Here's what I wrote to you on members@ Roman:
"""You're overlooking the archiving problem with president@ Roman.That we tell
people in the CoC that a report to that channel is availableto roughly 600
people unknown to them is needed if we are going tonot paper over the fact that
it's really not what a normal person wouldconsider "confidential" despite the
language in the CoC. Much less theadditional hundred or so unknown people on a
pmc list who would haveaccess to the report if it were made to private@pmc."""
Hard to have an intelligent conversation with you Roman when only one of us is
paying attention to what the other has said.
On Thursday, May 26, 2016 8:25 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org>
wrote:
On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 5:20 PM, Joe Schaefer
<joe_schae...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:
> Roman,
> I've been beating the archiving problem with president@ like a dead horse for
> the past week- what
> on earth have you been reading to avoid that reality?
Archiving per se is not a problem. If the archive is only available to
the board I'm border line ok with that.
What I didn't know (and it didn't come up in your emails) is that
there could be other folks having access
to the content of president@ who may or may not be on the board.
That's a big, huge problem.
> Furthermore, I doubt president@ has an associated qmail owner file, which
> means any addresses listed in that alias that go to domains whose mail
> servers do strict SPF checks will BOUNCE email from major email providers who
> publish such rules, and those bounce mails may wind up being DROPPED by
> Apache's qmail server since it's attempt to deliver the bounce mail back to
> the sender may also be REJECTED by the original sending domain.
That is also a good point.
> All of this leads to problems that, while some are fixable, others are simply
> not.
> We need a better strategy, and it should be collaborative rather than
> dictatorial.
Not sure what you mean, but as I said ideally I'd like it to be an
alias for an officer
appointed by the board. That's my MVP. What Shane suggested builds up on that
and may provide an even better solution.
Thanks,
Roman.
