"Roberto C. Sanchez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, Dec 03, 2006 at 03:33:15PM +0000, Steve Kemp wrote: >> >> The suggestion wasn't to remove the addresses, but to "mask" them. >> That would still allow you to lookup the sender addresses if you >> wished. eg "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" -> "foo at com.example". >> >> I'd strongly second the proposal myself, as well as updating some >> of our other email-based-systems. For example listing emails in the >> qa pages, in Debian changelog entries on packages.debian.org, etc. >> > Except that it ends up mangling things which are not email addresses and > which legitimately need to have the @ symbol.
And each automatically mangled address can be automatically unmangled as well. The benefit would be very limited. To be effective the addresses would need to be mangled in many different ways - an what a mess would that be! Matthias -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
