J C Lawrence <claw@kanga.nu> writes:
> Aye, there's that. I'm increasingly convinced of late that lists will
> be forced to obscure the addresses on the messages they send out
> TMDA-dated style. Its not a difficult engineering problem, its not even
> a particularly difficult SysAdm or community problem in doing this. It
> adds a possibly significant processing load (not storage) to the list
> host as he then needs to deal with (forward or discard) mail to such
> dated addresses, but that's not an impossible problem or load. The
> problem is in training the great unwashed to understand that addresses
> can be date limited.
If you do implement this, it would be cool if you could make it a per-user
option. My address is public. I want it that way. I use it in the
mailto links on my web pages and I use it when posting to Usenet. I deal
with the spam that results; I prefer to be accessible.
I can wholeheartedly understand and support people who want to make other
choices, but I personally strongly dislike TMDA-style addresses or
constantly changing addresses for my own personal mailbox and don't want
to suddenly discover that I've been assigned some by some mailing list
that I'm posting to.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Follow-Ups:
References:
|
|
