[spectre] not just an invitation to the hive un-launch

[Andreas Broeckmann]

hey armin,

the insinuation in your message is difficult to understand. you know 
me, you know inke, you have been following this list and its 
predecessor for 11 years (which, as you know, have always been open 
and unmoderated), and you (should) know how the mailman software and 
spam filters work. - in any of this, do you find reason for this 
'speculation' of yours?

why do you prefer to mistrust those who maintain the list, rather 
than consider alternative reasons? i can only speculate...

regards,

-a


ps: like this message of yours, every message is posted automatically 
that gets sent to the spectre list from an address that is subscribed 
to the list.

messages only get trashed (again, automatically) if:
- they come from an address that is not subscribed
- they contain attachments
- they use formating, marked up links, etc., which the spam filter 
recognises as
spam (see note below)
- they have a volume of more than 40 K.

in these cases, the messages get deleted automatically. please, believe me that
inke and i have much better things to do than 'control' what gets posted to the
spectre list or not. our main work is to keep the channel as spam-free as
possible, and to avoid the completely unnecessary pleasures of 4 MB attachments
and multi-colour, multi-size fonts.

if your message does not appear on the list, try sending it as 'plain text' -
you can select this option in the preferences/options of your e-mail software.

best regards,
-a

read more at:
http://www.gnu.org/software/mailman/docs.html 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayesian_spam_filtering



>now coming to the purpose of this email, there seems to be a hierarchy
>also regarding the posting of announcements. A couple of days ago Ilze
>Black sent an invitation of the Hive Networks UNlaunch to this list and
>she thinks it got stuck in the moderation queue. maybe she is right and
>moderators did not let it through. maybe the mail got stuck for some
>other reason. whatever. but the mere suggestion that there are
>weigthings or filtering mechanisms on announcements on a list whose main
>reason to e today is to allow people send annoucements I find totally
>astonishing. what are the criteria then for "good" announcements and
>"bad" announcements? what, possibly, could the moderators not have liked
>about the hive un-launch? I could only speculate on that and I dont want
>to.