[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: spam from upperside.fr
I could cop out in the particular case and say Upperside is different
because Peter Lewis has registered as a list member. However, I feel
your general point does need to be addressed. I have criteria in my own
mind that distinguish acceptable from unacceptable spam. I'm willing to
state them, but you've made me realize that I did not check them out
with my list membership. The concern is not so much with the ones I let
through -- list members can see those and complain about my decisions if
they are so inclined. What they can't see are the ones I've blocked.
Fortunately the issue arises only once or twice a year, so I'm not too
worried. The questionable ones I've discarded IIRC are repetitions of
those I let through.
My criteria? The topic has to relate to some aspect of VoIP, since that
is what Megaco is about. The organization has to be reasonably
non-commercial, and definitely not vendor-specific. And I only allow
one posting of a given message.
As for the Upperside postings, one can use the administrative interface
to moderate postings by individual members. I believe one would have to
get consent first from the list and then from the IESG, for the criteria
used to filter the messages.
Michael Sneed wrote:
I think item 6) pretty much obviates the need for a response or its
retention as far as most spam is concerned. Almost all of the spam we
get is obviously not topical. What is interesting about this case is
that some people seem to be willing to tolerate it, and therefore
rejecting it does require some thought.
This is surprising to me, and I only posed the question to determine the
extent of the problem. If we are willing to tolerate "good spam",
should we also permit postings advertising printer cartridges, since
most of us use those occasionally as well? Or maybe only posters
advertising "high quality" printer cartridges. Does rejecting such
postings require WG consent?
Regards,
Mike