In article <4.3.1.1.20011114143103.00c6b250 at rutchem.rutgers.edu>,
Catherine L. Lawson <lawson at rutchem.rutgers.edu> wrote:
>Dear Colleagues,
>>Are you fed up with spam on xtal-log like I am?
Yes. In fact for some time now I have been on the edge of dropping it from
my newsreader altogether.
>Benefits of moderation: No more garbage mail to wade through. The list
>can therefore serve its intended purpose of being a valuable tool to help
>us all with our science, instead of being an annoyance.
This is of course the desired result. It is quite possible for spammers
to forge the moderation approval, though. I don't know how widespread
that is. Yet. But eventually it would happen.
>Drawback: Messages suitable for the list will be slightly delayed in
>posting. (I will find suitable substitutes during periods I am away or on
>vacation).
Not a problem for most messages.
>If you have any strong opinions, positive or negative, about to converting
>xtal-log to a moderated group, please post them to the group:
>xtal-log at net.bio.net
That is not a valid usenet group that can be posted to.
Did you mean people should Email there?
--
Ethan A Merritt
