This is the mail archive of the cygwin-talk mailing list for the cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

RE: cygwin service not starting

Will L (sent by wrote:
> Dave Korn wrote:
>>> Nabble currently has this feature, but it is not as easy to use as the
>>> wiki-style in our next release. If you want to try it, click the "Modify
>>> this Forum" link under the forum name
>>> You will see further links
>>> and it's a voting-like UI.
>>   No, I see a request to sign up, hand over my email address and log in.
> DaveK:
> Sorry, I forgot to mention that. Yes, you will need to be a registered
> user to edit/create/post. The min requirement is to have a confirmed
> email address. This is to prevent careless anonymous people. Needless to
> say, Nabble will not spam, in fact, Nabble will not email you at all.

  Yes, that wasn't my point.

  The point was that in response to the question "What can we do about the
fact that John Q. Randominternetsite has portaled and re-purposed our mailing
list and we're getting hit with tonnes of unwanted garbage", your suggestion
was "Well, you can always take positive steps to opt out, including handing
over your personal information".  You are placing the cost of the burden on
the victim of your unwanted attentions.

  The reason "You can always opt-out" is an unacceptable response to
accusations of spamming is because it's unreasonable to suggest that I should
have to opt out individually from every single one of the tens of thousands of
people who might otherwise want to send me commercial email.

  Now, none of this should in any way be taken as accusing you of spamming, or
of even coming anywhere near it, because that's not remotely what I believe
and I would not like anyone reading this to misinterpret me.

  However, the one similarity, and the one that I think is still a problem, is
the "Well, we're just going to place a burden on you, out of the blue, and we
expect /you/ to cheerfully shoulder the costs of this thing which we have
undertaken for /our/ benefit".

  I'm not quite sure what the best solution would be.  You of course have the
right to archive public mailing lists.  I'm not sure you should start sending
to them without first approaching them to ask for consent.  You could run your
archive, and you could of course allow all your users to post locally to each
other on your site, but not gateway those posts back to any list unless you
knew it was going to be welcomed.

  This would of course place more administrative burden on you.

  But then it is _your_ business that this administrative work is for the
benefit of, and placing it on others as an externality seems to me bordering
on unethical.

Can't think of a witty .sigline today....

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]