On Thu, 30 Oct 1997, Peter Rauch wrote: > On Thu, 30 Oct 1997, Judith Hopkins wrote: > > > As spamming began to become a nuisance we changed to REVIEW =PRIVATE > > but realized that that was not particularly effective as anyone > > could subscribe, get the subscription list, and then unsubscribe. > > So now we have REVIEW =OWNERS If anyone can persuade me that > > he or she has a valid need for some subscription information I am > > glad to provide it to them but I have rarely received such requests. > > Can I persuade you to define the list as: > * Review= Private > * Default-Options= Conceal > > so that you leave the new subscriber protected from prying > eyes, but leave with them the prerogative and responsibility > to decide for themselves whether they wish to be a visible > subscriber (to other subscribers of the list)? This way, you > get to protect your subscribers, lacking any knowledge of > their wishes to the contrary, but you relieve yourself on > forcing them to continue to be "protected" if they do not > wish to. Everyone wins. Not everyone. I don't. I depend greatly on monthly printouts of the subscription list to manage the Errors messages. While it is possible to get printouts of all those with a specific option such as CONCEAL that printout shows all settings for each subscriber resulting in only 5-6 subscribers per page. With REVIEW I get one line per subscriber or 60 lines (subscribers) per page. With a subscription list of over 3,000 subscribers the total printout for October was 58 pages (29 sheets). The equivalent CONCEAL printout would be over 280 pages (140 sheets). With a computing center that is cutting back on printing that is not a direction in which I care to go. > If I do convince you to configure your list as above, then > remember also to QUIET SET <listname> CONCEAL FOR *@* in > order to initially conceal the subscriptions of all those > who are already subscribed to your list (redefining the > list's configuration will not change the SETtings of those > already subscribed). > > And, finally, remember that it is only those subscribers who > have not posted to your list who will have the option to > remain concealed (if you keep archives accessible to > subscribers or the public). Once they've posted, anyone with > permission can GET the logfiles and derive subscriber > userids from there. > Peter R > As you point out, it is only the inactive subscribers who would really be concealed (the archives are available to subscribers). With either approach a determined individual could glean the addresses of active participants. It therefore doesn't seem worth the bother to change. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Judith Hopkins, Listowner of Autocat [log in to unmask] http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~ulcjh