On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 02:31:54PM -0800, Chuq Von Rospach wrote:
- I think a tool like Mailman has to implement to the highest-reasonable
security, so if people want to be looser, fine. It's easier to loosen the reins than expect JrandomeUser to implement extra features on an ad hoc basis. I also think a tool like Mailman ought to try to set a "best practices" model for how it operates. Mailman should set the standard for how we think mail lists ought to be run, not be the least common denominator that everyone has to hack extras into to make it fit their needs.
And, to clarify my opinion, I don't disagree with this in the least.
That doesn't mean I think it's *right*.
- admins can set whatever policies they want -- but I think it's important
they disclose them, so users can make informed choices. That includes, frankly, letting users know their addresses are potentially exposed to spammers, so if a user is sensitive to this, they can choose to not subscribe, or to leave the list.
*Definitely... but people should realize that that's a possibilty *any time the give their address out*.
I'm not telling admins what their policies need to be, but I do think Mailman needs to understand it's role as a "best practices" tool -- and I do feel strongly that whatever an admin does, they do so in a mode that involves informed consent with their users.
Jay R. Ashworth email@example.com Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Florida http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274
"If you don't have a dream; how're you gonna have a dream come true?" -- Captain Sensible, The Damned (from South Pacific's "Happy Talk")