Re: [ga] @xxxxxxxxx

[DPF <david@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 17:11:14 -0700, crispin@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

>    4) I believe that you have seriously overstated the magnititude of
>    the problem you have identified.  Any person who is a member of a
>    list has complete access to all the addresses ever published; the
>    primary purpose of the list archives is to provide a record of
>    public discussion, not to provide a convenient directory for 
>    participants email addresses.
>
>    5) And there are essentially trivial workarounds for anyone who really 
>    feels that their address must be visible in the archives -- they could
>    simply use your trick, or give a URL.
>
>As in most things, there are tradeoffs.  In my opinion the tradeoffs in
>this case come down very strongly on the side I have described.

FWIW I totally agree with Kent on this issue.

DPF
--
E-mail: david@xxxxxxxxxx
ICQ:    29964527
MSN:    dpf666@xxxxxxxxxxx