"Derek Broughton" wrote in message
...
Zëbulon wrote:


"Derek Broughton" wrote in message
...

Not a problem, I think. If every email has to be valid (if they want
moderated posts returned) the software should be able to mung the email
addresses.

Why have the person's email address show at all? Surely the software can
be set to eliminate e-mail addresses or mung them to the point of being
useless to spam-bots and trolls.

I could have sworn I just said that...

There has to be _something_ in the address line, or it's not a valid news
message according to the RFC (I think - I could be wrong). It certainly
doesn't have to be usable. For the record, I was thinking of
converting 'Derek ' to 'Derek xxx@xxx'. Keeping
the
alias used by the poster is convenient because most of us have software
that uses that for the salutation, and it's user selectable anyway, so if
you don't want your own name there it won't be.
--
derek
==================================
I for one would like to keep my e-mail address private in some way. I'm
sure that question will come up at the right time and will be answered for
us.
--
ZB....
Frugal ponding since 1995.
rec.ponder since late 1996.
My Pond & Aquarium Pages:
http://tinyurl.com/9do58
~~~~ }((((* ~~~ }{{{{(ö ~~~~ }((((({*







--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Gill Passman wrote:
Derek Broughton wrote:


Not a problem, I think. If every email has to be valid (if they want
moderated posts returned) the software should be able to mung the email
addresses.

I hadn't thought of that - email addies munged by the moderation
software sounds a good idea....I wonder how far this could be taken -
would it, for example, be possible for only the robo-moderation software
to know the "real addresses" of posters - so if a post is returned it
automatically unmungs the address without a human being ever having to
know the true address?

I would consider munging the email address a form of editing and am,
therefore, personally opposed to the idea,subject to persuasion. My 2¢

--
Nick. Support severely wounded and disabled Veterans and their families!

Thank a Veteran and Support Our Troops. You are not forgotten. Thanks ! ! !
~Semper Fi~

wrote in message
...

I would consider munging the email address a form of editing and am,
therefore, personally opposed to the idea,subject to persuasion. My 2¢
===========================
Your mind will change rapidly if a few trolls used it to impersonate you on
groups you don't even know exist - plus use them everywhere so you're picked
up by every addy-combing bot out there. You suddenly find your inbox is
maxed out with spam, threats, barely coherent obscene messages and such
trash. ;-) I had to change mine twice, so now I keep it private.
--
ZB....
Frugal ponding since 1995.
rec.ponder since late 1996.
My Pond & Aquarium Pages:
http://tinyurl.com/9do58
~~~~ }((((* ~~~ }{{{{(ö ~~~~ }((((({*





--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Zëbulon wrote:
wrote in message

I would consider munging the email address a form of editing and am,
therefore, personally opposed to the idea,subject to persuasion. My 2¢
===========================
Your mind will change rapidly if a few trolls used it to impersonate you
on groups you don't even know exist - plus use them everywhere so you're
picked up by every addy-combing bot out there. You suddenly find your
inbox is maxed out with spam, threats, barely coherent obscene messages
and such trash. ;-) I had to change mine twice, so now I keep it
private.

Well, you chose to bring yourself to my doorstep with this reply. I'm not
as paranoid as you. I've had the same e-mail addy since I first went
online, I don't know how many years ago. I'm on some pretty rough NGs,
including moderated ones that won't accept my munged e-mail addy (q.v.).
I've gotten my share of the types of junk you describe. My SPAM filter gets
most of it, I add others to my Junk folder for filtering as needed. We each
make our own bed and have to lie in it. Like Karma!

BTW I have enjoyed many of your on-topic posts and look forward to more in
r.p.m.

--
Nick. Support severely wounded and disabled Veterans and their families!

Thank a Veteran and Support Our Troops. You are not forgotten. Thanks ! ! !
~Semper Fi~

wrote in message
...
Zëbulon wrote:
wrote in message

I would consider munging the email address a form of editing and am,
therefore, personally opposed to the idea,subject to persuasion. My 2¢
===========================
Your mind will change rapidly if a few trolls used it to impersonate you
on groups you don't even know exist - plus use them everywhere so you're
picked up by every addy-combing bot out there. You suddenly find your
inbox is maxed out with spam, threats, barely coherent obscene messages
and such trash. ;-) I had to change mine twice, so now I keep it
private.
========================
Well, you chose to bring yourself to my doorstep with this reply. I'm not
as paranoid as you.

One becomes a bit paranoid when constantly harassed by trolls who use their
e-mail address to harass them further. Why give them access to it at all
since it's not necessary?

I've had the same e-mail addy since I first went
online, I don't know how many years ago.

Yes, I had the same one for 8 years until the trolls used it to impersonate
me and the spam became more than I wanted to delete several times a day.
Now I get no threats, no one is impersonating me using my e-mail address and
spam is minimal.

