> The anonymous email thread was shaping up into another flame war, and
> the general subscribership has made it clear to me in the past they
> really wish I'd "do something" about flame wars when they threaten to
> erupt, so I'm doing something this time: I've TEMPORARILY made Firewalls
> a moderated list.
I think you're making a mistake. I find the arguments about what's
appropriate for a firewall to do (arguments which do tend to get heated) to
be far more interesting than discussions about how to set one up, which
tend to be the same 4-5 messages over and over. I believe a lot of people
on the list agree with me, and it's unfortunate that you're following the
wishes of some vocal subscribers who want to stifle discussion.
In general, the firewalls list tends to be about average for amount of
tangential and partially-relevant discussion. But it's the worst list I've
ever seen for the number of messages trying to halt discussion of one topic
or another, when those topics tend to be a lot more interesting than the
"normal" topics. Mailing lists like com-priv (commercialization and
privatization of the Internet) have discussions going all over the map,
from libertarianism to telephone circuitry, and that's one of the most
informative lists on the net.
I've unsubscribed from the list. The basic architecture of a firewall has
been hashed over and over, and if it's now a policy to prevent the
introduction of new, controversial topics on the list, then it can't teach
me anything that I haven't already learned from it.
In general, it has been a good list, though.
--
Tom Fitzgerald Wang Labs Lowell MA, USA 1-508-967-5278 fitz @
wang .
com
Pardon me, I'm lost, can you direct me to the information superhighway?
References:
|
|
