Bruce Dawson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[snip]
The problems with python2 have been resolved, and there is a later
version of mailman on that system. However, this has exposed a problem
with moving a list from one version of mailman to a later
version. After corrupting the mailman database
Kevin D. Clark wrote:
Bruce Dawson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[snip]
The problems with python2 have been resolved, and there is a later
version of mailman on that system. However, this has exposed a problem
with moving a list from one version of mailman to a later
version. After corrupting the
would otherwise
find such tactics to be vaguely insulting.
For the majority of this thread (which in actuality has been ongoing
for around 1.5 years) the vast majority of people on this list have
been under the impression that One Day a Long Time Ago the mail
archives were made to be non-public
What level of traffic are we talking about? My server could probably
handle a moderate load in addition to its other tasks, and both Chris
and I already have access. I would likely be willing to give some
sort of access to at least one other person.
--DTVZ
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 20:30:10
On Thu, Jan 27, 2005 at 03:31:35PM -0500, Travis Roy wrote:
When this came up before (with Derek) many found having the email
addresses available to be useful.
At this point I feel the need to interject. A number of people have
pointed fingers at me for bitching, but a number of other people
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005, at 11:22pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you have your own server, you could put up your own archives with
your own Perl script, and likely many would thank you. I would.
Throughout this thread I've been interested in solving a technical
problem that I was led to
What level of traffic are we talking about? My server could probably
handle a moderate load in addition to its other tasks, and both Chris
and I already have access. I would likely be willing to give some
sort of access to at least one other person.
--DTVZ
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 20:30:10 -0500
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005, at 8:40pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What level of traffic are we talking about?
I suggest you start by putting up an independent mail archive, sub'ing the
list to it, and posting a link to them here. That gets everybody started in
small steps.
I don't have
Jeff Smith wrote:
--- Kevin D. Clark kekevin_clclarkccess-4-free.com
wrote:
Benjamin Scott writes:
Note that the action in question had nothing to do
with Derek Martin's
bitching, but rather was due to an off-list issue with
a party outside
GNGNHLUG
Sorry, I
Bruce Dawson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
These changes were made quite a while ago (I forget when, but it was
during the last storm over this topic).
All that I've gotten out of this thread is that this happened before
the last storm and not during it.
Unless, of course, you're referring to a
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005, at 9:26am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
These changes were made quite a while ago (I forget when, but it was
during the last storm over this topic).
All that I've gotten out of this thread is that this happened before the
last storm and not during it.
As I recall, someone
Benjamin Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As I recall, someone outside of GNHLUG wrote and complained that their
info (not just an email, IIRC) appeared in a message in the
archives.
That's the first I've heard of this.
Again, if this really bothers anyone, I suggest they step forward
Kevin D. Clark wrote:
Benjamin Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As I recall, someone outside of GNHLUG wrote and complained that their
info (not just an email, IIRC) appeared in a message in the
archives.
That's the first I've heard of this.
Ditto
Yeah, like write a script to strip out email
Correct me if I am wrong: If somebody were to step forward and put
together a complete/public archive of this mailing list then this
outside person would probably contact the new archive maintainer
with unspecified threats? Bleh...
Okay, I'll confess. I think I triggered all of this. I
On Thu, Jan 27, 2005 at 03:31:35PM -0500, Travis Roy wrote:
When this came up before (with Derek) many found having the email
addresses available to be useful.
At this point I feel the need to interject. A number of people have
pointed fingers at me for bitching, but a number of other people
It seems clear that everybody agrees that the
following are true:
- Publicly accessible/searchable archives = GOOD
- Harvestable email addrs = BAD
Given that, our course seems clear: we start
obfuscating email addrs ASAP and nothing else has
to change.
What else is there to discuss? except
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005, at 3:21pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As I recall, someone outside of GNHLUG wrote and complained that their
info (not just an email, IIRC) appeared in a message in the archives.
That's the first I've heard of this.
I don't think it was discussed. I know myself and
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005, at 3:31pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah, like write a script to strip out email addresses. Of course, I
wrote this when I was led to believe that this would solve the actual
problem.
When this came up before (with Derek) ...
Just to be perfectly clear: Derek's
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005, at 3:47pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Okay, I'll confess. I think I triggered all of this. I forwarded an
email about a job opening and it contained the senders email address. In
his effort to minimize spam, he checks the search engines to make sure his
email address
- Publicly accessible/searchable archives = GOOD
- Harvestable email addrs = BAD
Agreed. But wouldn't putting the archives in some password-protected
directory with some publicly-available password suffice to hide the e-mail
addresses yet still have them easily available?
And
Michael ODonnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What else is there to discuss? except maybe who does
it and how? I nominate KevinC, assuming he's willing...
Dear Mr./Mrs./Ms./Dr./Etc. Person who runs the mail archive server:
please re-enable public access to the mail archives. But, before you
Benjamin Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you have your own server, you could put up your own archives with your
own Perl script, and likely many would thank you. I would.
Throughout this thread I've been interested in solving a technical
problem that I was led to believe existed in the
Jeff Macdonald wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 19:57:55 -0500 (EST), Benjamin Scott wrote:
snip
If you want to volunteer a reliable server, with reliable power, with
available reliable bandwidth and a static IP address, all dedicated to
GNHLUG, open to people you may not know, and also create and
--- Kevin D. Clark kekevin_clclarkccess-4-free.com
wrote:
Benjamin Scott writes:
Note that the action in question had nothing to do
with Derek Martin's
bitching, but rather was due to an off-list issue with
a party outside
GNGNHLUG
Sorry, I don't recall hearing this before.
