In reply to Pete and Melvin, I see some sort of problem which is
 linked to list operation and site operation, although I not thought
 through the whole scenario. I am not certain that it is a question of
 privacy, as the current Zimmerman case reveals that you are much
 better advised not to play games with the powers that be in terms of
 encrypting and just be straightforward about your message. Zimmerman
 faces a possible 55 years in prison for some artful encryption
 on the internet according to one Toronto newspaper. The Chinese have
 a saying: "Don't fix your hat in the peach orchard and don't tie your
 shoes in the potato patch!" It seems like very good advice.
 
                        Best regards,
 
 
                        Paul S. di Virgilio
 
 
> Hmm, while we're bashing, how about those "nasty" Usenet filters
> that alert you when some article matches your profile?
>
> Speaking of filters, one time I got "hit" upon one of those that
> did not like my reference to xxxx.mit.edu instead of rtfm.mit.edu
> (even when BOTH were specified in the same article).
>
> One (previous) notification was more than sufficient that I
> had referenced an obsolete FAQ host site.
>
> But the author of the Usenet scanner felt, in his infinite net-wisdom,
> felt that his automaton should harass me for saying the xxxx word
> on-net.
>
> Or the time some class project was to e-mail folks' anonymous FTP
> password (userid@node) with some info.  I suggested that this was a
> breach of etiquette, but no, it was their class project.  I immediately
> did another aFTP with the responders userid@node for the password.
>
> Hmm, I think I'm onto something here.
>
> /Pete "the guy who referenced xxxx" Weiss
>
 
 
--
 
Dr. Paul S. di Virgilio,  University of Toronto  [log in to unmask]