[Coco] A return to bit.listserv.coco?

[Jim Cox]

James:

I couldn't agree with you more.  I believe having people 
subscribe to the list is what's help prevent the fragging 
and spamming that was n the other list.

I think it would be the worst thing for the CoCo community 
for this list to close down.  I for one would not move to 
the new list, I am tired of all the spam, and flame wars 
that an open list invites.

-Jim

On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 12:33:22 -0500 (EST)
  James Dessart <james at skwirl.ca> wrote:
> 
> 
> On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, John R. Hogerhuis wrote:
> 
>> Why did that group get spam flooded but this (as its 
>>successor) did
>> not? I understood that it was due to a particular 
>>malicious
>> individual, so it could have happened to this group too.
> 
> However, in order to support the newsgroup connection in 
>the old list, the
> list had to accept posts from non-subscribers. This list 
>only accepts
> posts from subscribers. Frankly, I see no benefit to 
>using the newsgroup.
> If someone isn't willing to sign up to the mailing, 
>either because of
> privacy issues or some other "value" based reason, then 
>maybe the material
> they have to contribute isn't of much value in and of 
>itself.
> 
> Anonymity is not a right, and when we're talking about a 
>small community
> where one undesirable can create a lot of havoc, it 
>isn't even useful or
> desirable.
> 
> James
> 
> 
> -- 
> Coco mailing list
> Coco at maltedmedia.com
> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco