The Coq mailing list

[Derek Dreyer <dreyer AT mpi-sws.org>]

It's not just this one sender.  I have been noticing a high volume of
irrelevant announcements on coq-club.

Another idea would be to not moderate posts but have a stronger
vetting process for determining who has the right to post rather than
just allowing anyone.  However, this might have the effect of
discouraging newbies with real Coq questions.

I'm not sure of the right solution, but currently I find myself
clicking delete on so many coq-club posts that it feels like
types-announce.

Derek
On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 8:09 PM Jim Fehrle 
<jfehrle AT sbcglobal.net>
 wrote:
>
> insticc.info is not a registered domain but perhaps they are associated 
> with http://www.insticc.org/Portal/
> It's worth asking them politely to stop sending announcements to the list.  
> Of course, this works better
> if the requester can legitimately claim to represent the list users.
>
> Jim
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Gabriel Scherer 
> <gabriel.scherer AT gmail.com>
> To: Coq Club 
> <coq-club AT inria.fr>
> Sent: Friday, June 22, 2018 9:09 AM
> Subject: Re: [Coq-Club] Is it time...
>
> The spam here comes from 3 announces sent by *different* addresses
> @insticc.info addresses, so banning senders wouldn't work. In my (and
> I guess Benjamin's and Derek's) experience with the types-announces
> moderation, irrelevant Call for Papers (CFPs) come from all sources.
>
> The problem with mailing-lists is that any *relevance* moderation has
> to be a-priori, because you cannot remove an email once it is sent.
> (In contrast, tone moderation from specific individuals can be
> after-the-fact, banning repeat offenders.) But any a-priori moderation
> requires checking all moderated emails, which slows the posting flow
> and generates work for humans.
>
> If custom filters were available, it might be interesting to try to
> automatically detect conference announcements (eg. "CFP" in the header
> or "Call for" in general), and have a human moderate those. But unless
> mailman gives this flexibility, you probably have to get a moderator
> to check all messages before they are sent.
>
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 2:58 PM, Soegtrop, Michael
> <michael.soegtrop AT intel.com>
>  wrote:
> > Dear Coq Users,
> >
> > I guess it also needs to be discussed what is meant by "moderation".
> >
> > For the time being I think it would be sufficient to have a way to report 
> > spammers, to have someone review these reports and in case to delete the 
> > account or otherwise ban them. As far as I can remember, there are only a 
> > handful, so this would be a fairly lightweight task.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Michael
> > Intel Deutschland GmbH
> > Registered Address: Am Campeon 10-12, 85579 Neubiberg, Germany
> > Tel: +49 89 99 8853-0, www.intel.de
> > Managing Directors: Christin Eisenschmid, Christian Lamprechter
> > Chairperson of the Supervisory Board: Nicole Lau
> > Registered Office: Munich
> > Commercial Register: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 186928
>
>