Suggestions for this mailing list

[Per Hedeland]

Chris Pressey <cpressey@REDACTED> wrote:
>You know what?  I think the software running this mailing list should be
>rewritten in 100% Erlang and should set the Reply-To header correctly
>(i.e. to erlang-questions@REDACTED)

You forgot the quotes around and the smiley after "correctly":-) - see

http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html

> and should filter spam (i.e.
>disallow any address that isn't subscribed to the mailing list from
>posting to it.)

This is very common policy these days of course, but it's somewhat
cumbersome e.g. for users that want to subscribe with "special"
addresses to make sorting etc simpler / more reliable (e.g. this message
would have been rejected by such a policy:-), or just generally use a
variety of (working) e-mail addresses (due to being on the move a lot or
whatever).

Samuel Tardieu <sam@REDACTED> wrote:
>[...] The policy I choose on my own big mailing-lists
>is:
>  - subscribers can post freely as long as the list is explicitely in To or Cc
>  - other mails must be confirmed by answering a challenge
>  - confirmed mail goes through moderators and one of them has to accept it

This would alleviate the above problem I guess (though perhaps it isn't
less cumbersome to have to confirm and wait for approval from a
moderator than to set your sender address "right" from the start - but
you'd have the choice...). Also simply rejecting all messages that don't
have the list in To/Cc would probably cut down significantly on the spam
without inconveniencing anyone. Not that I think spam is a huge problem
on this list (yet).

--Per Hedeland
per@REDACTED