Listowners-L ArchivesArchiver > Listowners > 1999-01 > 0915563711
From: Den_Mari <>
Subject: Re: get dist no more?
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 13:15:11 -0600
I agree. There's one thing that I keep thinking, and will present it here.
If the subscribers are allowed to access the subscriber list, then what's
the point of having a password, and having the listowner man the list? I
know that some will come back and will say that it's to keep order. But if
it's handled right, there is no order to keep! I don't have a problem with
my lists. From time to time, I need to remind someone of a guideline, but
it has *never* ended up in a flame war, or even close. If the subscriber
wants an address, they can watch the list, and record them for themselves
if they so desire. I believe that the subscribers TRUST the listowner NOT
to give out their addresses for ANY reason. I believe that making the
subscriber list public is a breach of that trust. To me this would be like
Rootsweb giving out a list of who pays how much for sponsorship. If a
person wants to make it known, that is their prerogative. But it's not up
to anyone else to do so.
At 12:00 PM 1/5/99 -0500, you wrote:
>It may be useful on smaller family or locality lists for subscribers to
>be able to get a list of others' addresses for legitimate research
>purposes, but I run the RESEARCH-HOWTO list on which the subscribers
>usually have no family or geographical connection to one another. There
>is no legitimate reason that I can think of for someone to want the
>list, other than to use it to spam. And since I have almost 1,000
>subscribers, my subscriber list would make a great target for anyone who
>wanted to send genealogical spam. As it is I have to constantly police
>commercial posts that get through the spam filters.
|Re: get dist no more? by Den_Mari <>|