Re: [Full-Disclosure] FD should block attachments

[Mike Klinke <mklinke@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Friday 02 April 2004 10:27, Tim wrote:
> > Did you ever consider that people in some parts of the world pay
> > by the byte or by the time they're online, and attachments,
> > especially large ones *and* html email cost them money
> > personally?
>
> I have to agree here.  There are some who would say that email was
> never intended as a means to transfer files.  It is a very impolite
> way of getting a group of people a file.  Sending a link, is much
> more considerate to the subscribers and to those hosting the list.
>
> I don't know if blocking all attachments is the answer here, since
> doing that would block many signatures, but perhaps it would be
> worthwhile to block all but a couple of mime types.
>
> tim

It shouldn't have to be an "all or nothing" solution.  If some 
enterprising sole simply re-distributed the raw list with 
attachments, html, silly corporate signatures, and what-not stripped 
I'd guess a fair percentage of the subscribers would move to the 
re-distributed list.  I can't imagine the current list "owners" would 
object but I've been known to be wrong in the past .....

Regards,  Mike Klinke

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html