Gotcha. By all means don't let me get in the way of progress. Either approach works. I think everyone's in agreement that this will likely require list moderation, the question is just if we moderate tor-talk@ or make a new moderated list.
I suspect this would go more smoothly with a new list because the act of subscribing is opt-ing into the moderation rather than taking away posting rights of a once-open list. But either way this is a minor detail, and a decision for the boots on the ground doing the moderation. :)
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 3:56 PM, Griffin Boyce griffin@cryptolab.net wrote:
Damian Johnson wrote:
Hi Griffin. Iirc Moritz mentioned that we might soon be ready to roll out tor-users@ (with moderators) as a replacement for tor-talk@. I'm more curious about a replacement than trying to clean up tor-talk@ - imho it's a lost cause.
That said, don't let me stand in the way if you want to take this on.
I can appreciate that approach, but changing lists alone doesn't solve the core problem. People who want to be distracting will just sign up for the new list and be distracting there. But people who were interested in being on tor-talk for the on-topic discussions may not sign up for a new list.
My personal opinion is that we could save a lot of work by sending a reminder about on-topic discussions, kicking off a few people if they don't listen, then moderating posts for a couple of weeks if it's still not abating.
~Griffin