Please, make the debian-doc mailing list open only to subscribers.
The amount of spam there vs. posting from regular users, is very high. For
example, january this year, there were 23 spam emails and 45 valid:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-doc/2006/01/index.html

In February this year (although it did not end yet) there have been 10
relevant e-mails out of 43!

Even though some of the postings might come from unsubscribed users, I think
many developers would gladly accept becoming moderators of the mailings of
unsubscribed users.

Debian-doc does receive automatic mails from some non-subscribed
addresses (like the DDP CVS commit e-mails) so having a white list for some
addresses would be good too.

I rather reject posts to the mailing list myself than manually reviewing the
web archives and reporting as spam tons of messages. I believe other
subscribed of debian-doc (in CC:) would agree with me and cooperate in
moderating non subscriber posts.

Thanks

Javier

Hi,

Actually, it is not as bad here since I got bored fighting spam
these days and use one of those free pop serveice at g---.com .

...

I will not oppose this move but if we start doing this (I know some
debian-chinese list already do this.), our web page should be updated.
It is worthy cause.

My condition of support requires system of moderation is in place.
Sory, I do not want to be the one to moderate.

Osamu

Am 2006-02-22 00:42:27, schrieb Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña:

I second this, ONLY IF I CAN SUBSCRIBE with NOMAIL.

Or if Whitelisted E-Mails like this one can post without any restrictions.
      ^^^^^^^^^^^

Please note, that I have a second (secret) E-Mail on this list to get my
messages...

Greetings
    Michelle Konzack
    Systemadministrator
    Tamay Dogan Network
    Debian GNU/Linux Consultant

Hallo! Du (Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña) hast geschrieben:

we generally don't have moderated lists (beside some very few
exceptions, and most of the people are happy with that.

please report spam that you get through the lists.

see http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2006/02/msg00946.html

Cord

I think that's a misrepresentation of the truth.

The truth is that *everybody* would like to see less spam. From them,
a non negligible amount of people would even be willing to moderate,
if becoming a moderator would be the requirement to have less spam.

So just because you have not actually asked people about spam does not
mean they are "happy" with the level of spam. I am in fact terribly
frustrated by the fact that we are still not doing everything we could
do to stop spam more effectively.

Hallo! Du (Santiago Vila) hast geschrieben:

we got 34288 mails incoming yesterday of which 2292 passed our
filters. so we have a signal/noise ratio of .0668. if say 10-100
spam-mails pass our filters you should keep in mind that that is only
0.02%-0.2% of the incoming mails.

I really have the opinion that you have no idea what is happening on
our listserver, nor what we can do and what we can't do.

Switching Lists to moderated would mean that someone would have to
review between 30 and 300 Mails a day to check if they are appropriate
(numbers for debian-doc yesterday). I don't think that we find enough
people, who want to do that reliably (beside the problem that we don't
have an easy method to handle moderation).

It would also require a major change in running our mailinglists,
something i don't want to do without a real discussion and maybe a GR,
only because of two people (out of 90000 unique subscriber, which
doesn't complain).

So now think what you personally want.

* keep it like it is, with 0.02%-0.2% of incoming spam passed through
* moderate with 30-300 mails to look at a day

so the wontfix will stay, as long as we don't do a complete redesign
of lists.d.o. i won't close the bugs, but we also won't moderate those
lists.

Cord

PS: i hope this mail was polite enough, because i'm really pissed,
	that people cry out loud if our filters stop a few legit mails
	and we do our best to not let that happening again, and then
	the same people again cry out loud because the spam level is
	too high.

Just switching lists to moderated would be a nightmare.

I agree that it would not be practical.

However, a lot of time ago I proposed a semi-moderation scheme.
To summarize, the procedure would be as follows:

* Messages having a high spamasassin score are discarded, as now.
* Messages having a very low spamassassin score are allowed, as now.
* It would just be the messages in between the ones to be moderated.

Moreover, the moderators would not have to be you, listmasters.

The moderators would be volunteers from the same lists that switch to
this scheme.

This procedure would prevent a lot of spam from reaching the lists,
and, at the same time, would not mean a lot of work for moderators.

It would not require a major change in our mailinglist, only a few
procmail recipes (well, maybe more than a few ones, but definitely
it would not be a major change).

Also, it would not have to be done for all lists at once. We could try
it on a few lists, and if it works, extend the procedure slowly to
other lists.


I hope this mail was polite enough as well.

Cord,

[ I think you were not a listmaster yet in early 2003 ].

Please take a look at Bug #175744, where I explain the semi-moderation
scheme and provide figures showing why I think it would improve things
considerably without a lot of work.

Thanks.

While we are at it, please note that the real signal/noise ratio in
the lists (as perceived by the subscribers) may not be measured by
mechanical means[*].

For a subscriber, it's not the spam that the filters stop what counts,
but the spam that they do not stop compared to the legitimate messages
in the list.

If a user complains that one out of two messages is spam in a given list,
don't tell him "sure, but the amount of spam we stop is much higher".

[*] The only way to measure this accurately is by counting false negatives.
Only people who actually read the list can do this. No procmail logs
in the list server will tell you how much spam that was allowed should
not have been.

This is in no way to tell you that your work fine-tuning filters is
not appreciated. It is, but please don't measure their effectiveness
just by looking at the logs, as they will never tell you about the
false negatives.

Thanks.

Hello Cord and *,

Am 2006-04-25 21:15:59, schrieb Cord Beermann:

Normaly I get between 500 and 8000 Spams on my E-Mails.
Since i filter SPAM in "per Envelope-To: E-mails" I have seen,
that the SPAM-Folder of "debian" is nearly empty...

Only <linux4michelle> get around 97% of all SPAM...  Blub!

It seems...

ACK

Right.

:-/

Oh Cord, what about the SPAM-Mails which are allready
in the Archive?  Do they become cleaned-up one time?


Greetings
    Michelle Konzack

Hallo! Du (Michelle Konzack) hast geschrieben:

yes, one day this will happen.

I can't tell you when, but it is on our todo-list.

Cord

Hello,



I am contacting you with regards to using your name for funds claim of long
overdue dormant funds for Investment belonging to a late depositor. Let me
know if you are interested for more details.



Best Regards,

Hello,



I am contacting you with regards to using your name for funds claim of long
overdue dormant funds for Investment belonging to a late depositor. Let me
know if you are interested for more details.



Best Regards,

Final Notice.

You are among the beneficiaries of 2024/2025 grant for all scam victims and relatives reconfirm your email if active for more details

Thank You.

Regards
Mr. Rowland Cole
( Financial Crimes Enforcement Network)

Final Notice.

You are among the beneficiaries of 2024/2025 grant for all scam victims and relatives reconfirm your email if active for more details

Thank You.

Regards
Mr. Rowland Cole
( Financial Crimes Enforcement Network)

Final Notice.

You are among the beneficiaries of 2024/2025 grant for all scam victims and relatives reconfirm your email if active for more details

Thank You.

Regards
Mr. Rowland Cole
( Financial Crimes Enforcement Network)