From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ihor Radchenko Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Choice of bug tracker Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2023 13:17:26 +0000 Message-ID: <874jkejamx.fsf@localhost> References: <87il9kksqz.fsf@dfreeman.email> <835y51kslv.fsf@gnu.org> <7a82c524-1aa1-e755-e377-673ebb107a44@gutov.dev> <83r0nok8s4.fsf@gnu.org> <83ledwk4xi.fsf@gnu.org> <76ecf629-a41a-f6e4-f661-2ef926326d6c@gutov.dev> <83zg2cias7.fsf@gnu.org> <83pm37ie54.fsf@gnu.org> <831qfmhyx3.fsf@gnu.org> <245de638-e6b2-dd8e-ee61-695c4c3da0c7@gutov.dev> <83h6oghixu.fsf@gnu.org> <6ae0b4b0-b2ef-d8de-caed-d647979c2f37@gutov.dev> <83ttsfel30.fsf@gnu.org> <8f500cee-f136-fdc6-aaa5-960bbeceeaae@gutov.dev> <87zg26gy9i.fsf@gmail.com> <87bkemrycb.fsf@localhost> <87wmxaay1n.fsf@gmx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="1209"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Visuwesh , Dmitry Gutov , Eli Zaretskii , Stefan Kangas , philipk@posteo.net, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Michael Albinus Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Sep 01 15:17:48 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qc41y-000Ab2-0o for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 01 Sep 2023 15:17:46 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qc41U-0003Zh-De; Fri, 01 Sep 2023 09:17:16 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qc41D-0003Ki-Id for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Sep 2023 09:17:10 -0400 Original-Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qc415-00042k-32 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Sep 2023 09:16:57 -0400 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C171240028 for ; Fri, 1 Sep 2023 15:16:49 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1693574209; bh=18Ieo4NtHrR9D6MBDBJA2YUF4/hawQrLCryf6GL/dzQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:From; b=kc+poOwkmKmjmpGjb1qXDbTd6aKnC0UB9JSYf+6Kr0qVlngz8UOm5n8W89jsI1PZO bXmGC1LJmzJKNTkJsu/2bkULqU80eAQNgE42nmnJHD7sxQ4peObKab3tPjd/yBD/Dc xKxXkwlzfuOk07aw6OQgUCPL5n2w8frhlKO3hJbYCslGV5s924Pg0pHgZTrdkbA4Q2 0GQbEkPiOuBlERAS0Xwqfx7yavvX2rehCyg9cK6kZRaWSLwXSNfv5MZ8UA2gVN0KP2 +GMOnNa/eEjIk+Un722vmbIOE658XjEWCp4fFFcDIHq66rlAUT3QAgG8K9Cwre90Xw 2ZC6MPvxp9c+w== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4Rcdpm2Jcgz9rxP; Fri, 1 Sep 2023 15:16:48 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <87wmxaay1n.fsf@gmx.de> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.67.36.65; envelope-from=yantar92@posteo.net; helo=mout01.posteo.de X-Spam_score_int: -43 X-Spam_score: -4.4 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:309777 Archived-At: Michael Albinus writes: >> Agree. Isn't is possible to create an automatic bouncer for >> non-subscribed non-whitelisted users to notify them about moderation? > > That's not done because it would give the spammers the feedback that the > used mail address is valid. With the likelihood to get more spam. Is it something that was tried and then had to be removed? I do agree that the amount of spam will likely increase, but I am not sure if it will be unbearable. So, insight from moderators would be useful. -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode contributor, Learn more about Org mode at . Support Org development at , or support my work at