On Fri 17 Oct 03, 1:46 PM, Micah J. Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > On Fri, Oct 17, 2003 at 06:37:23AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > On Fri 17 Oct 03, 4:00 AM, Ryan Castellucci <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > > > If I post a message with 'X-No-Archive: Yes' will replys also not be > > > archived? > > > > unfortunately not. two things: > > > > 1. we COULD search the body for X-No-Archive, so if someone quoted your > > email, your wishes would be respected. > > > > it wouldn't be perfect. what if they trimmed that line? it would > > depend on a quoting system using ">". you couldn't post an email > > with a lines like /^X-No-Archive.*/. > > Trimmed? X-No-Archive is supposed to be a header, right?
not really---it can be whatever we want it to be. there's no law saying we can't cook up a home made system. non-traditional, but possible. > I wouldn't > expect that to show up in the quoting message at all. > > > 2. but you may also ask "so what?". it's a public forum. you > > shouldn't expect posts not to be archived. > > > > if you have an idea how to implement a threadful X-No-Archive, and it's > > either easy to implement or you want to implement it yourself, then i'm > > all for it. > > > > just realize that X-No-Archive is like copy protection. the responder > > can bypass any system we institute. > > Yeah, but I think the scenario he wishes to avoid would be: > > 1. Alice posts potentially sensitive information to list, setting > X-No-Archive. > > 2. Bob posts a response, which includes a quote containing said > information; but either doesn't realize the information may be > sensitive, or forgets to set X-No-Archive. of course. > Maybe the first 5 "Bobs" remember: but it only takes one accidental > forgetting to post it for the world to see. It's far from the ideal, > which would be that if a "Bob" would have to *explicitly* enable > archiving from such a response if that's really what he means. right. > One implementation which would seem to work well would be for a filter > to check the headers to all messages in the "References" header; and > if it found X-No-Archive, keep the response unarchived also. This is > not trivial to implement though (but not too difficult, either), and I > don't think I care quite enough to spend time on it. :-( heh. that's always the issue, though, ain't it? :-) yeah, i've tossed that exact same idea onto vox-officers, but somebody has to write it. pete -- GPG Instructions: http://www.dirac.org/linux/gpg GPG Fingerprint: B9F1 6CF3 47C4 7CD8 D33E 70A9 A3B9 1945 67EA 951D _______________________________________________ vox-tech mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech
