how to filter advertisers from joining the list

[Frank Fenderbender]

Sorry that I posted under another current questioner's subject-line.
I clicked the reply so I didn't have to type anything else in to get the To: <address> filled in, and then forgot to change the question to my own, before asking my own inside the question.
email's body. I should've slowed down after having to delete 3 of my 10 incoming list emails as overt spam.

Since BSD is based in security and a history of being older than most all surviving OSs, I
My question is whether we can imagine reducing overt email from the list that send "questions" about dating, or about buying a service/product... as a captive audience.
It seems ironic that a list membership about a secure OS exhibits insecurity in who can access our mailboxes and detour our attention-spans with misrepresentation of purpose.
So, I thought that others so-captured might want to seek some proactive revenge if we can decipher the problem, the tasks, and access.
If it's an "open" list then it's up to use to fend off invaders, right? It's not in anyone's "job description" unless it's in all of our membership implications?
If we don't do it, who will. eh? We do lots of this stuff by ourselves all the time, so a list mechanism may just need some known detail brought up so that volunteers will be able to research, prototype with a test-list, validate, and suggest workarounds or fixes. 

Examples of everyday improvements we all have made, or could make:
	Problem: 	In this day-and-age, 80% of all US phone calls are robocalls, esp. between 7-9am and 6-8pm..
	Workaround:  we've used the wildcard features of CPR CallBlocker and Ooma to pre-delete junk calls and callers.

	Problem: 	We send about 30% of what Amazon sells back as misrepresented, faulty, or incorrect.
	Workaround: we avoid Jeff Bezos whenever possible.

	Problem: 	We screened fake-people from a Yahoo Group mail-list I used to have; it was tough, because you had to screen for real people.
	Workaround: We did not admit to membership anyone who did not issue a self-statement , semi-divulging that they were not going to lob ads at us.

	Problem: 	quantities of fake-people assault forums.
	Workaround: on our SMF forum, we use email verification, BOT lists, and essentially block all eAddresses with alphanumeric name-fields since that indicates a spammer more often than a lazy person.
	
	Problem: 	Sado-parasites, thieves, and psycho-terrorists assault WAN-connected systems on auto-pilot so they can destroy somewhere else concurrently.
	Workaround: We added TXT/SPF files to reduce having our spoofed email addresses get us blocked from relaying mail-servers.
				We added anti-malware programs to reduce battles with viruses, spyware, etc.

	Problem: 	Approx. 20% of all our USPS-handled packages are delayed, damaged, or lost.
	Workaround: We use non-USPS deliverers whenever it's an option, as a workaround to them ever improving anything but 'images' of quality.

So, rather than "getting used to" or tolerating the intolerable creep of 'quantity over quality', small efforts can often reap great rewards.
I enjoy, and thus, prefer reading real questions and answers because a topic relates to me or just because it sounds interesting.
There's so much interesting use and knowledge in listees'  worlds that I resent being demographically-manipulated, like having to answer spam calls to find out I'm colluding in wasting my time by NOT proactively blocking them.

So, maybe we can get some info about the system running the list so we can try to make some improvements in proactively blocking spammers at the membership level?
If it is near-"impossible" then we find out from one or more answers why that is, and, if it is not impossible, then we find out what it may take and approach it like any other software project that "raising the bar" for higher quality implies?

here's to saving the Delete-button finger for more interesting pursuits,
frank