I
Benjamin Scott writes:
According to their FAQ, they keep mail indefinitely. They say they only
keep the most recent 3000 msgs in data or thread indexes; is that what you
mean? Or are they not working as advertised?
All I know is that I could only look back 196 days at that instant.
If the
Benjamin Scott writes:
The archives at http://mail.gnhlug.org have, to the best of my knowledge,
always been there. They were switched from public to private some time
back with no discussion. The reason was to bypass the email address
publication problem.
Indeed, there was no
The archives at http://mail.gnhlug.org have, to the best of my knowledge,
always been there. They were switched from public to private some time
back with no discussion. The reason was to bypass the email address
publication problem.
Indeed, there was no discussion of whether this
Kevin D. Clark writes:
Bill McGonigle [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This appears to be the main stumbling block. Mailman has an e-mail
address obfuscation feature but it's very sad ('user at domain'). If
I were writing a harvester I think I'd throw in the 1-line regex to
fix these so it's
On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 09:08:04AM -0500, Kevin D. Clark wrote:
Apologies if you get this more than once. I sent this out last night
but I haven't seen it get delivered yet.
This program is a filter that strips out email addresses. I hope that
this program can be useful in addressing our
On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 08:33:21AM -0500, Travis Roy wrote:
Indeed, there was no discussion of whether this was an actual problem
or not before this change was made. No discussion at all.
Oh no.. I have a feeling this is going to start the whole public/private
email crap.. More emails
Prior to that, when the list was at (all rise) ZK3 (be seated), I have no
idea. I believe various personal archives have been fed into web archives
at various times, but I don't remember who fed what to where or when.
If only to find the squeege thread.. *le sigh*
---
Thomas Charron
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 19:57:55 -0500 (EST), Benjamin Scott wrote:
snip
If you want to volunteer a reliable server, with reliable power, with
available reliable bandwidth and a static IP address, all dedicated to
GNHLUG, open to people you may not know, and also create and supervise a
process
Benjamin Scott writes:
Note that the action in question had nothing to do with Derek Martin's
bitching, but rather was due to an off-list issue with a party outside
GNHLUG.
Sorry, I don't recall hearing this before.
--kevin
--
GnuPG ID: B280F24E And the madness of the
On Jan 23, 2005, at 22:30, Kevin D. Clark wrote:
One thing that this highlights, to me, is that the archives to this
mailing list still aren't available online.
http://www.mail-archive.com/gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org/msg08582.html
-
Bill McGonigle, Owner Work: 603.448.4440
BFC
Bill McGonigle [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Jan 23, 2005, at 22:30, Kevin D. Clark wrote:
One thing that this highlights, to me, is that the archives to this
mailing list still aren't available online.
http://www.mail-archive.com/gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org/msg08582.html
The archives
On Jan 24, 2005, at 12:03, Kevin D. Clark wrote:
The archives from mail-archive.com are regularly purged, and in fact
only go back to 196 days at this instant.
Ah, bugger.
I could mirror the list on my server, I already have mailman setup for
DLSLUG and sufficient free disk space. Does anybody
If anyone wants to suggest an archiver/web frontend, I can set it up
on my server; I can afford to store at least a few hundred meg of
archives, probably even a gig.
--DTVZ
Note: As anyone I've replied to has probably noticed, I usually send
the email intended for the list to an individual
Bruce Dawson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hmmm. Those archives should be available at:
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/private/gnhlug-discuss/
These appear to be password protected, preventing non-subscribers from
accessing them. Can search engines see these?
I do like these archives; however
On Jan 24, 2005, at 12:48, Kevin D. Clark wrote:
Some folks on this list are *very* concerned with their email
addresses appearing on a web-accessible archive (they don't want to
give anything to the spammers). I share this concern, although I
think that there are folks on this list who are more
I'm curious - is there anyone here who expects total privacy with the
address they use to post here? If I were a spammer I'd subscribe to
Hahahaha. :-(
I wish I had a nickel for everytime the email privacy/mail archive/etc
issue was rehashed beaten to death. You could look in the archives
Bill McGonigle [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Jan 24, 2005, at 12:48, Kevin D. Clark wrote:
Some folks on this list are *very* concerned with their email
addresses appearing on a web-accessible archive (they don't want to
give anything to the spammers). I share this concern, although I
On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 15:44:52 -0500, Tom Buskey wrote:
snip
A way around this might be a poll that put the archive idea to a vote,
then go with the majority. Then put that in the charter so we can end
these debates by pointing at the charter.
I'd like the archive. However, would gmane be a
On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 03:44:52PM -0500, Tom Buskey wrote:
Seriously, if you can remove all email addresses from the archive, I'd
bet you'd solve 90% of the problems people have with creating an
archive.
I'm pretty sure I've historically been the most vocal complainer, and
I've followed the
On Mon, 24 Jan 2005, at 2:05pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/private/gnhlug-discuss/
I do like these archives; however I didn't know about them until around 30
seconds ago. The archives were removed with some fanfare (or, more
precisely, not enough fanfare) a
On Mon, 24 Jan 2005, at 12:03pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.mail-archive.com/gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org/msg08582.html
The archives from mail-archive.com are regularly purged, and in fact only
go back to 196 days at this instant.
According to their FAQ, they keep mail
Bill Sconce [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
We've had threads here previously about ACPI. [1] [2] [3]
A very informative post. I found all of this to be very interesting.
Thanks for sharing.
It seems like you did quite a bit of research into this problem.
One thing that this highlights, to me, is
46 matches
Mail list logo
