[Top] [All Lists]

Re: List configuration

To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: List configuration
From: Darrell Michaud <dmichaud@xxxxxxx>
Date: 23 Jan 2004 16:58:53 -0500
Cc: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1074295715.1535.12.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0401151607460.26076@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4007500D.1060806@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0401161340400.16362@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.55.0401161753240.6290@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0401161351360.16362@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <40086E9F.90602@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0401161412560.20635@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1074295715.1535.12.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
It wasn't just yesterday. Not to revive a dead horse but I received over
30 spam mails from the XFS list in the last 24 hours.

Something needs to be done if this list is going to remain useful to a
wide audience.

Before someone flames me to be unsubscribe if I don't like it, I am a
step ahead of you.

Take care.

On Fri, 2004-01-16 at 18:28, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-01-16 at 17:16, Arthur Corliss wrote:
> > > You are free to unsubscribe.
> > 
> > Yes, I am.  But until someone from SGI tells me that they refuse to fix the
> > list config, I'm going to stay and hope it gets fixed.  I want to get the
> > legitimate e-mails, I just don't want the spam.  And I really don't think 
> > I'm
> > being unreasonable for expecting that much.
> We do not plan to change our previous conscious decision to keep the
> list open.  It's not broken, it's intentional.  I'm sorry you don't like
> it.  It's not your choice.  staying subscribed, or not, is your choice.
> spamd died for a while, some spam got through, deal with it.  If you
> can't deal with it, please -do- unsubscribe.  This thread has had higher
> volume, and not much more useful content, then the small bit of spam
> that leaked through.
> -Eric
Darrell Michaud <dmichaud@xxxxxxx>

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>