Re: successful build - i686-pc-cygwin

[Christopher Faylor <cgf at redhat dot com>]

On Wed, Jul 04, 2001 at 11:42:21PM -0400, Phil Edwards wrote:
>On Wed, Jul 04, 2001 at 07:23:53PM -0700, Joe Buck wrote:
>> So it may seem "fierce" for me to say we should think about a ban,
>> but I'm a bit worried about just ignoring the issue.  I suppose we
>> could rig up a procmail filter to bounce messages with certain
>> phrases, like "confidential", but we'll probably get false hits.
>
>Rather than dropping the suspect messages, the filter could forward them
>to someone for approval.  The false hits would then get passed on (with
>a slight delay).  I too am worried by these emails.
>
>There's also an axiom (I forget its formal name) stating that when the
>lawyer-mandated disclaimer at the bottom is longer than the message body
>itself, the email contains zero useful information and can be ignored. :-)

Maybe we could automatically moderate anything that looks like it has a
signature longer than n lines.  I don't know what "n" should be, though.
I wouldn't mind if it was 3 but I'm sure that others would disagree --
especially the gcc mailing list owners who would be doing the moderation. :-)

cgf