On May 8, 2011, at 11:02 AM, John R. Levine wrote: >> 1. State principals that are specific to the content of the draft and that >> give guidance about the scope and boundaries of what should be covered. >> >> 2. Make specific suggestions for specific bits of text in the draft. > > Despite the valiant work that Murray has put into the MLM document, my > preference, which I doubt has any hope of gaining consensus, would be to > throw it away and replace it by one page that says > > a) many lists break signatures, which isn't going to stop > > b) so it would be nice if they signed their mail on the way out. > > Everything else is either too marginal to be worth worrying about, or not > a problem if a list's mail has a credible signature.* > > Failing that, I don't see small changes making it any better, so just ship > it.
+1 to all of that. Cheers, Steve _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
