Re: [Gossip] Three questions

2003-10-30 Thread Kristian Khntopp 
On Wednesday 29 October 2003 21:34, Earl Hood wrote:
  Since the vast majority of these types of statements are being prepared
  withi n
  few days of the issueing of the original statement, a 3000 messages
  window is
 
  just fine. If it isn't, that's tough luck...

 But, ignoring jurisdiction, would you still have problems with conforming
 to German law?  Do you care?

The German law requires the Gegendarstellung (opposing view) to be published 
in the same medium and context as the original article. That is, if the 
original article has been published in the magazine Der Spiegel (The 
Mirror), the Gegendarstellung must also be published in Der Spiegel, but 
there is no requirement that it is published in all press overviews or 
quotations that have cited the original article.

Ported to a mailing list context it seems that it would simply be enough for 
the article to be published on the mailing list which is a simple matter of 
using the Reply button, and perhaps in any archives that are deemed 
official archives of the list (which mail-archive.com isn't). At least that 
is what the german lawyers on debate seem to agree on.

   For one software component that mail-archive uses, it will ignore
   messages that have the same message-id to an existing archived one
   (up to the 3000 message size window Jeff has specified).
 
  So a handover will probably be painless.

 I'm unsure about what you exactly mean by handover.  The way
 mail-archive works is that you subscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] to
 the list you want archived.

That is not what I am doing. While I am also the list-administrator for that 
list, I completely separate the list administration from my private 
participiation on that list, especially when the issue is controversial. That 
is, I have not subscribed mail-archive.com to the list, but I am using my 
private subscription and a little Sieve rule

# fitug.de
if header :contains Mailing-List [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
  fileinto INBOX/lists/fitug-debate;
  if not header :contains X-Spam-Level *** {
redirect [EMAIL PROTECTED];
  }
}

to bounce my private copy of these articles to mail-archive.com.

A handover would be me ceasing to to this bouncing, and another subscriber of 
debate taking up the bouncing. That would probably not be completely 
seamless, depending on how much we two are synchronizing ourselves in the 
process.

Kristian


___
Gossip mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.mail-archive.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gossip

Re: [Gossip] Three questions

2003-10-30 Thread Kristian Khntopp 
On Thursday 30 October 2003 00:22, Jeff Breidenbach wrote:
 I would be much happier if the list administrator is the one who
 initiates the archival process for three reasons. First, forwarding
 (also known as tunneling) a list can cause technical problems with
 Mail-Archive's sorting engine. Second, I don't interact with list
 endusers if at all possible. I usually tell people to talk to their
 list administrator. That's works a lot better when the list admin is
 in the loop. Finally, Mail-Archive is for public lists desiring an
 archive - it's not for archiving lists against the list admin's
 wishes.

I happen to be the list administrator, but this is incidental. I have not 
subscribed mail-archive.com to debate directly, but I am using my personal 
subscription to debate to forward the list to mail-archive.com using the 
following sieve rule:

if header :contains Mailing-List [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
  fileinto INBOX/lists/fitug-debate;
  if not header :contains X-Spam-Level *** {
redirect [EMAIL PROTECTED];
  }
}

which has worked for several thousand messages just fine until now.

Debate is a public list in german language: Anybody can subscribe by sending 
mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and after the usual ezmlm double-opt 
in, is able to read and write the list. The list contains a number of 
technically inclined people as well as a lot of lawyers, judges, policy 
makers and other non-technically inclined people and is often subject to 
culture clash in both directions. It is being used sometimes as an 
educational tool as well to it being used as a discussion forum. The list 
currently has some 300+ subscribers.

If you think that me using personal forwarding is a problem, I will stop that. 
I will not use my special admin powers on the list to subscribe 
mail-archive.com directly, unless the people on the list decide that I can or 
should do so, so I would rather not have you stop me though.


Fitug is running an official archive of the list at 
http://www.fitug.de/debate/index.html. In the last year or so, Fitug has seen 
multiple requests by people who wanted their original messages from the 
archive changed or deleted, in order to unsay things they have said in the 
past or remove their personal address from the web after they have been 
distributing that address in their signatures for several years or other 
reasons.

Within Fitug there has been much discussion about an archival policy and how 
to deal with such requests for change to the official archive. Also, several 
subscribers of debate have started to MHonArc their personal archives (e.g. 
http://does-not-exist.org/mail-archives/debate/maillist.html), stirring 
additional discussion among a certain circle of subscribers to debate.

I have decided that I personally do not like 1984-like history reediting at 
all on this list, and that additional archives are needed, preferably in 
another jurisdiction than Germany to make such changes harder to achieve. 
Others have had the same idea, and are using their personal subscription to 
forward debate for example to gmane.org and other services.

It seems that this backup-archive inflation has caused at least a little 
progress in the discussion, as people are starting to understand that they 
cannot control all archives of the list. Also, people learn that we (the 
leave them archives alone-group) do not say debate is a public place, 
please watch your words before you send them just for fun. Within this 
particular discussion, people now start to make a distinction between 
official archives and additional archives, and are starting to say that 
Fitug cannot be held responsible for not officially endorsed archives 
content. I hope that this opinion on the list will hold...

Kristian


___
Gossip mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.mail-archive.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gossip

Re: [Gossip] Three questions

2003-10-29 Thread Jeff Breidenbach 

Looks like Earl beat me to many of the same answers.  Mail-Archive
decisions and policies are made using my own (hopefully good)
judgement and my understanding of applicable US law.

-Jeff

___
Gossip mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.mail-archive.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gossip