On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 04:30:47AM +0000, Russell Coker wrote: > On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 04:01:28 AM Joel W. Shea via luv-main wrote: > > Yes, it also has the potential to reduce the distributed and > > decentralised nature of email; > > Not at all. The distributed and decentralised part of email is > inherently not mailing lists. By definition lists are centralised!
yeah. and sucks to be us if we want to run our own lists and not google or yahoo or msn shite. being able to run mailing lists is an essential part of the open internet and *IS* de-centralised. At least until the corporates manage to kill off any alternatives to their spyware services via DKIM. > The real issue is that nothing we agree on matters much if Google and > Yahoo don't agree. To the contrary, nothing that google or yahoo demand matters if we just ignore them. Neither of them are necessary to the function of our list. If they want to do a dis-service to their users by rejecting mail from legitimate lists, that's a problem for them and their users, not a problem for us. if mail from the list sent to gmail etc bounces because of their misconfiguration, the correct response is to think "shit happens. this is nothing new, there's always been idiot mail admins at large corporations" and ignore it, not jump through their hoops that are designed to let them gain complete control over all email on the net. craig -- craig sanders <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ luv-main mailing list [email protected] http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main
