I'm sorry Frank, your response didn't address any of my questions so maybe
there was some missed direction. Whatever the case I'll restate it in case you
want another go at it:
There are a couple of arguments consistently used by the pro-ban/anti-filter
camp that kind of confuse me and maybe someone could explain:
Claim: The claim that all the good people will leave if the noise level is too
great and if stubborn people with limited technical ability aren't banned.
Question: If that claim is accurate, then since there were no PR-Actions for
the first 20 years of the IETF one would have to assume that all the good
people left long ago (years and years) and the ones left here now are the ones
that drove the good engineers away?
Claim: Filtering by sender doesn't help because you see all the repsonses to
Question a: If the responses are part of the problem then aren't the people
who sent them part of the problem as well? They are equally (probably more
disruptive), so why not ban them? Are they incapable of controlling their
responses? Are they lemmings?
Question b: If so many people whose email you don't want to filter are
replying to the person that you do, then maybe you are in the minority in
thinking their comments aren't worthy of discussion?
Question c: If so many people whose email you don't want to filter are
replying to the person that you do then maybe you're the only one who's
Question: If there was rough consensus on banning someone then if that same
rough consensus individually filtered all mail to or from that individual
wouldn't the same effect be acheived? Roughly?
Question: Has no one made a dynamic filter that logs the subject of all email
sent from an address and then filters all future email with the same subject,
regardless of sender or recipient?
Question How many responses will not be able to refrain from making fun of the
Clain/Question format I used?
Ietf mailing list