On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 10:27:08AM -0500, Damien Morton wrote: > I wonder if the ADA would accept the need to obscure email addresses, > and I wonder if they would accept the extra authentication step required > to get at the unobscured email address? Would they understand that it > protects all mailman users, including the disabled?
Stunningly unlikely... > Would Lynx users and other browser-disadvantaged users accept the extra > authentication/authorisation step to get at the unobscured email > addresses? Would they understand that it protects _them_ as well? If each page had a link to the version of that same page that required authentication, so that I wouldn't have to go do a whole-nother damned search, yeah... > > And insulting lynx users isn't a way to increase your > > expected life span. Go do something less controversial like > > arguing the advantages of vi in the emacs news groups. > > Agreed, appologies to recidivists, luddites and lynx users :) Nice to know that you understand now that those are three separate groups. :-) Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the Technical Staff Baylink RFC 2100 The Suncoast Freenet The Things I Think Tampa Bay, Florida http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 "If you don't have a dream; how're you gonna have a dream come true?" -- Captain Sensible, The Damned (from South Pacific's "Happy Talk") _______________________________________________ Mailman-Developers mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers
