spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

[spf-discuss] Re: Contact page requests going to SPF-discuss

2006-06-25 05:21:21
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Koen Martens wrote:
Also, 'spf-discuss' is something else than 'project staff'. For all
practical purposes, 'spf-discuss' equals 'the world' and 'project
staff' does not..

But "publicly" does qualify as "the world", does it not?

I agree with Scott in his follow-up in this thread, that we need to
be explicit about sending submissions off to spf-discuss.

So far we have the following suggestion:

"This issue [ may / may not ] be discussed publicly by project staff with
identifying information (e-mail addresses, domains, etc.) included"

- From those who think we need to be explicit about sending submissions off 
to our mailing lists, would someone please suggest an improved wording?

Sometimes submitters explicitly select that "the issue may be
discussed publicly", and if the issue is of general interest, e.g.
when it's a website suggestion or a general comment about SPF, I
resend/forward it to the appropriate list.  Is that really
inappropriate?

I think part of the inappropriateness is that if you reply to such
an issue, you reply to the list and not to the original submitter.

Several times I made the error and _resent_ messages so that they would 
appear as a regular mailing list postings (except for the contact form 
footer, which I thought would give it away, but maybe I was wrong).  I am 
now _forwarding_ messages instead so it should be clear to everyone that 
the submitter is probably not a subscriber to the list.  If those who 
reply to such messages want to be nice, they ought to CC the original 
submitter.

So the submitter has no added benefit of the repost on the list,
unless someone decides to forward the discussion that follows to
that person. In which case the submitter could as well subscribe to
spf-discuss himself.

One should not forward/CC the entire discussion to the submitter.  It may 
very well be that the submitter was not interested in an entire discussion 
in the first place and therefore chose to use the contact form instead.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFEnn+RwL7PKlBZWjsRAlDnAKDFNYvLI89J6eyAtHMV8EDL64oWPwCeM/Fn
f7CZ/be14Vire6X+g3z43Ro=
=RBO+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your 
subscription, 
please go to 
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com