[Lincs] Archive is private from now on!

[Marc Mc Guinness]

Hi,

MJ Ray wrote the following on 14.09.2004 12:23:
> On 2004-09-13 14:00:22 +0100 Marc Mc Guinness <marc at mcguinness.de> wrote:
> 
>> It was my intention not to publicise the senders mail address to the web. 
> 
> Too late. For example: 
> http://66.102.11.104/search?q=cache:http%3A//mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/lincs/2004-August/000251.html 
> and other cache services exist, some of which hold messages far longer.

No, I don't think it's too late. 2 guests at our meeting told me that 
they won't subscribe to the list, if it stays the way it was. I think 
there are even more people who'd subscribe, if we offer a better way to 
prevent the addresses from being snarfed up by automated web scanners 
for use by spammers.

>> Unfortunately I only see two ways to do that:
>> - make the archive private
>> - strip sender address from any message
> 
> or obfuscate it, which is what happened before.

Yes, it happened before. But, to be honest, replacing the "@" with " at 
" isnt't really efficient. At least with the mailman version 2.1.2 
you've only got one option called "obscure_addresses", which is still 
switched on. More advanced obscure re-write rules aren't possible.

>> I find it more important to protect our mailing list members privacy 
>> and prevent spam, than make it appear in web searches and catalogues.
> 
> Those who want to participate without releasing their contact details 
> may do so anonymously or via an alias service already, assuming the list 
> moderators permit their posts. Closing the archive gives a false sense 
> of privacy: when I joined, it looked like anyone may join, including a 
> list-web robot. (That type of robot has been noticed joining LUG lists 
> in the past.)

I know and I agree. Closing the archive isn't a good thing to do, but as 
I don't have direct read/write access to the mailman installation on 
lug.org.uk I've got to use the options they give to us.

> It also makes the LUG look like a "private garden" with high fences to 
> hide you from outsiders. No-one can see what they're stepping into 
> before joining. You seem a friendly bunch, so you shouldn't be ashamed 
> of advertising yourselves.

Ack.

>> If I notice an interest in making our mailing list available for 
>> public search engines I'll change that setting immediately.
> 
> Check your webserver logs and see how many search engine robots visit you.

What I meant was interest by subscribed members. Not interest by search 
engines.

>> I've changed the reply-to setting and I hope it works.
> 
> Not at the time of the email that I'm replying to.

This mail is another try.

Marc