On Mon, 08 Jul 2002 13:03:10 -0400
Nick Simicich <njs @
> At 11:57 PM 2002-07-07 -0700, Chuq Von Rospach wrote:
> For example, someone could sign up to one of my lists with their real
> e-mail address, and never post. Their e-mail address is not available
> to the public. I no longer, for example, allow "who" or "which"
> commands by non-admins (at the user's request initially, I had not
> thought of it at that point, this was some time ago). But if I allow
> the transmission of web bugs, or HTML scripting in the archives that
> opens them to cross site scripting vulnerabilities, their addresses
> and privacy are not protected.
Quiet aside: This protection of the privacy and thus even identity of
fact of subscribers to my lists is a base promise that I for my lists.
While I haven't codified it into a single clear statement, loosely I
will not make any statement about the presence, absence, subscription
status, etc of any person on one of my lists beyond that revealed by
their public activities on that list at the specific time of that public
activity. Note however, that once public activity is engaged in on the
list, all the gloves are off (for that specific public activity).
This is important to me. It is not important to a great many of my
members, and they have said so. I have a few people, and they are a
very few (3 I think out of a few thousand members), who have said that
this principle is important to them tho they haven't said how important.
Note: I don't run what I would think of as particularly sensitive
lists. I run no support lists, no political or social activism lists
etc. All of my lists are of an analytical bent, or derived from
analytical lists (eg a meta list for another more technical list).
J C Lawrence
---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas.
nu He lived as a devil, eh?
http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live.