FoRK policy recommendation, process recommendation Re: Antigen found =*.exe file

carey carey@tstonramp.com
Mon, 29 Oct 2001 21:06:40 -0800


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: MD5

Here's the problem I see with closing FoRK to non-members:

A few times, at least according to FoRK's eyes, I've posted as a
non-member.  For whatever reason, I can't connect to my standard
posting address (which is what I use 98% of the time), and have had to
send out what I consider pretty interesting, FoRKful bits, from a
non-FoRK sanctioned address.  I  personally think, as its not -too-
abused, this is a great service.  While I could stop being a lazy
bastard and just register EVERY email address I may use, the
non-member posting system does allow a few of us real members to take
liberties without adding every address.

Not to mention, that a few folks who send messages off to FoRK and
'other' non-forkers, have received messages of pertinent, FoRKful
interest from non-members.

Either way, I must go to work, and I think making FoRK member only is
equivalent to country clubs.  They suck, they discriminate and
generally they're full of really snotty rich people.  Hell, we already
have the CC&R's, why make it worse?

My cent and a half.

- -BB

Monday, October 29, 2001, 1:24:41 AM, you wrote:


> Joe claims that we've all come to consensus about letting non-members post to
> the list.  I don't believe this to be the case.  My policy recommendation is to
> configure the list to screen out posts from non-subscribers.  If --- as it
> appears --- we need a "vote" of some kind to enact this policy decision, my
> recommendation is to weight the vote in some way to reflect the participation
> in FoRK of the voters in question.  The first, most obvious way to weight
> things would be in terms of most frequent voters:  individual vote X
> posts-in-the-last-year.    Of course this would be my first recommendation.
> ;-)  A more pertinent mechanism might be individual vote X
> posts-responded-to-in-last-year.  This information / metric should be easy to
> harvest;  if nobody else feels like writing the Perl script to do so, under
> duress I volunteer.

> Hopefully, it won't require this.  Let your voice be heard.  Should FoRK be
> closed to non-members or not?  It's your call...

> $0.02,

> jb

> Jeff Bone wrote:

>> Aaron,
>>
>> These are good questions.  I challenge Joe Barr's assertion that this was
>> the clear will of the subscribers.  It seems to my "Memento"-like
>> recollection that Joe is overapplying something that came up earlier onlist
>> in a different context, perhaps inappropriately.
>>
>> Despite this --- butt the hell out.  Fix your list / spam problem.  I've
>> never heard of you before, and your commercially-oriented messages aren't
>> welcome in my mailbox.  That's my own opinion, not a list opinion:  have a
>> great life.  Come back if you have something FoRKful to share.
>>
>> jb
>>
>> Aaron Blosser wrote:
>>
>> > So if I wanted to (and not that I would), I could just start
>> > spamvertising fork@xent.com and using that whenever I sign up for
>> > anything, getting it into every DMA list I can find, and that'd be just
>> > fine with the list subscribers?
>> >
>> > Was there a vote to do that, or was this decision itself a "fascist"
>> > one, dictated from the administrator of the list? :)
>> >
>> > Whatever the case, I'll butt out now with a parting shot that I'm
>> > convinced my antivirus software has done nothing wrong, but it's a
>> > misconfigured list server that caused the message to go to the list.
>> > End of story as far as I'm concerned, but the accusation was made that
>> > somehow our server was at fault, so I wanted to defend it. :)
>> >
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From: Joseph S. Barrera III [mailto:joe@barrera.org]
>> > > Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2001 10:40 PM
>> > > To: Aaron Blosser
>> > > Cc: fork@xent.com
>> > > Subject: RE: Antigen found =*.exe file
>> > >
>> > > Changing the list to NOT accept emails from non-subscribers
>> > > has been deemed "fascist" by members of the list.
>> > >
>> > > At 10/28/2001 09:19 PM, Aaron Blosser wrote:
>> > > >I still say it's the lists job to NOT accept emails from non
>> > > >subscribers, and I still see that even my messages (I am not a
>> > > >subscriber) have been showing up in the list archives.
>> > >
>> >
>> > http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork
>>
>> http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork



> http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork



- --
Carey Lening

I need a witty quote.
 carey                            mailto:carey@tstonramp.com

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6

iQEVAwUAO941Yg3hmq/Crfv3AQHO2AgAlgZr12/BZ46GjAZQSmI5WcJDhfzD2Ein
jdSHclzoXVu8ms/28KtOa+cE63vT05izwtjN5yoxCqGMEovebj6zj1k43cLzkgez
syTJhymnj9Dp9wpfMsAkvycWvmtC2FepN/UJbl/dLl1oBu5yOB5E6+e8MJLe/18e
2sZJ3EM5VcFNDUDP3NBTMZgwEcKOui4K+YfGtNMN4nZRRAcxlJNT6sZgyw+PTnVR
lpvoV+Q9y+DSh/6pr4HVCJjIAM6NnQxjwf9OqFK72KGaLWGHvYRimecMraMBX6Nk
KB/eUciKl1pKmZ0hU3L49sl7fZnR/7ml4xr/9VTMlRjlPU1jQB6b8A==
=2o9X
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----