Proposal to phase out *winehq.com email addresses

[Duane Clark]

Due to the rather large amount of spam sent to the *winehq.com email 
addresses (as opposed to *winehq.org), I would like to phase them out. I 
will state up front that this proposal benefits only me or any future 
moderator. Since I have been doing that for about 6 years now, hopefully 
I'll get a bit of sympathy ;)

A cursory inspection of postings to this list show that almost everyone 
already posts to *winehq.org. I would propose that for a few weeks, I'll 
simply keep track of where people are posting to, and send private 
emails to the very few who post to .com. Once everyone is posting to the 
.org address, I'll implement a filter in mailman that simply drops the 
others. I have already done this as a test on the announce, bugs, and 
cvs lists, and this eliminates about half of the spam.

And while I am at it, anyone who wants to help with the moderation and 
is willing to stick with it for the long term, let me know.

[James Hawkins]

On 7/12/07, Duane Clark <fpga(a)pacbell.net> wrote:
> Due to the rather large amount of spam sent to the *winehq.com email
> addresses (as opposed to *winehq.org), I would like to phase them out. I
> will state up front that this proposal benefits only me or any future
> moderator. Since I have been doing that for about 6 years now, hopefully
> I'll get a bit of sympathy ;)
>
> A cursory inspection of postings to this list show that almost everyone
> already posts to *winehq.org. I would propose that for a few weeks, I'll
> simply keep track of where people are posting to, and send private
> emails to the very few who post to .com. Once everyone is posting to the
> .org address, I'll implement a filter in mailman that simply drops the
> others. I have already done this as a test on the announce, bugs, and
> cvs lists, and this eliminates about half of the spam.
>
> And while I am at it, anyone who wants to help with the moderation and
> is willing to stick with it for the long term, let me know.

How about an automated response email for users that post to
winehq.com telling them to report to winehq.org instead?  I'm assuming
spam bots aren't smart enough to read that reply and post to
winehq.org themselves.

-- 
James Hawkins

[Duane Clark]

James Hawkins wrote:
> How about an automated response email for users that post to
> winehq.com telling them to report to winehq.org instead?  I'm assuming
> spam bots aren't smart enough to read that reply and post to
> winehq.org themselves.

No, we don't want automated responses, because much (or probably most) 
of the spam has fake email addresses. That would result in us spamming.

[Jeremy Newman]

I am not opposed to this.

One of the benefits of the upcoming 'etch' upgrade of the server is the
newer SpamAssassin in 'etch'. After the upgrade I'll also implement a
'sa-update' cron job that will keep us updated with the latest rules.

On Thu, 2007-07-12 at 14:39 -0700, Duane Clark wrote:
> Due to the rather large amount of spam sent to the *winehq.com email 
> addresses (as opposed to *winehq.org), I would like to phase them out. I 
> will state up front that this proposal benefits only me or any future 
> moderator. Since I have been doing that for about 6 years now, hopefully 
> I'll get a bit of sympathy ;)
>
> A cursory inspection of postings to this list show that almost everyone 
> already posts to *winehq.org. I would propose that for a few weeks, I'll 
> simply keep track of where people are posting to, and send private 
> emails to the very few who post to .com. Once everyone is posting to the 
> .org address, I'll implement a filter in mailman that simply drops the 
> others. I have already done this as a test on the announce, bugs, and 
> cvs lists, and this eliminates about half of the spam.
>
> And while I am at it, anyone who wants to help with the moderation and 
> is willing to stick with it for the long term, let me know.

[Stefan Dösinger]

Am Donnerstag, 12. Juli 2007 23:39 schrieb Duane Clark:
> Due to the rather large amount of spam sent to the *winehq.com email
> addresses (as opposed to *winehq.org), I would like to phase them out. I
> will state up front that this proposal benefits only me or any future
> moderator. Since I have been doing that for about 6 years now, hopefully
> I'll get a bit of sympathy ;)
> OK with me. The dual address thing is also confusing for everyone who sets up 
> his own filters in the mailer, mostly to sort out mails into different 
> folders.

[Robert Shearman]

Stefan Dösinger wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 12. Juli 2007 23:39 schrieb Duane Clark:
> > Due to the rather large amount of spam sent to the *winehq.com email
> > addresses (as opposed to *winehq.org), I would like to phase them out. I
> > will state up front that this proposal benefits only me or any future
> > moderator. Since I have been doing that for about 6 years now, hopefully
> > I'll get a bit of sympathy ;)
>
> OK with me. The dual address thing is also confusing for everyone who sets up 
> his own filters in the mailer, mostly to sort out mails into different 
> folders.

You should sort on the List-Id header instead.

-- 
Rob Shearman

[Stefan Dösinger]

Am Freitag, 13. Juli 2007 10:44 schrieb Robert Shearman:
> Stefan Dösinger wrote:
> > OK with me. The dual address thing is also confusing for everyone who
> > sets up his own filters in the mailer, mostly to sort out mails into
> > different folders.
>
> You should sort on the List-Id header instead.
> I'm doing that now, but I used to sort on the address, and apparently many 
> people sort the mails based on the address instead of the list id.