Protected archive Re: [SPAM] Re: Surfree

Dr. Ernest N. Prabhakar (
Wed, 3 Jun 98 08:36:14 -0700

Ah, but you forget that FoRK's primary method of reproduction nowadays =
is from people hitting the archive and being sucked in by one tidbit or =
other. And that one of the reasons for the list's existence is to =
explore the evolution of a electronic community in the fishbowl of a =
public archive.

Protecting the archive 'a priori' is equivalent to putting up a 'no new =
members' sign. We'd only get people who already know someone else, =
which is hardly any fun at all.

Viva the new blood!

-- Ernie P.

You wrote:
> At 08:26 PM 6/2/98 -0700, CobraBoy wrote:
> >So whatever you do spam, until Uncle Sam makes it a $250,000 or 5 =
> >in jail crime isn't going to stop. However, my feelings about the
> >mailing list is to password protect for members only the archive. I
> >personally am tired of getting idiots sending me mail about =
> >that I might have posted two years ago.
> Since we've gone public on this... I agree wholeheartedly. I'm on
> another list that works this way, and it works great. They're using
> majordomo for the list software, which I believe has some general
> anti-spam features you can set. Then the archives are password
> protected. If people want to look at the archives that badly, let =
> ask you for a password.