-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Wayne Schlitt wrote:
Thanks for your nice summary. Let's hope Listbox makes something of it.
Personally, I really don't think that moving the mailing lists would
be a good idea.
Running several large mailing lists doesn't sound like much fun to me,
what with people "unsubscribing" by reporting mailing list traffic as
"spam" to their ISP (AOL/Hotmail/Yahoo/etc.) or via spamcop, delivery
problems, mail loops, etc. I really doubt that the number of bogus
subscriptions would go down that much.
I remember when we had the SPF-council and SPF-private lists on
mailman. It was almost impossible for anyone but the person owning
the box to do anything. When that owner moved on from the SPF
project, we were stuck. In contrast, when Meng Weng Wong moved on
from the SPF project, we could still do a lot of list management.
On the list host's part, there's inactivity and there's dissociation.
Those are two different things. You can't do anything about dissociation,
but inactivity can be mitigated by having multiple list admins. Mailman,
for example, supports that. (List admins are still limited, though, e.g.
with regard to the list archives.)
Could things be better? Sure. Do I think things *would* be better if
we moved the mailing lists? I doubt it.
The main point of moving away from Listbox is being in control over the
system. If Listbox fixes the problems we pointed out (the malicious
subscription problem, BTW, may not be the main source of erroneous
subscriptions but it is certainly real), then we're fine. If they don't,
we can either ignore the problems, which would cast a very bad light on
the SPF project, or we can grab control by moving the lists.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
please go to