On Thursday 20 March 2008, Paul Johnson wrote: > On Wednesday 19 March 2008 10:57:54 pm L. Rahyen wrote: > > No, e-mail address shouldn't be revealed to the public (and spam > > robots). And if user wants his/her contacts published in the forum > > he/she can register there and fill in corresponding fields and then > > continue to write to mailing list (instead of forum). If user don't > > want his/her e-mail to be revealed in the forum (or somewhere else) > > then this shouldn't happened. Of course it is possible to modify > > e-mail somehow to prevent spam robots from collecting the address > > so easily but protected e-mail and true e-mail are different things > > (as I said above, true e-mail address never should be revealed to > > the public). > > Address munging is considered harmful. It's the postmaster's > responsibility not to accept spam in the first place. > http://www.interhack.net/pubs/munging-harmful/ Make that "Matt Curtin considers Reply-To Munging Considered Harmful". The contrary point of view is from Simon Hill: http://www.metasystema.net/essays/reply-to.mhtml There is no RFC that mandates whether a list should munge or not and it is up to list and mail admins to decide how they want to deal with the issue as both camps have valid points and neither is a clear winner. Personally, I agree with you and Matt, but your assertion that there is a standard about this is disingenious and simply wrong. -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
