[e2e] Enough!

[Vikram Visweswaraiah]

Andrew Warfield wrote:

>I the interests of ending the perpetual spam discussion, might it be
>possible to set up a sister-list, say e2e-m, which is a moderated version of
>e2e?
>
>This would seem to allow a compromise in which spam, and meta-spam could be
>avoided to whatever degree people are comfortable with.  e2e-m could accept
>only posts from the e2e listserve, and pass all subscriber posts back up to
>the parent list.  The sublist would be higher-latency (due to the moderator
>problem), but satisfy the needs of those who are willing to take the delay.
>
>Unless I am missing something obvious as to why this would be a bad idea
>(wouldn't be the first time), it would seem all that is needed is a
>volunteer to moderate (or comparable cunning moderating solution). ;)
>
>  
>
Interesting. This got me thinking to something such as

- e2e listserv picks 'N' people out of the subscriber list to send every 
mail to (random or algorithmic)
- The 'N' people respond with a pre-designated token that marks that 
message as SPAM (they could do this via their intelligent filters, or 
manually reply).
- listserv takes a vote out of the 'N', if the vote wins, it qualifies 
as non-spam and is then broadcast to the whole list.

This would seem like a fairly semi-automated task that would involve 
everyone interested in actually reducing spam at the cost of the extra 
delay. Note that positive responses can be indicated by a timeout on the 
listserv, i.e it can be setup to treat non-replies as OKs. The 
'volunteers' (N people) can be random, guaranteeing that not all of them 
are on vacation, it can involve some static people who always moderate 
and are running smart filters.

In short, a voting based moderation instead of a single moderator, so 
the single moderator doesn't have to do this all the time. Having more 
moderators also buys everyone on the list the advantage of a variety of 
filters that folks may be individually running.

Oh, and sorry for the digression, I'm now bordering on actually 
generating more spam ;-)

-V