>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