Re: [tlug] Email address munging in the TLUG archives

[Edward Middleton <edward@example.com>]

Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Josh Glover writes:
>
>  > On 06/12/06, Edward Middleton <edward@example.com> wrote:
>  > 
>  > > That is fine but its an issue of policy, i.e. should it be a requirement
>  > > to have your email address publicly displayed in order to post to tlug.
>  > 
>  > Yes! Thank you for putting it so clearly. *This*, and nothing else, is
>  > the issue. All the other stuff is simply implementation details.
>  > 
>  > My take on this is:
>  > 
>  > NO! In subscribing to the list, the only thing you are agreeing to is
>  > that you want Mailman to try to deliver posts to you.
>
> That's true of subscription, but posting is another matter.  Mailman
> does not force subscribers to post, that's an explicit decision.
>
> Note that there are plenty of archiving services (eg, Gmane) with less
> than robust ethics about following list policy.  I'm pretty sure that
> Gmane munges, but others many not.
>   

I was under the impression that gmane was managed by proxyies of the
group and the choice on whether to mung was up to them.

> And I know that people managing active open-subscription lists with
> closed archives have reported (on Mailman-Users) clear evidence of
> professional spammers signing up and harvesting addresses.
>
> It's just a matter of time....
>   

Good point, can we have the sender address removed from emails posted to
the list?

Edward