On 2 Aug 2002, at 7:39, Chuq Von Rospach wrote:
> On 8/2/02 4:52 AM, "Bernie Cosell" <bernie@fantasyfarm.com> wrote:
>
> >> I do. My big site has 50+ lists. It generates a good number of subscribes a
> >> day. My list rules specifically state not to externally archive any mailing
> >> list without my explicit approval.
> >
> > Why do you do this? I've been following this discussion and, like Russ,
> > I don't understand this aspect of it. If the purpose of the (public)
> > list is to disseminate information, why do you care if it happens in one
> > mail-delivery step or two?
>
> Spam. I've had too many cases where someone's address was leaked to a
> spambot, and where it turned out I got yelled at because someone else put up
> nthe archive on a web site I didn't know about with no protection.
I think we are in roaring agreement on this matter. That's why I tried
to be careful to put *PUBLIC* whenever I mentioned relaying or archives.
If you're running a *restricted* archive, then, obviously, you cannot
permit list subscribers to run a less-restricted one. Similarly, if you
manage addtitions to the list [so it is NOT completely-public-open-to-
all], then obviously you can't let third-parties hide-subscribe addrs
to your list.
So I guess I hear the message, but I'd have expressed it differently: in
this day and age, you can no longer have really 'public' lists, as we did
back in the dark ages, and part of that is that listadministrors have to
impose various restrictions on how both the listmembers and the public
can use and access both the list and the archives, and part of *that* is
not allowing listmembers to evade the restrictions [whatever they happen
to be for YOUR list] by taking local actions.
So I see that I need a perception adjustment... I'm still stuck in the
past on some of these policy matters and haven't fully internalized the
realities and necessities of the way things are now.
[but I have to admit, that the transition from "list-administrator" to
"list-owner" as a matter of actual policy and almost-property-rights,
rather than just syntactic convenience, still sticks in my craw --- I
figure I can set (and enforce) rules for a list as its
*administrator* without having to make like I "own" the list]
/Bernie\
--
Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers
mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com Pearisburg, VA
--> Too many people, too few sheep <--
Follow-Ups:
References:
|
|
