Re: Spam: process the web archives?
On Tue, 15 Oct 2002, Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 15-Oct-02, 16:29 (CDT), Santiago Vila <email@example.com> wrote:
> > That's a bogus argument. You can also avoid having to subscribe to a
> > high-volume list by reading the list archives at lists.debian.org.
> That's a bogus counter argument. Yes, you can read the archive, but
> reading a high volume list in a crappy web archive is worse than dealing
> with mail; a decent news reader (e.g. trn) is way better than e-mail.
> We're not going to solve the SPAM problem until we're allow to put the
> assholes up against the wall and pull the trigger. Absent that, a few
> newsgroups here and there ain't going to make much difference.
Spam is a complex problem and there is not THE solution. We are not
going to solve the SPAM problem until we do *everything* we can.
If you mean that email addresses HAVE to be disseminated, then your
counter-counter-argument is bogus.
If reading via newsgroup is an absolute requirement, we should create
our own newsgroups having all the email addresses protected. They would
still contain the useful information you are looking for.
Just because news are easier to read does not mean we should allow
the email addresses of the people who participate in our lists
to be disseminated around the whole universe.
If you want to reach somebody who said something in a list, you have
to subscribe to know his email address. Being able to do that should
be a privilege, not a "right". Such privilege should be reserved for
those who subscribe. We should not give spammers such privilege.