Re: [tlug] Email address munging in the TLUG archives (C&C)

[Edward Middleton <edward@example.com>]

Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Edward Middleton writes:
>
>  > Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>
>  > > Gmane claims to consult with the managers of the lists it proxies, but
>  > > in practice it makes no effort to check whether people claiming to
>  > > represent the list have the authority to do so.
>  > 
>  > This who line of argument that everyone else does a poor job so we
>  > should follow suit is completely wrong.  This is TLUG.
>
> If by doing a bad job, they can destroy the effect of our good work,
> that is an argument against wasted effort.  That's all I want to point
> out.
>
> If TLUG decides to make a best-effort attempt to keep addresses from
> leaking, I'll go along with it, of course.  I just think it's ugly and
> ineffective in the medium-to-long term.
>
>  > Your proposed solution of posting from a hotmail address is a very bad
>  > idea, because it makes it impossible for anyone including the list
>  > master to tell who is the actual poster.
>
> Hey, nothing posted under my name was posted by a human.  I a cat (not
> to be confused with ayakat).  (The fat bearded balding guy is a waldo.)
>
>  > Which Stephen.J.Turnbull_1@example.com,
>  > Stephen.J.Turnbull_2@example.com ..
>  > Stephen.J.Turnbull_n@example.com is the real Stephen Turnbull
>
> stephen@example.com is, and so is turnbull@example.com, although
> I'd prefer to be known by the former on this list.  I want my address
> to be known; I'll deal with the consequences.  I don't want people to
> have to jump through hoops to get in touch with me (which is why I
> oppose Reply-To munging, too).  I want "one-keystroke replies".
>   

An email address I previously used is already widely disseminated.  I
have been coming up as the first non-dead Edward Middleton on google for
some time, and until recently so did my email address.  While I can
understand your need to disseminate your contact details, the previously
googlable email account has such a low signal to noise ratio that spam
filtering is ineffective.

> If you want to be known as "Addressee Unknown", I can't really blame
> you.  But please don't deny me the honor of standing up for Truth,
> Justice, and the RFC Way.
>   

I have to write you an RFC?

>  > Not showing the email address to all list members doesn't protect you
>  > from the consequences of your posts, the list master has the list of all
>  > email addresses.  If something inappropriate is posted to the list there
>  > is clearly a method of recourse, i.e. the list master warns the user or
>  > in the case of spammers removes the account.
>
> And they just sign up for another one.  Abuse by members is not
> preventable without moderation.
>   

If this sort of abuse occurs it is clear and limited in its damage.
Harvesting email addresses from posts to the mailing list if far more
serious a problem then a single spam.

Edward