As suggested in the article, I don't think we should spend much time on this - as it seems the list managers have made a decision and it is not really a valid topic.
However, I have an issue that I'd like to air. The sign-up page doesn't say much more than "this is a private list, which means that the list of members is not available to non-members." One can assume that it is publicly logged since you can search the archives without subscribing. In signing up for such a list, I think most people would believe that while conversation topics are public, subscribers addresses are private. I think this is a great setup. Since we know how hard documentation is, it is critical that these lists be publicly archived. Since we also know how much time it takes to manage email, I also like the idea that I get to chose what sort of mail I receive. My problem is with the violation of that statement above "the list of members is not available to non-members." Ok, so maybe the whole list isn't available at once. But every time you post a message, you expose your address to clients who may include it in the plain text of a response. For example, in Erik's response to the list, there is my address, in plan text, available to the world: http://openlayers.org/pipermail/dev/2007-July/001040.html Now you might say, "look at that tricky address munging, how could anybody parse an address from that?" Anyway, it's not worth going on. Were it up to a vote, I would vote to keep subscribers addresses private. Erik Uzureau wrote: > I would like to refer us all to the wise, wise words of Karl Fogel: > http://producingoss.com/en/mailing-lists.html#reply-to > > > > On 7/16/07, Tim Schaub <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Christopher Schmidt wrote: >> > On Sat, Jul 14, 2007 at 12:21:34PM -0500, Lance Dyas wrote: >> >> Because the way the list is setup my mail client says the reply to is >> >> just one user... >> > >> > Yes. This behavior is intentional. Using the "Reply-to-List" feature of >> > your mail client will help here, if your client has one. If it does >> not, >> > I'm sorry that it does not. >> > >> > In general, I feel more comfortable with responses accidentally not >> > going to the list than I do with responses meant for a single person >> > accidentally going to the list. >> > >> > Regards, >> >> I agree with Lance here. Personally, I'd like it if subscribers >> addresses were never exposed. This is a list - not a tea party. >> >> I get tired of ditching addresses because folks include a personal >> address in the text of the reply and spam bots pick it up. >> >> I think if people want personal communication, they should use different >> means to get addresses and initiate a conversation. If you have an >> issue, you address it to the list. If you want to respond to an issue, >> you address it to the list. A person might also want to respond to an >> issue without opening themselves up to unsolicited personal responses. >> >> (And though I wish "get a new browser" were a valid solution at times, I >> don't think "get a new email client" is a good solution here.) >> >> Just another opinion. >> Tim >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev >> _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
