On Mon, May 29, 2006 at 03:05:06PM +1000, Jamie Wilkinson wrote: > I don't have anything constructive to add to the first point, as I'm mostly > indifferent.
I'm against but not really strongly so. If put in place, perhaps we could make an excception for gpg signed mail. > This one time, at band camp, Peter Rundle wrote: > >2. The originators e-mail should not be in the header of the message. > > I don't like this; what would you put in place? Yeah me neither. I'd really not like normal communication to be inhibited. I've had mail addresses that have never been published anywhere, and never been used to send mail, and have still received spam. If isp staff sell addresses to spammers there's no hope of staying out of spammers databases. And once you're in one you're in all. On the other side of the coin I seen mail archives mangled beyond usefulness because they happen to have a @ in them. e.g. solaris /device listings and gnu-arch archive locations. > We had a discussion about community on Friday night at the meeting, and my > gut reaction to this proposal is that it clips the wings of the mechanics of > that community that we are trying to protect and uphold. > > ObRant: > Spammers be damned, the day I have to jump through hoops to communicate with > someone is the day that the terrorists have won. Absabloodylutely. We shall fight them on the beaches etc... Matt -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
