Munged lists are practically ususable for the general audience (was: Address munging vs. DKIM)

Dmitry Alexandrov <[email protected]> Tue, 16 Jun 2020 06:02:20 +0300

Newsgroups	gmane.discuss
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

Adam Sjøgren <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dmitry writes:
>>> I don't see how any NNTP client could do that out of the box
>
>> Do you mean, that was as easy as (setq gnus-...-dkim-key "...")?
>
> No. Read what I wrote again. "I don't see how" ...
>                                   ^^^

Why do not you?  Gnus have lots of special features.  Why the glue for opendkim youʼve written (btw, if anyone interested in it, see appendix) could not have, in principle, been present there already?

>..>> Except that you can't reply directly to authors the groups are perfectly usable, right?
>..>
>..> List addresses are affected as well, do not they?

>>> I fail to see how address encryption makes the whole []/DKIM/DMARC thing any worse
>>
>> By _forcing_ you to use the gateway for posting, of course.
>
> Could you elaborate on that? I don't understand what you mean.

Iʼve restored some context above.  Perhaps, it could help.

> You can post through Gmane if you want...

...to implement DKIM for your newsreader or disable DMARC for your domain first (if you do not own the domain you use, you can do neither of that)...

> ...or you can send an email to mailing list address if you want...

...if you know it (or know to how to obtain it), and have a newsreader that allows you to substitute cryptic addresses for real addresses.  Not even Gnus have that feature out of a box, to the best of my knowledge.

> I don't see how address encryption affects that choice in any way?

If does not affect _that_ choice normally — _both_ alternatives are no-go for most users.

It affect the choice between (in the best case) using Gmane for a munged list or not using it for a munged list; or (in the worst) between participating in the munged list or abandoning the hope to participate.

Why do you believe, that this kind of unsolicited discrimination against their lists should make list owners any happier?

> The _only_ thing you can't do is to email people directly

Which is also necessary in many times.

> I think we are starting to go in circles now, didn't we start with this?

No, I believe, I have been managing to come with some fresh arguments in every my letter so far.

(unnamed) (message/rfc822, 5.2 KB) - not displayed

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 247 B)