[Mailman-Developers] Interesting study -- spam on postedaddresses...

[Damien Morton]

> From: Jay R. Ashworth
> 
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 10:27:08AM -0500, Damien Morton wrote:
> > I wonder if the ADA would accept the need to obscure email 
> addresses, 
> > and I wonder if they would accept the extra authentication step 
> > required to get at the unobscured email address? Would they 
> understand 
> > that it protects all mailman users, including the disabled?
> 
> Stunningly unlikely...

Would they accept it if the email addresses were omitted in the public
archives, and an extra authentication step required to get into the
private archives. 

These might be a questions better answered by the ADA themselves.

> > Would Lynx users and other browser-disadvantaged users accept the 
> > extra authentication/authorisation step to get at the 
> unobscured email 
> > addresses? Would they understand that it protects _them_ as well?
> 
> If each page had a link to the version of that same page that 
> required authentication, so that I wouldn't have to go do a 
> whole-nother damned search, yeah...

Cookies can be your friend.

Remember, we arent talking about putting obstacles in the way of getting
access to pages, but merely to pages that contain raw email addresses.