On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 20:37:26 +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote: > 30.04.2012 20:16, Camaleón kirjoitti:
(...) >>> By the way, this looks like a reason to GPG sign everything, like I am >>> doing. There is sometimes arguing at gnupg-user and enigmail user >>> about should messages to mailing lists be signed or not. I think that >>> there was once such arguement here too in some of those multiple [OT] >>> Posting styles threads. >> >> I would be against forcing the usage of signed e-mails for mailing >> lists which, by the way, can be also automated and used to send spam or >> "faked" messages: you don't solve a problem like this with just >> GPG/PGP, you need to apply additional counter-measures. >> >> >> > You misunderstood me. I only said that it's a reason to use GPG, not > that it should be forced. But Mika, if you don't enforce a policy then is the same that not using it, don't you think? :-) If anyone can decide whether to use or not signatures for their posts, where is the gain? I can decide to go that path but in what way that will change anything? > If GPG signatures would be forced, amount of posts on this list would > drop and there wouldn't be so many people on this list. Of course. For instance, it will prevent me from posting. Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/jnmr14$kbo$1...@dough.gmane.org
