[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: lynx-dev Agreement, opinions about the move ? (Was Re: mailing-list
Frédéric L . W . Meunier
Re: lynx-dev Agreement, opinions about the move ? (Was Re: mailing-list problem (Was Re: lynx-dev What happened to MINGW patch? (fwd)))
Mon, 9 Feb 2004 12:38:12 -0200 (BRST)
Resending it for the fourth time...
BTW, will Bob respond anytime soon ?
On Mon, 9 Feb 2004, Henry Nelson wrote:
> 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?).
Yes, there doesn't seem to be much spam before 2000. I found
one in December 1999 and that's it. Others are mainly
"subscribe" "unsubscribe" "postmaster" messages.
> 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.)
Why ? I'll moderate it. But I don't like the idea of moderating
what goes to the actual lynx-dev, so better get rid of it and
do "2" -
"2- Send back a message about the move. Their original message
could be included, just in case they don't save a copy."
I assume it doesn't cause more traffic than if they redirected
; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to address@hidden
- Re: lynx-dev Agreement, opinions about the move ? (Was Re: mailing-list problem (Was Re: lynx-dev What happened to MINGW patch? (fwd))),
Frédéric L . W . Meunier <=