[Mailman-Users] GMane?

[Brad Knowles]

At 1:38 AM -0500 2006-02-17, John A. Martin wrote:

>  Did you consider selecting the option to have Gmane do address
>  obfuscation?  I suppose that would require someone at Gmane to
>  intervene if your list had been subscribed by a third party.

	Considering the rest of the things that Gmane has gotten wrong on 
this most recent incidence, I am not at all convinced that they would 
be capable of adequately meeting all our technical concerns.

	Or, even if they can meet them today, I am not at all convinced 
that they would continue to meet those technical concerns in the 
future -- they could just as easily go back to a previous 
configuration where various undesirable activities were performed or 
allowed.


	They need to prove to me that they can operate by certain minimum 
rules of net.decency, and that they can continue to uphold these 
standards of operation for an extended period of time, before I would 
be willing to consider whether or not they could meet the technical 
requirements.

>  The "without permission" bit is I think a bit misplaced.  Any
>  subscriber can do what they will with list mail they receive.  They
>  can (and do in other venues) put list mail to public and private
>  archives, send it to other lists, and expose it to search engines
>  anywhere.  In fact Gmane removes lists when there objections.  I don't
>  know what more it is reasonable to expect from Gmane.

	And good spammers remove your name from their lists when you 
request that they do so.

	I see very little difference here.

>  If Gmane was such a menace to the lists why was it "a long, long time"
>  before the issue was brought to Lars attention again?

	Dunno.  Why did this ever have to be an issue to begin with?

-- 
Brad Knowles, <brad at stop.mail-abuse.org>

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

     -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania
     Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755

  LOPSA member since December 2005.  See <http://www.lopsa.org/>.