[MUD-Dev] META: Making the list public?
clawrenc at cup.hp.com
clawrenc at cup.hp.com
Thu Jul 17 10:19:35 New Zealand Standard Time 1997
In <9707161553.88qc at ami-cg.GraySage.Edmonton.AB.CA>, on 07/16/97
at 08:00 PM, cg at ami-cg.GraySage.Edmonton.AB.CA (Chris Gray) said:
>:A) Should the archives be requestable or browsable by non-members?
>:Note that this effectively makes ever poster's email address open.
>Doing this retroactively is slightly questionable, but if you receive
>no nays, then, sure, why not.
While I don't expect there to be a realised problem, I know that many
members deliberately obfuscate their email address in newsgroup
postings to prevent collection by spammers. Now I'm not about to say
that some spammer is going to target MUD people, but I wouldn't put it
against them as a possible method of collecting known-valid email
Outside of that there is a privacy issue. I've previously posted here
that converstions on the list should be considered on a par with
conversations held in my living room/lounge conducted with bullhorns
while unknown people stand outside with tape recorders. The
difference between that analogy and making the email addresses public,
is that now the recorders have video cameras and are doing close-ups.
Translation: I'm not about to be a key element in anyone else
receiving spam. I'm not about to expose those who have no interest in
Brandon Gillespie's solution to this for the Cold* lists is to remove
all the email addresses from the posted archives. I don't like that
solution -- for one it kills amost all attributions, and for another
it renders almost all posts anonymous, removing much of any sense of
>:B) Should the list be echoed (one way) to a newsgroup? If it is
>:echoed to a newsgroup should that group be a private group on a
>:private newsserver, or should I create a moderated alt.mud.development
>I'd guess that a new alt group would be easiest, but many people
>can't get alt groups, so there could be objections to that. Are you
>up to providing a server that supplies the new group - it could be a
>lot of traffic and messing around!
I currently run a newsserver. I'd have no problem feeding an alt
group. Distribution of that alt group to various user's sites is of
course a problem, but not one I'd lose sleep over.
Related question: If I make an alt.* group, then DejaNews will archive
the list (as well as making searchable) -- heck, I'd probably make
DejaNews my direct upstream.... This would automagically render all
email addresses public etc.
Note: I would of course preserve X-No-Archive headers, as ell as
possibly supporting an X-No-Newsgroup(?) header to prevent echoing to
>[Membership] My main concern here is sheer volume. My email interface
>isn't as good as my newsgroups one (could be remedied, however), so
>it would be painful to get more email (the days of 40 messages can be
>painful). In general, the advantage to this list is that the traffic
Whatever happens, whether the list goes public or not, traffic is
going to increase. Our top resting average seems to be about 20 posts
a day. Currently we're way under that. I wouldn't be surprised if we
hit a stable running average of 50+ by years end.
J C Lawrence Internet: claw at null.net
(Contractor) Internet: coder at ibm.net
---------------(*) Internet: clawrenc at cup.hp.com
...Honorary Member Clan McFUD -- Teamer's Avenging Monolith...
More information about the MUD-Dev