Subject: Re: namedroppers mismanagement, continued

From: Dan Schlitt <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 14:00:06 -0500

I believe that this statement applies. Perhaps both Randy and DJB might
review it before continuing this off-topic thread.

Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 10:03:56 -0500
From: The IESG <[email-masked]>
To: IETF-Announce:  ;
Subject: Guidance for spam-control on IETF mailing lists

The level of spam on IETF mailing lists has now reached the level
that we encourage the use of operational controls as described in:

        http://www.ietf.org/IESG/STATEMENTS/mail-submit-policy.txt

In particular, list managers are encouraged to employ the use of
automatic mechanisms that immediately distribute messages submitted
by subscribers and other known email addresses while directing all
other messages to a human reviewer for rejection or approval.

-- 

Dan Schlitt
[email-masked]

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>

---

From: Olafur Gudmundsson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 14:49:47 -0500 (EST)

On 27 Nov 2002, D. J. Bernstein wrote:

> [ post by non-subscriber.  with the massive amount of spam, it is easy to
>   miss and therefore delete mis-posts.  your subscription address is
>   [email-masked], please post from it or
>   fix subscription your subscription address! ]
>
> Once again: Bush is (1) subjecting a huge number of legitimate messages
> to manual review and (2) silently discarding many of these legitimate
> messages, apparently at a rate of hundreds per year (not counting mine).

All you need to do is ONE of the following:
	Use the same subcription address and posting address
	Ask Randy to put your posting address on the approved posters
		list.

>
> Both #1 and #2 are unacceptable. I want the manual reviews _eliminated_.
> If a message isn't posted immediately, it must be bounced, with a clear
> explanation of how to have it posted without Bush's intervention.

The ONLY reason there is manual review is because you are not
addhearing to the protocol for posting to the mailing list.

>
> If the IETF documentation doesn't make sufficiently clear that Bush's
> behavior is unacceptable, that documentation also has to be fixed.

Send text.

	Olafur

---

From: Dean Anderson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 15:50:07 -0500 (EST)

I am not on the ietf or iesg list. I don't know if this will go through to
those lists.

While DJB may also have some subscription issue, that is not the
fundamental problem.

It seems from your comments below, that you think that Randy isn't
manually blocking/forwarding messages from subscribed addresses. However,
that it not true.

The real problem is that Randy sometimes don't post messages from people
he doesn't like or on topics he has an interest in, even when they are
posted from subscribed addresses.  This has happened to me several times.
One of the occasions where it happened to me is documented on Bernstein's
web page.  It has probably happened many more times that haven't made it
on DJB's webpage.

There seems to be no reason that Randy should set himself up as a
moderator, or any reason whatsoever there should be any manual
intervention on posting from subscribed addresses.  Do you agree?

		--Dean

---

From: bert hubert <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 22:23:22 +0100

> intervention on posting from subscribed addresses.  Do you agree?

The lack of transparency smacks of impropriety. I see this list well served
with some moderation. I do not see it benefit from unfettered solo activity
with no external checks and balances.

'Trust me' does not apply here. 

To resolve this I suggest a page with any articles that have been refused
for whatever reason. Randy?

Regards,

bert

-- 
http://www.PowerDNS.com          Versatile DNS Software & Services
http://lartc.org           Linux Advanced Routing & Traffic Control HOWTO

---

From: "D. J. Bernstein" <[email-masked]>
Date: 27 Nov 2002 23:24:47 -0000

Olafur Gudmundsson writes:
> Ask Randy to put your posting address on the approved posters list.

Messages are not being bounced with explanations of how to set them up
as known addresses. Messages are being SILENTLY DISCARDED. (Misdirecting
them to some obscure web page would have essentially the same effect.)

You say the problem is that _I_ am not doing something. But a whole
bunch of namedroppers messages from _other_ people have also been listed
as coming from non-subscribers. How many more messages have been lost---
or deliberately thrown away by Bush? THE PROCEDURE IS FLAWED!

As for my own sender address [email-masked], Bush has already taken manual
action---but what he did was _not_ adding the address to a list of known 
addresses. Instead, he started putting my subscription address on top of
all my messages to the list---shortly after I had informed him that I
kept _that_ address private to limit the number of people who can forge
unsubscription requests.

I don't care whether Bush's decisions can be adequately explained by
stupidity. The decisions shouldn't be made by hand in the first place.
The only acceptable ways to process a message to a standardization
mailing list are

   (1) to immediately pass it through unchanged to the subscribers or
   (2) to immediately bounce it.

The decision between #1 and #2 must be made by objective standards. The
bounces must clearly and thoroughly explain the standards. The standards
must allow the sender to straightforwardly arrange for #1.

---D. J. Bernstein, Associate Professor, Department of Mathematics,
Statistics, and Computer Science, University of Illinois at Chicago

---

From: Olafur Gudmundsson <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 10:27:25 -0500 (EST)

> manually blocking/forwarding messages from subscribed addresses. However,

As of early this year the policy of the list was changed from
"moderation" to "subscriber automated posting".
Bringing up ancient history is not productive as that issue has
been addressed.

Randy is currently wasting valuable time in manually scanning
100+ spams a day that are sent to namedroppers and other IETF mailing
lists he runs and we all should thank him for the good citizen service
he provides!
Every meesage that is reposted from the bounced list contains a header
explaining that posting address is not a subscribed address.

I agree that the feature to get a message back saying that a message is
waiting for manual moderation is good, it requires effort for the
list operator to set up. In my personal case I get few of these messages
each month in response to viral attempts to post messages as me on
random mailing lists.

> web page.  It has probably happened many more times that haven't made it

Ancient history.

> intervention on posting from subscribed addresses.  Do you agree?

Yes, this is the CURRENT list policy. Thus the only messages that
are affected are from non subscribers and people posting from
different address.

In response the some points raised in this thread two changes
will happen:
 - Montly namedroppers list policy message will contain statement on
	the posting policy.
 - Moderated messages will contain more informative instructions
   on how to avoid moderation.

	Olafur (DNSEXT co-chair)