Re: Announcing new security mailing list

[full-disclosure () lists netsys com (Ron DuFresne)]

On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Steve wrote:

> > I suppose
> > you can accuse him of not stating his
> > standards well enough up
> > front for what kinds of messages he considers fraud instructions.
>
> Typically Dave (the Bugtraq moderator) will return the rejected post
> with comments as to why it was rejected.  I can't speak for Dave or
> Security Focus but in my experience I have seen comments come back as to
> why a message is being rejected come back from Dave.

With the new mailman SW the poster gets a standard rejection/denied form
e-mail back <ezim is ones friend when avoiding real contact>.  It is then
up to the original poster to try and contact the list admin as to the
reason<s> behind the denial of their post.  Sometimes, depending upon the
list and list administrator in question they will get something with meat
in the form of a reason back, sometimes they are silently ignored
<smile>.  What has been interesting on this end has been the vapid
increase in rejections of postings due to the fact the list
maintainer thought the posting in question would generate "too much"
discussion and they had not the time to deal with the increased posting
flow through their list.  We've found this an interesting *rationale*, on
the stifeling side as pertains open discussion and the learning process

        [SNIP]


Thanks,


Ron DuFresne
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Cutting the space budget really restores my faith in humanity.  It
eliminates dreams, goals, and ideals and lets us get straight to the
business of hate, debauchery, and self-annihilation." -- Johnny Hart
        ***testing, only testing, and damn good at it too!***

OK, so you're a Ph.D.  Just don't touch anything.