ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: trying to sweep namedroppers mismanagement under the rug

2002-11-29 21:18:02
    There is a process to have messages posted immediately, if what is being
said is important and time critical, follow it.  If it is not worth even the
small amount of effort to do this, you probably do not have anything so
incredibly important to say that it cannot wait.  Personally, I thank the
people who take the time to filter the list and keep it free of spam, it
wastes the time of the subscribers to get these unwanted messages and, some
of us (I suspect the vast majority) would rather not get them.  If you are
going to make an accusation of censorship, do so, but do not do so lightly.
If you are not, then there really is no point to these messages, as it is
unfortunate if a few messages are lost but, the alternative to not filtering
the list is worse.

That being said, I do find the examples you linked to in the original
message interesting.  Has anybody else experienced these problems?  I
especially find the earlier ones questionable as there should be no reason
to edit an incoming message.

-Daniel Pelstring


----- Original Message -----
From: "D. J. Bernstein" <djb(_at_)cr(_dot_)yp(_dot_)to>
To: <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Cc: <namedroppers(_at_)ops(_dot_)ietf(_dot_)org>; <iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Sent: Friday, November 29, 2002 8:01 PM
Subject: trying to sweep namedroppers mismanagement under the rug


Bill Strahm writes:
I believe the problem is in your court

That's patently absurd. It's not _my_ fault that a bunch of messages
from _other_ people are being silently discarded.

(As I said before, there have been more than 100 messages in the past
three months on namedroppers labelled as coming from non-subscribers,
only a small fraction of those being mine. Furthermore, Bush has
silently discarded several of my recent messages. If we believe Bush's
claim that he isn't selectively targeting my messages, the only
reasonable conclusion is that he has silently discarded a huge number of
messages overall, only a small fraction being mine.)

Most namedroppers contributors who don't post from subscription
addresses are, presumably, people who don't watch the list at all---for
example, people from other lists involved in cross-posted discussions.
How are they supposed to find out about the problem?

I do tend to watch the list. I noticed the problem. I pointed it out.
That doesn't mean I'm the only person with the problem.

If the problem is fixed _for me_, but not _for everybody_, then it
hasn't gone away. The procedures are still broken. Legitimate messages
to namedroppers---potentially quite valuable messages---continue to be
thrown away.

---D. J. Bernstein, Associate Professor, Department of Mathematics,
Statistics, and Computer Science, University of Illinois at Chicago





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