X-Recipient: archive-cygwin@delorie.com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_NEUTRAL,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <4FB15BE8.6000607@cs.utoronto.ca> Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 13:24:24 -0600 From: Ryan Johnson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Someone is pretending to be some Cygwin's support References: <20120514143614.GA29237@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <20120514144119.GB29237@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <87obpqbr5n.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <4FB144ED.8040705@molconn.com> <20120514181207.GA9635@corel> <4FB14F59.6090002@dancol.org> In-Reply-To: <4FB14F59.6090002@dancol.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com On 14/05/2012 12:30 PM, Daniel Colascione wrote: > On 5/14/12 11:12 AM, Ken Jackson wrote: >> ==== Mon, May 14, 2012 at 01:46PM -0400 LMH wrote: >>> As an aside, I've wondered for some time why this group is a mailing >>> list and not a vBulletin type forum. >> I second the motion. >> > No. > > Mailing lists are infinitely easier to filter, archive, and read. I > have my choice of client. Email supports cryptographic authentication. > Really, the "forum" model is a humongous step backward from the state > of the art of the 1980s. > > No, please, let's stick with email. If you'd rather access the list > using a forum-style interface, consider gmane. (Note that you can > access an email list as a "forum", but not a "forum" as an email list.) I'll be the first to admit that a good UI is important, but they were arguing for a forum because it would foil spoofing and anonymous spamming. While cryptographic authentication could stop that too, I'm not sure it's practical to require all postings by list members to be cryptographically signed. It's been around as long as I can remember (state of the art of the 80's, perhaps?) and still hasn't caught on widely yet. Did you sign your message? I didn't. $0.02 Ryan -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple