openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Marcus (OOo)" <>
Subject Re: [Discussion]
Date Fri, 19 Aug 2011 16:50:30 GMT
Am 08/19/2011 06:34 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Marcus (OOo)<>  wrote:
>> Am 08/19/2011 02:48 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>>> As my preceding forwards indicate, we're getting some interesting
>>> posts to, including offers of help, but they are
>>> not getting adequate responses.  We're missing opportunities here to
>>> grow the project.
>>> Is there anything we can do to improve this?
>>> 1) Continue as now, and I'll forward "interesting" posts to ooo-dev?
>>> 2) Send a note to telling them that we've moved
>>> over to ooo-dev and inviting them to join?
>> It's OK for everyone who is still subscribed to that ML. But not everyone
>> who wants to participate is already subscribed.
>>> 3) Auto-responder for telling them that we've moved
>>> over to ooo-dev?
>> Not a good solution in the case of spam. They would get an answer, know that
>> it's a valid address and start mass spamming.
>> E.g., I'm still managing the dev@distribution.oo.o and
>> mirrors@distribution.oo.o ML and 99% is spam (up to 20 per day).
>>> 4) Shut down to new posts?
>> No
> So why wouldn't we want to shut down that list?

Why are you asking when you want to do it anyway? ;-)

> is getting 20 spam per day.  I'm a moderator on
> ooo-dev and we see maybe 1 spam every 2 weeks.

I said I see up to 20 spam mails on the other both ML. I don't know how 
much we get on dev@ooo.

> Real posts at are infrequent and are not getting
> responded to.   But ooo-dev is clearly where the thriving dev
> discussion is occurring.
> Aren't these good reasons to consolidate the dev discussion in one
> place? Is there any advantage to have it be fragmented across two
> lists, especially if one list is mainly getting spam?

If so, it would be the same reason to shutdown also other mailing lists. 
So, we could do it will all.

As Mathias said, the shutdown will happen anyway. No need to force it.


>> It seems that #1 is the best way for the moment as long as the old ML are
>> still working. But maybe together with a note. Then the possible new
>> participant 1) gets an (first) answer, #2 knows that it goes on at ASF, and
>> #3 knows the new ML.
>> My 2 ct.
>> Marcus

View raw message