Re: permitted cross-posting for genuine FAQs

---------

Marty Fouts (fouts@null.net)
11 Mar 1998 09:12:26 -0800

I realize that this would require a significant software investment
and so at best is a long term solution, but in light of "son of RFC
1036" now would probably be the best time to suggest it.

I also realize that it has probably already been discussed in the
appropriate places, but since I'm not following those discussions I
offer it here for consideration.

It seems to me that to answer Chris' legitimate concern about content,
a different approach, not limited to FAQs, might be incorporated,
consisting of two parts:

1) tighten up the meaning of "approved" so that the approval header
amounts to a crypto signature of the article by the
moderator. This would dramatically reduce the likelyhood of
forged approvals.

2) exempt moderated groups from spam BI calculation, other than
checking the signature.

I realize that I'm suggesting a significant change in the software, as
well as a process that might be CPU intensive. However, it might not
be necessary for the signature to be checked by most sites, only by
spam-cancellers.

marty

-- 
marty fouts       mailto:fouts@null.net          http://www.best.com/~mjf


I believe in censorship. After all, I made a fortune out of it.
  -- Mae West