Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: PostgreSQL moderation report: 2009-6-16

From: Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL WWW List <pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL moderation report: 2009-6-16
Date: 2009-06-18 21:07:41
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-www
On Thursday, June 18, 2009, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> writes:
>> > On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 3:42 PM, Tom Lane<tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> >> So the rest of us have to start filtering junk from our -www
>> >> subscription?  Please undo this.
>> > Unless you have a better way of ensuring everything gets moderated.
>> > This was discussed last week,
>> Discussed where?  Not here, that I saw.
>> Personally, I'm perfectly capable of procmail'ing these things into
>> oblivion, and I'm sure most of the other subscribers to -www are too.
>> So in a week or so the only effect that these missives will have is
>> to permanently clutter the list archives.
> Agreed.  The core problem is that moderators have to dig through tons of
> spam/duplicates/cross-posting to do anything meaningful, and they are
> resigning under that load.  Address that core issue;  shaming is not
> going to help anyone.

There is zero spam - we're not talking about list moderation.


Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK:

In response to


pgsql-www by date

Next:From: Guido BarosioDate: 2009-06-18 21:09:39
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL moderation report: 2009-6-16
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2009-06-18 20:54:16
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL moderation report: 2009-6-16

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group