On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 10:09:43AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:It's another waste of space in my inbox due to poorly-implemented software. If their mailman installation uses a whitelist, so I get *one* message per list rather than a bounce for every message I send, then that's somewhat acceptable. If I get mailbombed just for participating in a thread on lkml, that's definitely not acceptable (and I will remove such lists from the Cc). It would be vastly better if mailman were smart enough to autoapprove threaded replies -- it's not as if the spammers are any more likely to forge In-Reply-To: than From: (which they already do). Or even to not waste my time by sending a "held for moderation" message until it's processed by the listowner. Not sure what ad hominem attacks have to do with this situation. It's not as if I can reasonably /dev/null all mailman gunk; if there's a real exception condition, I want to see it. -andy -
| Linus Torvalds | Linux 2.6.27-rc5 |
| Greg KH | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 004/196] Chinese: add translation of SubmittingPatches |
| Trent Piepho | Re: [PATCH] [POWERPC] Improve (in|out)_beXX() asm code |
git: | |
| Christoph Hellwig | Re: [PATCH 06/32] IGET: Mark iget() and read_inode() as being obsolete [try #2] |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 0/37] dccp: Feature negotiation - last call for comments |
| David Miller | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
