Re: Anti-spambot hacks?

One quick unrelated thing - are the "Reply:" and "Maybe Reply:" lines in hypermail 2b25's output working as expected? They seem really weird to me! For me they seem to display the sender & subject of the *current* message, linking to the previous message in the thread. How is that useful? Shouldn't at least the link and the info match? :-)

What is the Reply line for, anyway? It's totally unclear to me.

(I tested a copy of hypermail 2b25 before posting: it's not my hackery that  broke whatever is broken.)

On 1999-11-08, 08:43:23 (-0600), Kent Landfield wrote:
>
> It won't stop or even slow down anyone. The problem is they go into the
> code and see what the algorithm is. The source is and will be available
> to all. Now with that info they simply code in a recognition of the archive
> type and harvest the addresses. The only people who are affected are the

You are glossing over the issue a bit, but in general I agree - which is why I rewrote my stuff to use a truly lossy algorithm (as mentioned & demonstrated in a previous post). Doing so means the addresses cannot be harvested without some guesswork, whether it's done by a human or a fuzzy-logic harvestor.

> sort of defeats the purpose of posting new messages from the archive options
> and responding directly to posts from within the archive. Both are used
> constantly here and on the numerous lists I manage.

These two options are incompatible, I know. That's a non-issue though - they are both optional as well. Just because you don't think this feature is worth the lost functionality doesn't mean everyone thinks that way...

The active members of the lists I'm currently creating archives for were somewhat concerned that I was about to put their email addresses up in lights. Since that wasn't one of the things they had to consider when they signed up in the first place, I felt compelled to address their concerns.

(I myself am not concerned, my 'd' key works just fine...)

In short, I think the lossy solution works about as well as can be expected of such a beast, and it's a feature that will probably be appreciated by many of hypermail's users (myself included). It would of course be cool if I didn't have to maintain my own private set of patches to enable this feature in future hypermails...

I've probably made my point by now, so I'll let the issue rest and let you guys decide. :-)

-- 
Bjarni R. Einarsson                           PGP: 02764305, B7A3AB89
 bre_at_netverjar.is           -><-           http://www.mmedia.is/~bre/

Netverjar gegn ruslpósti: http://www.netverjar.is/baratta/ruslpostur/