Re: Spam: process the web archives?
Matthew Garrett wrote:
> In chiark.mail.debian.devel, you wrote:
Funny. No, you are misrepresenting the facts. I didn't write that in
> >Don't be confused. What is evil and annoying is being spammed.
> Being spammed is not evil. The act of spamming is evil.
Yes, that's what I meant.
> The act of obfuscating the addresses of people who do not want their
> email addresses obfuscated is arguably bad and wrong.
The act of disseminating email addresses of people who do not want
to be spammed is arguably bad and wrong as well.
> >We should not disseminate email addresses from people who subscribed
> >to our lists or allow others to do so. If this means forbidding
> >archives of Debian lists which do not protect email addresses, let's
> >forbid them.
> Why not?
Because when someone posts something to a list, what he/she usually
wants is to communicate a message (specially the contents) to the
subscribers of such list, not giving his email address to the whole
> If any user feels that they do not wish to disseminate their
> email address, they are already free to do something about that.
> I would prefer my email address to be easily available to people who
> want to contact me, and I'm not going to let spammers increase the
> awkwardness of either my life or the lives of those who may want to
> contact me.
You can make your email address to be as available as you can, but as
a general rule against spam it would be better if the default is that
no email addresses are shown in the web archives.
> >If sourceforge and geocrawler protects email addresses in their list
> >archives, there is no reason why we should not be able to do the same.
> Do you believe that finding every single archive of Debian mailing lists
> and then either getting the administrator of the archive to obfuscate
> them or determining which subscribed address is being used to generate
> the archive is a trivial problem?
Of course not, but maybe google can help here :-)