On Mon, 2010-11-29 at 14:12 -0500, Jerry Feldman wrote:
On 11/29/2010 10:45 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-11-29 at 07:49 -0500, Jerry Feldman wrote:
>> On 11/29/2010 06:29 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2010-11-29 at 02:12 -0800, Globe Trotter wrote:
>>> Isn't it time to ban this idiot?
>> The problem here is that the user's yahoo password has been hacked. I
>> have seen this exact same thing with other yahoo, gmail and aol
>> addresses. The user needs to change his/her yahoo password to clear
>> this up.
> If the user is a genuine member of the list, by now they should have
> noticed the crap being sent in their name and done something about it.
> If they aren't, why do we care about banning them?
> Even if they are genuine and for some reason haven't noticed the
> problem, banning them only means they'll get a reject from Mailman,
> whereupon they have the opportunity of appealing to the list admin.
We shouldn't. The user should be unsubscribed from the list, certainly,
removing any user who violates list policy either knowingly or
unknowingly should be removed.
Are you *quite* sure about that? The only policy as such is contained in
the list guidelines, which are regularly violated with impunity (and
those of us who complain are often subjected to name-calling for our
pains), but getting medieval with any and all violators is unlikely to
lead to a more congenial list on the whole.
Banning a person from the list would
require listadmin approval to rejoin. It just requires more work for the
Maybe. Presumably spammers wouldn't bother arguing with the admin, but
they probably wouldn't bother resubscribing either.