[no subject]

However, I believe we're using Mailman ...

On Tue, Jan 27, 2004 at 03:53:29AM -0600, ChangingLINKS.com wrote:
> I don't think you are correct.
> 
> As I mentioned before, the local Linux group has already implemented such 
> code. I am not *sure* that they overcame the "emails in the body" issue that 
> you raised, but my guess is that they did. I can get more information on how 
> to do it if no one in the ALE knows how.
> -- 
> Wishing you Happiness, Joy and Laughter,
> Drew Brown
&gt; <a  rel="nofollow" href="http://www.ChangingLINKS.com";>http://www.ChangingLINKS.com</a>
&gt; 
&gt; 
&gt; On Tuesday 27 January 2004 00:26, Jim Popovitch wrote:
&gt; &gt; There is no feasible way to do what you are asking for, short of
&gt; &gt; removing the sender's email address entirely.  Even then... it is
&gt; &gt; ineffective because the body of the email may contain email addresses
&gt; &gt; from a reply or forward, and the diversity of email clients makes it
&gt; &gt; near impossible to determine where a client may inject the original
&gt; &gt; posters email address (headers included).  
&gt; &gt; 
&gt; &gt; Given the use of email addresses in sigs, RFCs, announcements, and code
&gt; &gt; samples (not to mention emails containing valid addresses that posters
&gt; &gt; are trying to share, i.e. Congressmen, etc), it would require human
&gt; &gt; intervention (i.e. a moderator, also not perfect) to scan each email and
&gt; &gt; decide what email addresses should remain. 
&gt; &gt; 
&gt; &gt; If you don't want your address public, get a diff email account for
&gt; &gt; public lists.
&gt; &gt; 
&gt; &gt; -Jim P.
&gt; &gt; 
&gt; &gt; On Mon, 2004-01-26 at 22:32, Robert Reese wrote:
&gt; &gt; &gt; -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
&gt; &gt; &gt; Hash: SHA1
&gt; &gt; &gt; 
&gt; &gt; &gt; I'd love that to, but it isn't quite what I meant.  What I meant was
&gt; &gt; &gt; for the list manager (sorry, I don't know who that is) to change the
&gt; &gt; &gt; behavior of the archives so that the email addresses cannot be
&gt; &gt; &gt; obtained via bots or search engines.  I have seen a good many lists
&gt; &gt; &gt; that offer this protection for the  members.


</pre>
<!--X-Body-of-Message-End-->
<!--X-MsgBody-End-->
<!--X-Follow-Ups-->
<hr>
<ul><li><strong>Follow-Ups</strong>:
<ul>
<li><strong><a name="01121" href="msg01121.html">[ale]OT It begins...</a></strong>
<ul><li><em>From:</em> jimpop at yahoo.com (Jim Popovitch)</li></ul></li>
</ul></li></ul>
<!--X-Follow-Ups-End-->
<!--X-References-->
<ul><li><strong>References</strong>:
<ul>
<li><strong><a name="01084" href="msg01084.html">[ale]OT It begins...</a></strong>
<ul><li><em>From:</em> runman at speedfactory.net (Greg)</li></ul></li>
<li><strong><a name="01093" href="msg01093.html">[ale]OT It begins...</a></strong>
<ul><li><em>From:</em> ale at sixit.com (Robert Reese)</li></ul></li>
<li><strong><a name="01099" href="msg01099.html">[ale]OT It begins...</a></strong>
<ul><li><em>From:</em> jimpop at yahoo.com (Jim Popovitch)</li></ul></li>
<li><strong><a name="01101" href="msg01101.html">[ale]OT It begins...</a></strong>
<ul><li><em>From:</em> groups at ChangingLINKS.com (ChangingLINKS.com)</li></ul></li>
</ul></li></ul>
<!--X-References-End-->
<!--X-BotPNI-->
<ul>
<li>Prev by Date:
<strong><a href="msg01101.html">[ale]OT It begins...</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Next by Date:
<strong><a href="msg01103.html">[ale] Boot of USB drive</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Previous by thread:
<strong><a href="msg01101.html">[ale]OT It begins...</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Next by thread:
<strong><a href="msg01121.html">[ale]OT It begins...</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Index(es):
<ul>
<li><a href="maillist.html#01102"><strong>Date</strong></a></li>
<li><a href="threads.html#01102"><strong>Thread</strong></a></li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>

<!--X-BotPNI-End-->
<!--X-User-Footer-->
<!--X-User-Footer-End-->
</body>
</html>