Re: [boost] Need volunteer to supply Boost NNTP/newsgroup server

From: David B. Held (dheld_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-03-28 10:57:30

----- Original Message -----
From: "Beman Dawes" <bdawes_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>; <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2002 9:19 AM
Subject: RE: [boost] Need volunteer to supply Boost NNTP/newsgroup server

> The rationale is that (1) we want tight control on who and what gets
> posted, not just to avoid spam, but also to avoid a lot of other unhelpful
> posts, (2) we would be better off to build experience with newsgroups
> which we control (and can change quickly at will) before going public
> (if indeed we ever want to go public), (3) we want to hold administrative
> work to a minimum, (4) a hope that spammers are less likely to harvest
> email addresses from a private, controlled membership, newgroup than
> a public one.
>
> I don't have any personal experience running a newsgroup, so the above
> is based a bit on speculation rather than experience.
>
> Comments?

Borland controls their own news servers, and I would have to guess for
essentially the same reasons as you have cited above.  While some
well-meaning public newsgroups like some gcc support groups are
rife with spam, I've never really seen any obvious spam on Borland's
newsgroups, so I can only assume the assumptions are valid.  The only
thing of which I am unsure is the amount of email harvesting that occurs.
However, I have a hard time believing that a spammer building a list of
millions of addresses would go to the trouble of finding small private
newsgroups just to harvest a few thousand addresses, when there are
so many public newsgroups available to glean.

Dave