On sf sell out

[full-disclosure () lists netsys com (Scott Francis)]

--veXX9dWIonWZEC6h
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 09:18:48PM +0000, looseduk () ductape net said:
> Is this list going to be archived? Then anyone will be able to google the=
=20
> archives, and make off with whatever knowledge that ends up collected bei=
ng=20
> here.

It's the Net. That's one of the major features. If you have something to say
that you don't want random strangers finding, why would you say it in a
public forum to begin with?

You can always use the X-No-Archive flag, which may or may not have the
effect you desire.

IMHO there's entirely too much angst over the ability of some *gasp*
non-list-subscriber reading one's valuable pearls of knowledge in a search
engine rather than a MUA. What's the difference, anyway? If you want your
words to stay private, encrypt them, or use a private list or network. Expe=
ct
that whatever you say in a public forum will be hanging around for some time
to come. That's the way of the Net.

> I think that we are all angry that things happened the way they did with=
=20
> securityfocus, and that's understandable. However, knee-jerk reactions wi=
ll=20
> get us nowhere fast. Perhaps something in the charter forbidding the sale=
 of=20
> the list, or assurances that exploit info isn't prostituted, etc. etc. wo=
uld=20
> be cool, and sufficient.

They would be pointless. Consider what you're proposing a bit more and see =
if
you don't reach the same conclusion. Trying to control the degree of
disclosure
of information in a public forum on the Net is an exercise in futility.

(Besides, list archival is a good thing - many questions have been answered=
=20
for me thanks to google searches of old mailing list archives, or Usenet
posts. I think we'd all like to decrease, rather than increase, the number =
of
FAQs appearing on lists we frequent. Archives make this possible, even if
people seem averse to reading them.)

> --Joey

--=20
-=3D Scott Francis || darkuncle (at) darkuncle (dot) net =3D-
  GPG key CB33CCA7 has been revoked; I am now 5537F527
        illum oportet crescere me autem minui

--veXX9dWIonWZEC6h
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQE9PPPhWaB7jFU39ScRApd/AKCYcTVmEEv0GiB/bhSNDtPXYKo1DQCfTcbE
RjibLlaFDMqXqOZrYwq9cGE=
=91jo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--veXX9dWIonWZEC6h--