On 13 Jul 2005 at 1:20, Owain Sutton wrote: > David W. Fenton wrote: > > On 13 Jul 2005 at 0:56, Owain Sutton wrote: > > > >>Simon Troup wrote: > >> > >>>The solution to searchable archives shouldn't be in these archives > >>>which are very slack with peoples email addresses. > >> > >>Once again, I have little sympathy. You signed up. The very > >>definition of the 'private list' talked about earlier made it clear > >>that your email address would be available to other subscribers. I > >>do not remember a promise that they would prevent spammers from > >>subscribing. > > > > This is a red-herring argument. > > > > Opensubscriber.com (read the *name* of the site) means you don't > > have to be a subscriber to get the email addresses. > > Yes - and they got the addresses, and everything else, how? (read the > name of the site again)
??? They got the addresses by republishing content for which they have not sought permission to republish. And that exposes your email address, however obscured, to exploitation, just for having posted in a forum that should be of limited distribution (i.e., only to subscribers). But I'm not really making the spam argument -- it's only one of a number of issues, and at least the site has attempted to put roadblocks (however ineffective) in the way of those attempting to harvest addresses. This is all about permission. They don't have it. It's unethical. It is illegal. It's also not something that subscribers to this list know is going to happen. At least, not until now. -- David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associates http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc All non-quoted content (c) David W. Fenton, all rights reserved _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
