[kwlug-disc] This is the new list, same as the old list

[Paul Nijjar]

FYI: Chris sent me some feedback about the list, but like an idiot I
did not forward my response to the entire list. So below is the
conversation thus far. 

--- On Mon, 12/8/08, Chris Frey <cdfrey at foursquare.net> wrote:

> <cdfrey at foursquare.net> wrote:
> > 
> > > The Line-Id: header still looks slightly odd:
> > > 
> > > 	List-Id: KWLUG discussion free for all
> > > <kwlug-disc_kwlug.org.kwlug.org>
> > 

> > I think this looks newly odd. I don't think this  is used for routing
> > in the sense that it needs to be a legitimate address or URL.
> > Do we care if it looks funny?
> 

> This is the recommended way that people filter mail into various
> mailboxes automatically.  The mailing list software adds it.  So it
> doesn't really matter what it says, but what is key is that it is
> consistent, and never changes, once configured.  Otherwise, it
> breaks people's procmail filtering, for example.

I think that maybe I will change the description away from "KWLUG
discussion free for all" to something a little less anarchist.

> > Here is where Mailman seems to be getting the
> components:
> > 
> > "KWLUG discussion free for all" : the short description of the list
> > 
> > kwlug-disc_kwlug.org : the way that CCJ/Clearline's server sees the
> > list. The _kwlug.org is there because the server can host mailing
> > lists for many domains. 
> > 
> > kwlug.org : the "preferred host" for the list. 
> 
> If it is hard to change, then no worries.  As long as it
> doesn't change later on. :-)

It is easy to change two of these three components. 

> > > This sounds good to me.  The archives appear to obfuscate the
> > > email addresses anyway on the web.
> > 
> > The obfuscation is pretty terrible and spammers are making enough
> > Mailman-specific attacks that this offers pretty much no protection. 
> > 
> > I wish I was smart enough to get Mailman to use the
> obfuscation 
> > 
> > paul_nijjar at ...
> > 
> > rather than 
> > 
> > paul_nijjar at yahoo.ca 
> > 
> > in protecting addresses. Does anybody know how to do this? I'll bet
> > that this does not make it impossible for spammers to figure out our
> > addresses, but it makes it harder. 
> 
> It also makes it impossible for archive readers to figure out how to
> contact someone who posted on a certain topic...
> 
> I haven't looked that deeply into mailman, so I don't know how to change
> this.  I wouldn't call it a big issue.

I think I am okay with archive readers not being able to contact
particular posters, because I don't know how this can avoid being
exploited by the stupid spammers who have ruined the Internet.


> > There is another criticism of putting the archives up: independent of
> > spamming, people (including our bosses) can see the list archives. To
> > me this seems like more of a feature than a bug, but my impression is
> > that others disagree. 
> 
> For mailing lists, it's definitely a feature, and is the default in the
> vast majority of cases.  For a LUG mailing list, it should be the
> "default default" :-)

What do others think? 


> (Btw, I think this mail only went to me... if you intended
> it to go to the list, you might want to resend.  Feel free to forward my
> reply to the list too.)
> 
> - Chris

Oops. 

- Paul



      __________________________________________________________________
Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail.  Click on Options in Mail and switch to New Mail today or register for free at http://mail.yahoo.ca