James wrote:

A nice idea. Same complaint here: I post using a number of source addresses, and I'm certainly not going to go through the @rse ache of subscribing multiple addresses to ALUG just to workaround dumb moderating software.

Well, sod you. These CLUG people seem to have an aversion to trimming quotes and their mailserver is still not accepting my subscription request, so maybe they deserve to be held. :^)

Seriously, there are reasons why the ALUG lists are set up in the way they are. Bitter experience is one of them and I think the issues around them have been talked to death on-list, so the archives might make interesting searching.

When a friendly human admin has time to moderate, that's bearable. I don't object to moderated lists, when there is a good reason to use that approach.

This list is not moderated, but posts by unknown addresses and ones which match certain other common features of past spams are held for one of the (currently three) list admins to take a look at before they are allowed through.

I was told that the CLUG listserver maintainer is long gone, however. So changes to CLUG are probably not advisable / impossible.

One possible change is to move the CLUG list to more useful location.

Nor should anyone get the hump at ALUG over criticism - let it be constructive. Can you tune the moderation?

Yes, but the current settings seem optimal.

Keeping UseNet discipline and self-moderation is probably best for clug - just be (self) disciplined about threads? An FAQ can be supported if the anarchy / total freedom approach breaks down irretrievably.

The ALUG FAQ is http://www.alug.org.uk/articles/2001a/alugfaq.html

Its _all_ about Linux - innit!

Indeed. Our areas overlap and I always hoped our activities would overlap at some point. It's nice to see it starting to happen.