I agree with this. What's so bad about it? I'm not a big fan of the archive search features and interface either. I haven't been able to figure out a nice way to view whole threads on a single page, which is why I'm thankful that I've been gathering my own archive via gmail for the past 2 years.
We should always encourage others to create more enriched ways of sorting the 'list data' (not the kind that Frank likes to talk about).
If you have something private to say and don't want it recorded forever on the internet, then post your responses to individuals only. But most of you are keen to discourage private responses, because you know that it's better for the community to have that information stored for future reference.
~Kyle
On 1/23/07, Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@eds.org wrote:
On Jan 22, 2007, at 8:02 PM, Christian Klippel wrote:
Am Montag, 22. Januar 2007 18:24 schrieb Hans-Christoph Steiner:
It would be nice if that person had notified the list about this (perhaps they did, I didn't check the archives). This is a public list, and its already archived in other places like gmane, so I don't think we can expect people to get permission from every person who ever posted on the list in order to reuse the list contents.
ah, so this list is spread to even more public places? dont these people have their own ideas/content to fill their pages with? seems so ...
I think it's more effective to make sure people realize that posting to lists like this means they are giving the contents of those emails to the public domain.
great! would you say the same if it would be about a drug related list? since it is public accessible, no problem to forward it elsewhere completely? maybe to the employers of the people posting there? if not, why? it would be public list as well, so whats the difference? sorry, but your argument is a bit weak. using the same logic, one could say "wiretapping is ok, since we dont have anything to hide".
again, i find it disturbing that the list is "forwarded" to other places in whole, without even notifying the people about it and to ask the list if the majority of the people on the list are ok with that. it doesnt matter what the topic of the list is, it has to do with respect to the people here.
I don't mean to be annoying or anything, but I don't understand the problem here. What harm is done if a public list like this is archived in other formats? Anyone can subscribe, the archives are freely searchable and downloadable on the iem.at site. I am having a hard time seeing any violation of privacy if someone mirrors the public archive.
.hc
If you don't want the info public, then don't post it to public lists.
good idea. i will follow that and unsubscribe now, because i'm not happy with that by principle.
That said, I think IOhannes is correct about the way to go about doing the blogger reposting.
.hc
nmfga.dr IOhannes
greets,
chris
PD-ot mailing list PD-ot@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-ot
PD-ot mailing list PD-ot@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-ot
Computer science is no more related to the computer than astronomy is related to the telescope. -Edsger Dykstra
PD-ot mailing list PD-ot@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-ot
If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.
PD-ot mailing list PD-ot@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-ot