>The challenge  for Eric is  not only  to develop a  new filter to  block mail
>messages sent directly  Listserv lists; its also filtering out  the crap that
>comes from abuses of Usenet that  affect Listserv or perhaps the mechanism at
>American University which  permits mirroring news groups  with Listserv lists
>needs to be changed so it too has a filtering mechanism.
 
Um...I don't really see how we can expect LISTSERV to do all of
this.  There are just too many Usenet sites (and too many subscri-
bers with Usenet access, and too many mail-to-news gateways, and
too many anonymous remailers, et cetera) out there.
 
I would think that the optimum solution - and you're not going to
like this - would be to implement semi-moderation.  Messages from
subscribers would be posted normally; everything else, including
the postings from a Usenet/Fidonet/whatever gateway, would be
routed to the moderator for review.
 
This, of course, is why my list is *never* going to have a Usenet
gateway.  I think we, as listowners, have to assume some of the
burden if we want a Usenet gateway; we can't expect the software
to handle everything.  If you want the good input from Usenet
participants, you'll have to take care of some of the dross too.
 
Frankly, I'll go on record as predicting that the vast majority of
serious mailing lists will, within two years, be either moderated,
invitation-only (unpublicized, that is), or defunct.  I'm on one
list that actually requires:
        - Invitation (after nomination by current members),
        - Probationary period, including an essay, and, finally,
        - A vote of the current membership.
It actually works fairly well.  Before the invitation is extended,
the nominators forward some examples of the prospective nominees'
writings from other forums.
 
We definitely need a "wheat from the chaff" mechanism, but the
software isn't going to provide it for us.
 
--Wes