jidanni(a)jidanni.org wrote: The reason were people posting private data to the mailing list, then annoying sysadmins to remove then when finding about them on Google.

2009/8/22 Brian <Brian.Mingus(a)colorado.edu>du>: Pity they're all over gmane and nabble, then. Suggestion: a Google search on gmane and/or nabble linked from the archive pages. - d.

All I know is I don't know of any other examples of "security through obscurity" on mailing lists. Wasn't Jimbo inventing a new search engine? I don't know though... can't search for the announcement.

On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 1:16 AM, <jidanni(a)jidanni.org> wrote: [snip] If you wish to have a productive discussion with people you'll be most successful if you try to understand and empathize with their concerns, so that you can find a solution which satisfies everyone. You won't go far with scare-quoted phrases like "the bad guys" and hyperbole like "held for ransom" and "North Korean style". The current behaviour was established as the result of experience: It's not something that was done speculatively, but as a solution to real problems which were occurring.  Removing messages from archives was found to be time-consuming and ineffective because once out the removal often did nothing. The annoying of dealing with it was magnified because it had to be done by someone with shell access and because it was, naturally, always urgent. People make mistakes, both the "clicked the wrong button type" and the "failed to consider the consequence" type, and people often play fast and loose with other people's privacy. As an example— an issue we've had in the past is people responding with private details to a message which included a public list buried in its carbon-copy chain.  So admonishing "be more careful" really doesn't solve it:  The lack of google indexing is intended to address the cases where "be careful" failed. The intent isn't to stop people from searching for information in the lists, which would be an impossible goal, but to prevent material from the lists from showing up at the top of google when people perform random searches for various people's names and to make removals actually effective. So the availability of archive files is not a problem. Perhaps this is more of a problem for the Wikimedia Lists than many others due to the high search placement of the Wiki(p|m)edia sites in general. I think the comparison to LKML is entirely inappropriate: not only can you make an entirely different set of assumptions about the users technical prowess but LKML is open for posting to non-subscribers … the level of SPAM received through it in the past has exceeded the volume of some of our lists, its like arguing that we shouldn't wear underwear because the nice folks at the nudist colony don't either. :) Different culture, different issues, different solutions. Other people do have the same problems and concerns— though obviously you're less likely to see them if they aren't indexed by google! Being able to keep your messages out of the search indexes while remaining open to anyone who is willing to click a few buttons is a primary attraction of the yahoo-groups service.  Be thankful that we don't force you though an infuriating web interface like they do. I think everyone would like better search than we currently have available. It should be possible to provide a solid search interface without increasing the level of exposure.

In the meantime, the wide availability of searchable archive copies through multiple third-party list aggregation services means most of our lists are *already* searchable via Google etc, so we're not missing much functionality. -- brion

Thank you everybody for your comments. Pipermail is fine, if you would only let Google™ index it. Every mailing list in the world occasionally sees the accidental slip of the cut and paste finger, and the need for an administrator to remove the spilled beans, which he should then do. But there is no need to not let Google index it. When we think search, we think Google. I hate proprietary software, and RMS http://jidanni.org/comp/index.html#rms is my idol, but when I think search, I think Google, and will not remember to use a special search for a special list. I end up reposting this thread every time I realize I can't find something again due to someone's arbitrary decision, so this time Cc'd jwales to perhaps get a second arbitrary opinion. Anyway, you are throwing the baby out with the bathwater, and as you mention the stuff is mostly in Google indirectly anyway, why do this crippleware concept of not letting it be indexed? Also no need to reinvent the wheel of a substitute search engine... OK to have it alongside Google, but don't block Google. There are a lot of tools, noindex, nofollow, just don't block entirely. OK, maybe you all operate on some higher logic. P.S., if removing a message will cause renumbering, just leave a stub message. I have an idea, put a message on each subscription page, and post to all subscribers: "Starting 9.9.2009 all lists will once again be open to indexing in Google™. This means due to Mediawiki.org ranking, anything you say can and will end up at the top of search engine results, you have been warned." Tim, good job finding that. I in fact long ago have given up on searching for anything related to these mailing lists.

Platonides wrote: I think he already knows the reasons why, and the archive sites where search is available, he found out that information last time he posted to this list on this subject: http://marc.info/?l=wikitech-l&m=124348095926993&w=2 -- Tim Starling _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l