[148738] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: [Cryptography] Can we move this list to an online forum please?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tom Mitchell)
Thu Dec 26 13:46:45 2013
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
In-Reply-To: <CAHWD2rJU=cX2yQF0VCWvaL0FE9hmCzSejUQLRMcBtuxjECyYYw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2013 23:40:13 -0800
From: Tom Mitchell <mitch@niftyegg.com>
To: cryptography <cryptography@metzdowd.com>
Errors-To: cryptography-bounces+crypto.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@metzdowd.com
--===============6050076608292667534==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b33d5a0854d5a04ee6b16f8
--047d7b33d5a0854d5a04ee6b16f8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
One interesting move might be a move to a media and mechanism
that has improved security without increased complexity or needing
inconvenient
and incompatible tools.
Forums to date are not an improvement. over mail at this time
for the content and discussions I care about. (small experience list..)
But within a week we will have a new year so who knows.
Any change should solve a problem ... and not generate new
ones that are intolerable.
.
On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Lodewijk andr=E9 de la porte <l@odewijk.nl=
>wrote:
> But then some people have to move away from mut!
>
> It's also not actually superior. What do you really gain? Hard to archive=
.
> No more transparant to browse. More susceptible to a lot of things.
>
> Ultimately the premise is the same:
>
> Medium =3D [Subject]
> Subject =3D (String, [Email])
> Email =3D (Headers, String)
>
> The only arguable difference is in catagorization. It's like a single tag
> is added to every subject. Usually called the 'category'. People always
> miscatagorize and this list is supposed to be pretty much a single catego=
ry
> ("cryptography").
>
> If there's really a need for tags we can prepend them to our subject
> lines. "[pol]" or "[tech]" are the mayor mayor differences. We can also p=
ut
> intent into them, but that would require more thought of notation. Stuff
> like "publish" or "Request For Comments" or "Discuss" or "news" would be
> interesting tags.
>
> In the end the ability of present forums to organize discussion is
> dissapointing to the potential. Additionally the workflow of present foru=
ms
> is far inferior to mailing lists.
>
>
> Worst of all is reputation systems inherent in forums. Reputation is not
> earned through any one objective measure, especially a non personalizable
> one. All systems attempt to approximate, and often fail.
>
> To me the answer is: rather not.
>
> Pro:
> * Potential for more advanced discussions (metadata)
> * Sometimes easier to manage large volumes or content or users (communit=
y
> management)
> * Doesn't distract as much as e-mail (more self-contained)
> * More personalizable profiles (username, signature, profile picture,
> bio/contact info)
> * (Maybe) easier to do psuedononymously
>
> Con:
> * Not embedded in standards. (subject to strange change)
> * No to very very little archivability (will dissapear, with content,
> more easily)
> * Does not fit existing workflow that works through e-mail (Less
> usual/habitual)
> * Far from client native user interface; E-mail sees better support than
> "the web", because it's simpler. (Lowered usability)
> * Increased hassle will likely decrease users. The forums don't end up i=
n
> your inbox, so to speak. E-mail aggregates into your mail-client, forums
> are spread thin accross countless pages. (Additional effort, not just a
> habitual argument.)
>
> Note that Spam and Espionage are still equally large problems in forum
> software.
>
> _______________________________________________
> The cryptography mailing list
> cryptography@metzdowd.com
> http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
>
--=20
T o m M i t c h e l l
--047d7b33d5a0854d5a04ee6b16f8
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">One interesting move might be a move to a media and mechan=
ism<div>that has improved security without increased complexity or needing =
inconvenient</div><div>and incompatible tools.</div><div><br></div><div>For=
ums to date are not an improvement. over =A0mail at this time</div>
<div>for the content and discussions I care about. (small experience list..=
)</div><div><br></div><div>But within a week we will have =A0a new year so =
who knows.</div><div>Any change should solve a problem ... and not generate=
new=A0</div>
<div>ones that are intolerable.</div><div><br></div><div>.</div></div><div =
class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Wed, Dec 25, 20=
13 at 5:10 PM, Lodewijk andr=E9 de la porte <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=
=3D"mailto:l@odewijk.nl" target=3D"_blank">l@odewijk.nl</a>></span> wrot=
e:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra">=
But then some people have to move away from mut!<br><br>It's also not a=
ctually superior. What do you really gain? Hard to archive. No more transpa=
rant to browse. More susceptible to a lot of things.</div>
<div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">Ultimately =
the premise is the same:<br><br>Medium =3D [Subject]<br>Subject =3D (String=
, [Email])</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">Email =3D (Headers, String)</div=
><div class=3D"gmail_extra">
<br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">The only arguable difference is in cat=
agorization. It's like a single tag is added to every subject. Usually =
called the 'category'. People always miscatagorize and this list is=
supposed to be pretty much a single category ("cryptography").</=
div>
<div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">If there=
9;s really a need for tags we can prepend them to our subject lines. "=
[pol]" or "[tech]" are the mayor mayor differences. We can a=
lso put intent into them, but that would require more thought of notation. =
Stuff like "publish" or "Request For Comments" or "=
;Discuss" or "news" would be interesting tags.</div>
<div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">In the end =
the ability of present forums to organize discussion is dissapointing to th=
e potential. Additionally the workflow of present forums is far inferior to=
mailing lists.</div>
<div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><=
div class=3D"gmail_extra">Worst of all is reputation systems inherent in fo=
rums. Reputation is not earned through any one objective measure, especiall=
y a non personalizable one. All systems attempt to approximate, and often f=
ail.</div>
<div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">To me the a=
nswer is: rather not.</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><div class=
=3D"gmail_extra">Pro:<br>=A0* Potential for more advanced discussions (meta=
data)</div>
<div class=3D"gmail_extra">=A0* Sometimes easier to manage large volumes or=
content or users (community management)</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">=
=A0* Doesn't distract as much as e-mail (more self-contained)</div><div=
class=3D"gmail_extra">
=A0* More personalizable profiles (username, signature, profile picture, bi=
o/contact info)</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">=A0* (Maybe) easier to do p=
suedononymously</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><div class=3D"gma=
il_extra">
Con:<br>=A0* Not embedded in standards. (subject to strange change)</div><d=
iv class=3D"gmail_extra">=A0* No to very very little archivability (will di=
ssapear, with content, more easily)</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">=A0* Do=
es not fit existing workflow that works through e-mail (Less usual/habitual=
)</div>
<div class=3D"gmail_extra">=A0* Far from client native user interface; E-ma=
il sees better support than "the web", because it's simpler. =
(Lowered usability)</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">=A0* Increased hassle w=
ill likely decrease users. The forums don't end up in your inbox, so to=
speak. E-mail aggregates into your mail-client, forums are spread thin acc=
ross countless pages. (Additional effort, not just a habitual argument.)</d=
iv>
<div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">Note that S=
pam and Espionage are still equally large problems in forum software.</div>=
</div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
The cryptography mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:cryptography@metzdowd.com">cryptography@metzdowd.com</a><=
br>
<a href=3D"http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography" target=3D=
"_blank">http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography</a><br></blo=
ckquote></div><br><br clear=3D"all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div dir=3D"ltr">=
=A0 T o m =A0 =A0M i t c h e l l</div>
</div>
--047d7b33d5a0854d5a04ee6b16f8--
--===============6050076608292667534==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
The cryptography mailing list
cryptography@metzdowd.com
http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
--===============6050076608292667534==--
