[Vision2020] the future of this list

[eevans@moscow.com]

I appologize if this has been proposed before.

First, Yahoo! does have an abuse policy. I don't know how responsive they are, 
but in theory they would snuff out D. Stambler's address.

Second, I wouldn't mind having a list god, or even a pantheon, but that will 
require someone to volunteer time and resources, and it will involve a bit of 
help from FirstStep who's already donating a lot as it is.

An alternative is an open forum with the subscribers doing their own filtering. 
I've set up my email software to route all of D. Stamblers stuff straight to 
the trash, and it only took a couple seconds to set up. This can be applied at 
the corporate level as well (see Bill Strand's previous post re PacSim). 
http://email.about.com/cs/spamfiltering/ looks to have a nice bit of 
information on the subject.

I suggest folks try this method first before sweating the details of a V2020 
subscriber policy. It spreads the work burdon to the subscribers, and it 
functions well for this kind of minor spam.

Cheers,
Ed Evans

> On Thursday, April 10, I posted a message offering V2020 subscribers a
> chance to "vote" on the future of this list.
> 
> Faced with the continuing and malicious postings from Douglas Stambler,
> several subscribers had asked me to "ban" his postings. A ban on
> Stambler (or others in future) is technically possible (though it is
> likely not foolproof, as Stambler or others think of more devious
> methods to skirt those regulations and post to the list).
> 
> As I noted in that message, neither our generous hosts First Step nor I
> intend to make such a decision based upon our own preferences.  It is
> the subscribers of this list who have to make that choice.  Therefore, I
> asked for a response from the members: should we continue as a totally
> open forum or should we begin to control/moderate the postings to the
> list.
> 
> And when I sent that posting asking for "votes" on whether to begin
> moderating the list, the group consensus seemed clear.  By a more than
> two to one margin, the vote was for continuing the open forum.  I
> counted six for blocking Stambler and 17 against.
> 
> I do not think this conversation is closed, and would welcome further
> input.  But I also think that it indicates that the membership values
> the freedom associated with this list in its present form.
> 
> For the record, my own personal opinion is that the inherent values of
> an open forum far outweigh the minor inconvenience of deleting some
> messages.
>
BL

---------------------------------------------
This message was sent by First Step Internet.
           http://www.fsr.net/