[linux-elitists] Proposal: Roster accessible to subscribers

Rick Moen rick at linuxmafia.com
Thu Mar 26 09:33:00 PDT 2009

Well, there had to be one.  And, true to form, I note that he doesn't
want to speak for himself or for any actual subscriber, only on behalf
of theoretical subscribers who could in theory object but who cannot
seem to be found.

Quoting D. Joe Anderson (deejoe at etrumeus.com):

> It seems pretty clear-cut to me.  Don has made a commitment that
> he'll keep subscribers' addresses confidential.


First, I cannot recall Don ever saying that -- and especially not saying
that subscribers' addresses shall be eternally and completely concealed
from _other subscribers_.  Can you show me where he did?

However, you are posing a blatantly false dilemma:  You are suggesting
the only way to honour such an (alleged) pledge is to continue to
deprive subscribers of roster access completely.  As already detailed,
that is not the case.  

Don can announce on-list "In a week, March 31, I will be changing this
mailing list's subscriber roster from viewable by listadmin only to
viewable by subscribers.  If you wish to conceal the fact of your
membership and your e-mail address from all other subscribers (other
than the listadmin), you'll need to change your subscriber option
"Conceal yourself from subscriber list?" from "no" to "yes".  Five days
later, reminder.  Seven days, flip the option.

> A reasonable way forward would be to set all current
> subscriptions to "hide"....

Yes, we need to inconvenience everyone for the sake of theoretical
subscribers who have been invited to speak up but have said nothing, and
whom nobody can find.  I'm sure that's "reasonable" in _some_ universe.

Essentially, you are assuming that concealed is the norm, that people 
joining this list expected, and that changing the default _even with
advance warning_ would be somehow breaking faith.  None of those things
is within a country mile of being true -- and it's not even a Mailman
default.  Mailman's default is a completely public roster, for heaven's
sake!  No, instead this is a misconfiguration that needs correcting --
especially on an _elitits'_ mailing list -- not a sacred trust.


More information about the linux-elitists mailing list