In article <Pine.BSF.3.91.960204182946.20283Bfirstname.lastname@example.org>,
Brock Rozen <email@example.com> wrote:
>The lists I manage are all moderated and there are a few I manage which
>allow posting by the readers (one is a list that relays news from
>various sources, another is a discussion list; all are moderated). Truly, it
>does not take much time to moderate lists and remove spams.
When I started my first list, I decided that it would accept posts
only from members, largely because it deals with sexuality.
That was the main reason for writing my own list processor, and it
frankly doesn't take too much effort handle addresses that aren't
authorised - feed them into a script and then add the address to the
Most of the time, this will deal with anything that comes up, and even
with 450 members and up to 60 messages a day, I usually only have a
couple of genuine posts with mangled headers that need to be released
from the queue. (Fortunately, I don't think I've had any attempts to
spam uk-motss yet).
In the long term, seeing the problems that people have with spam, I
don't think I'd run a list without this sort of address checking. So,
I've now re-written the list's front-end to do the checking more efficiently.
Of course, some spam will come from list members; the main tactic I
use to prevent anything like that is simply a line limit; the lists I
run are discussion lists. Sometimes things do get a bit verbose, but
messages are often quite short. The list holds messages more than 150
lines long for my attention (which also stops people sending back
Again, it's a little more work, but not much in day to day operation.
The updated script that does all this is more or less tested (it'll
also bounce messages with uuencoded, binhex or certain MIME types);
give me a few weeks and maybe I'll have something that people can drop
in as a filter for other software.
firstname.lastname@example.org Digital Diversity
email@example.com and uk-motss
***** All demon.co.uk sites are independently run internet hosts *****