I'm on some pretty rough NGs,
including moderated ones that won't accept my munged e-mail addy (q.v.).
I've gotten my share of the types of junk you describe. My SPAM filter
gets
most of it,

OE has a lousy spam-filter as I'm sure you know. Also, the spammers change
their addresses and other info daily so that was useless.

I add others to my Junk folder for filtering as needed. We each
make our own bed and have to lie in it. Like Karma!

BTW I have enjoyed many of your on-topic posts and look forward to more in
r.p.m.

Thank you! I really look forward to posting and reading about ponds and
fish in peace again.
--
ZB....
Frugal ponding since 1995.
rec.ponder since late 1996.
My Pond & Aquarium Pages:
http://tinyurl.com/9do58
~~~~ }((((* ~~~ }{{{{(ö ~~~~ }((((({*





--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Sheeeeeeeesh Carol spare all of us that know yu so well all the crap
your trying to peddle. Your the reason folks need to munge emails.

On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 22:20:21 -0600, Zëbulon
wrote:


wrote in message
...
Zëbulon wrote:
wrote in message

I would consider munging the email address a form of editing and am,
therefore, personally opposed to the idea,subject to persuasion. My 2¢
===========================
Your mind will change rapidly if a few trolls used it to impersonate you
on groups you don't even know exist - plus use them everywhere so you're
picked up by every addy-combing bot out there. You suddenly find your
inbox is maxed out with spam, threats, barely coherent obscene messages
and such trash. ;-) I had to change mine twice, so now I keep it
private.
========================
Well, you chose to bring yourself to my doorstep with this reply. I'm not
as paranoid as you.

One becomes a bit paranoid when constantly harassed by trolls who use their
e-mail address to harass them further. Why give them access to it at all
since it's not necessary?

I've had the same e-mail addy since I first went
online, I don't know how many years ago.

Yes, I had the same one for 8 years until the trolls used it to impersonate
me and the spam became more than I wanted to delete several times a day.
Now I get no threats, no one is impersonating me using my e-mail address and
spam is minimal.

I'm on some pretty rough NGs,
including moderated ones that won't accept my munged e-mail addy (q.v.).
I've gotten my share of the types of junk you describe. My SPAM filter
gets
most of it,

OE has a lousy spam-filter as I'm sure you know. Also, the spammers change
their addresses and other info daily so that was useless.

I add others to my Junk folder for filtering as needed. We each
make our own bed and have to lie in it. Like Karma!

BTW I have enjoyed many of your on-topic posts and look forward to more in
r.p.m.

Thank you! I really look forward to posting and reading about ponds and
fish in peace again.
--
ZB....
Frugal ponding since 1995.
rec.ponder since late 1996.
My Pond & Aquarium Pages:
http://tinyurl.com/9do58
~~~~ }((((* ~~~ }{{{{(ö ~~~~ }((((({*



-------
I forgot more about ponds and koi than I'll ever know!

On Mon, 11 Dec 2006 13:19:48 -0400, Derek Broughton
wrote:

Gill Passman wrote:

Derek Broughton wrote:


Not a problem, I think. If every email has to be valid (if they want
moderated posts returned) the software should be able to mung the email
addresses.

I hadn't thought of that - email addies munged by the moderation
software sounds a good idea....I wonder how far this could be taken -
would it, for example, be possible for only the robo-moderation software
to know the "real addresses" of posters - so if a post is returned it
automatically unmungs the address without a human being ever having to
know the true address?

Not sure about that.

Software can certainly be written to handle that. I've written stuff to do
that and I'm currently in several groups that strip reply to and from stuff
along with all references to email or web addresses in the body. Such
stuff as it can recognize, it is easily bypassed, such as writing
as joeblow at somewhere dot com. However, I am much
in favor of making any protection incumbent upon the poster, rather than a
human or robo-moderator. If the poster feels it's important enough to post
about, they can take the initiative to safeguard their email address


Just throwing out ideas here - don't even know if any software is out
there capable of doing this. Some people have a more protective stance
on their email addresses than others - and this in itself might put them
off a moderated group...or would the moderators feel that if they are
trusted enough to moderate the group they should be trusted to have all
the "real" email addresses of posters? Or would the munging be so
obvious that everyone could work out the address anyway? Or does any of
this matter to the average poster?

It might not matter to the average poster but it will matter to _some_
posters, and it _should_ matter to the moderators. It occurs to me that
privacy laws in many places actually require us to say exactly how we will
use (and protect - or not: in some places it's ok not to protect personal
information but the suppliers of that information need to know that is what
happens) these addresses.

This is one of the reasons that I think the moderators should "moderate" as
little as possible and offer no guarantees whatsoever and leave address
protection entirely up to the poster.

Galen Hekhuis NpD, JFR, GWA
Illiterate? Write for FREE help