On Thu, May 04, 2000 at 08:29:01PM +0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Last time I mentioned list filtering, I got called a pedophile. Maybe you'll get called a communist this time instead! > How about... > > Setting a new header keyword each Sunday, like > > X-No-Spam: <something> > > ...and not accepting submissions without it? No censorship there. > > Also, submissions must be to the "To: cypherpunks@" and have no Cc. > > Or is this technically beyond our collective means? The technical issue is the easy one. In fact you could implement the filtering yourself, for the cypherpunks mail that goes to you, fairly trivially in procmail or the like. Filtering out mail sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] seems to work pretty good for filtering most of the spam. Historically the cypherpunks list has been unfiltered and unwashed. There's lots of reasons, one being that not filtering makes it possible for anonymous posters to post to the list. Sometimes they post interesting things, like the supposed RC4 source. The most important reason however is that the cypherpunks can't agree on what and how much filtering to do. There are some moderated lists, like coderpunks and cryptography, which cover most of the same topics (minus political rants). If you really want to try to make a spam-filtered cypherpunks, just start your own filterpunks list rather than trying to get cypherpunks to agree on the filtering... 'cause it'll never happen. -- Eric Murray www.lne.com/~ericm ericm at the site lne.com PGP keyid:E03F65E5
