[PLUG-TALK] Re: PLUG-talk and other Filters?

[Russell Senior]

GLL> I wouldn't mind at all if an automated system simply bounced all
GLL> "family radio-unfriendly" words. I really don't think we'd lose
GLL> that much - what would we lose that was truly necessary?

Russell> The beautiful thing here is that *you* can moderate with your
Russell> *own* filter.  That lets you adapt it precisely to your own
Russell> sensitivities.

GLL> I don't think that technology exists yet. (See below.)

Russell> You don't have to rely on everyone sharing them. Nor do you
Russell> have to convince everyone else to share them. The power is in
Russell> your hands to solve your own problem.

GLL> If I an reading you correctly, you're saying "if you don't like
GLL> it the way it is now, just unsubscribe/turn it off." That's
GLL> giving up on the problem, not really solving the problem.

Your proposed solution to your problem is for the mailing list itself
to reject messages based on presence of certain words.  Or maybe
you're suggesting just filtering out the offensive words themselves.
Either way, a procmail recipe can do the same thing with your own list
of words.  This is not new technology.  Procmail has been around for
more than a decade.  Whatever a machine can do on the mailing list
server, it can also do on your mail receiving machine.  Do it if it
will make you happy.  Or, alternatively, convince an overwhelming
majority to adopt your particular sensitivities.  The former seems
like a more pragmatic approach.


-- 
Russell Senior         ``I have nine fingers; you have ten.''
seniorr at aracnet.com