[yes I saw that this involved only an individual's configuration, but
I wish to address some points raised when people thought it didn't]
When someone does something like this and doesn't participate (only reads),
there isn't a problem -
Try running a list sometime. Even read-only exploders cause problems.
For starters, sometimes they screw up the headers (e.g.,
change Date, Message-ID; change or add or delete Reply-To). They can
route bounces back to the original list-owner which causes headaches
since he can't locate the bouncing address. If the posts look like
they came from the actual list (which they should) then the subscribers
can endlessly try to unsubscribe from the list instead of from the exploder.
They can archive posts in ways and places not authorized or intended
by the list owner or the posters.
It's one thing if the exploder is done by or with consent of the list owner.
It's quite another to do it on the sly, or if the list owner says "no";
and NO implicit permission is created by failure to get an answer to the
request.
And the listadmin for the "official" list seems to have vanished from it
Just because Stephen isn't actively participating in the list doesn't mean
that mirrors and relays, etc. should just be put into place without
consulting the others on the list first. In absense of a single leader, a
consensus should at least be sought from the regular participants,
otherwise anarchy becomes the rule of the land...
Even more, it should be Stephen and ONLY Stephen who authorizes this,
not "regulars." The "regulars" won't have to deal with all the headaches
that exploders, mirrors, gateways, etc. create. If the list starts
falling apart, people who don't like it CAN START THEIR OWN LIST; don't
try and create a democracy here. And who gets to vote to decide who the
"regulars" are? Who gets to vote to see who gets to vote? And what
makes you think "regulars" will do any better at list administration
than the anarchists?
Stan