[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: lynx-dev Agreement, opinions about the move ? (Was Re: mailing-list

From: Henry Nelson
Subject: Re: lynx-dev Agreement, opinions about the move ? (Was Re: mailing-list problem (Was Re: lynx-dev What happened to MINGW patch? (fwd)))
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 10:36:21 +0900
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.4i-ja.1

On Sat, Feb 07, 2004 at 11:27:58AM -0200, Frédéric L. W. Meunier wrote:
> > > Yes, we could just add the 140+ automatically, but we don't
> > > know how many are still "valid".
> >
> > We'll be able to tell once it's moved by looking at bounces.
> Not all invalid accounts return "User unknown" or something,

To confirm, I stopped sending "User unknown" almost two years ago.  All
mail coming in that doesn't have a legitimate user addressee is "dropped
on the floor".  100% of it was spam (about 6 months monitoring), so now
I don't even syslog or send warning messages to the process owner.

WRT the Flora archive URLs, I'll replace any on my private pages with
URLs to the no-spam archive that Fr延薗ic proposes to create.  Although
I have very little time to offer lynx-dev, I'll do what I can to find
Flora URLs in the Lynx docs and search for the corresponding links in
the new, no-spam archive.  Probably archives at Flora pre-1999 could
remain as is, i.e., only change for the years that spam outnumbered
legitimate posts (last three years?).

Fr延薗ic, do you plan on allowing non-subscribers to post?  (My own
view is that non-subscribers shouldn't be allowed to post, but the
last time we argued this I was in the [very small] minority.)


; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to address@hidden

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]