This will be familiar to subscribers of the mailing list.
\r\n\r\nThere is a list of site registrations for web content requiring registration, but not payment for materials, at [link|http://twiki.iwethey.org/|TwikIWeThey], as topic [link|http://twiki.iwethey.org/Main/SiteRegistration|SiteRegistration].
\r\n\r\nSeveral points to discuss include:
\r\n\r\n- \r\n
- Why do this? \r\n
- What should the registration convention(s) be? \r\n
- How should registration notifications be handled? \r\n
- Can this method be improved? \r\n
- Is there any downside to current practices? \r\n
Why do this?
\r\n\r\nThe sites for which this is being done are no cost, but registration required. I'm not advocating undermining financially supported sites. I do strongly advocate resistance of mandetory ubiquitous marketing -- the increasing degree to which marketing and gratuitous data gathering occur -- both on the Net and in "real life). General referene: Bruce Schneier's Secrets and Lies.
\r\n\r\nThat's the philosophical background. On the pragmatic side: we're simply providing ready access to material that's already free. Organizational subscriptions to many such resources exist. Countering the anonymity, IWeThey is providing a readership consisting of a group of skilled and influenttial technology professionals. If a given site decides it would prefer not to have this audience, this is its prerogative.
\r\n\r\nWhat should the registration convention(s) be?
\r\n\r\nFor sites in which the username can be freely chosen, the established convention is "iwethey/iwethy". This works for the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, and other sites. The keypair is chosen in the long tradition of "cypherpunks/cypherpunks", which many sites now change, refuse, or otherwise counter (the Times, I'll note, finally abandoned this practice at cypherpunks6/cypherpunks6, perhaps realizing that there was a large potential namespace).
\r\n\r\nSome sites require that the userid be an email address rather than a composed password. I'd previously used the IWE list address as a proxy for this, for a number of reasons:
\r\n\r\n- \r\n
- It is a known group address. Well, modulo some variance. \r\n\r\n
- The list itself is subscriber-only. Other than notification/confirmation messages (one or two per registration), mail received as a result of such registration (eg: "marketing" or spam) will be intercepted by the Mailman list management software, and can be readily bounced by the administrators (or whom I was until recently one). The list address is also publicized (you'll find it at the top of this page), and consequently does receive a measure of spam already, which the administrators have until now been taking care of. Emphasizing this last point: no mail is delivered to the IWE list members unless it is sent from a subscribed address, OR is EXPLICITLY approved by an administrator. \r\n\r\n
- Use of the list address conveniently means that any such registrations are automatically announced to list subscribers. The list archives (both public and individuals private mailboxes) serve as a repository of such announcements. \r\n\r\n
- On the basis that there has been some past confusion over the appearance of such messages on the list, I've taken pains to pre-announcing any such registrations so that both list administrators (Rob Nelson and Peter Whysall) and subscribers will be awware that the messages are authorized and specifically requested. This is at the specific suggestion of Peter's message of 9 December 2002: "Er, a little message to the list beforehand would probably have defused a lot of this tension." I also note not without a little irony that a major display of outrage occured not in response to the confirmation message itself but the courtesy notice I'd sent in advance to the list. \r\n
It's been suggested that a nondelivery address be used for subscriptions, namely iwethey@iwethey.org. There are a few problems with this approach:
\r\n\r\n- \r\n
- The address is potentially useful, and we may wish to activate it in future, at which point it may be subject to a significant amount of irrelevent traffic. Invalid addresses directed to a domain still result in network traffic and may result in other administrative overhead (logs, postmaster summaries, etc.). \r\n\r\n
- There is an inconsistency in use of this address. Apparently several people are using it or slight variants, but haven't publicized use. \r\n\r\n
- The address isn't auto-notifying. Among the advantages of use of the list address is that people subscribed to the list are then informed of available registrations. \r\n
My proposal is this: if a registrations-specific email be used, it should be specific to that purpose (eg: registrations@iwethey.org), and should be linked to an archive or list to which persons interested in seeing archives of registrations or receiving notifications, can be subscribed.
\r\n\r\nThere might also be a benefit to bringing mailing lsits somewhat closer in house. For the past several years, we've been graciously hosted by VTLUUG at Virginia Tech, courtesy of Rob Nelson. Rob's been largely inactive in IWETHEY for much of this time, absent list administration, occasional moderation, and the odd post. It might be better to have administration which is more conversant with the group's pulse as a whole.
\r\n\r\nThere is a very large benefit to running the list itself on hardware and networks independent of the rest of the group infrastructure. One of the initial motives for the mailing list was to provide an out-of-band channel for when IWE was down. Today, with both websites (zIWT and TWIT), and jIWT, all hosted on one box, a remote mailhost would be useful.
\r\n\r\nGiving the the group direct control over lists would also allow for creating special-purpose lists, including the above-mentioned registrations list and others. Most of these would likely be administrative at present (the list never did and still doesn't see much traffic). But there appears to be a clear call for seperation of roles.
\r\n\r\nHow should registration notifications be handled?
\r\n\r\nAs indicated above, use of the list address itself handily addresses the issue. The net mail load is minuscule (a half dozen messages in the past 11 months). Registrations are broadcast automatically. Public and private archives serve as a repository of registered sits (in the event the TWiki page isn't updated).
\r\n\r\nSwitching to a nonfunctional address loses a number of these benefits, as discussed.
\r\n\r\nA registrations-specific list would be a good middle-of-the-road alternative, it seems.
\r\n\r\n\r\nCan this method be improved?
\r\n\r\nThe main issues I see with registrations are:
\r\n\r\n- \r\n
- An established standard set of identification tokens which can be tried, or registered, at a given site. \r\n\r\n
- Notifying the group of sites and tokens for registration. \r\n\r\n
- A protocol for registering new sites that allwos for notification and uses known tokens. \r\n\r\n
- Keeping administrative overhead to a minimum. \r\n\r\n
- Keeping incidental burden (tracking, spam, addresses, notification) to a minimum. \r\n\r\n
Is there any downside to current practices?
\r\n\r\nThere is list mail generated. At present, a total of six posts in eleven months. There is a contingent who apparently feels this is to great to be acceptable, though the logic appears variable, divorced from reality, and inconsistent. The initial complaint almost a year ago, by a listmember who's otherwise almost wholly nonparticipatory in the group, was far and wide of the facts. Recent discussion seems to have revived several gross inaccuracies promulgated at that time. If various constituencies would care to attempt a reasoned statement of their greivances, I'd appreciate elucidation.
\r\n\r\nOne line of reasoning appears to indicate that use of a valid or group email is fundamentally unacceptable. Again, this hasn't been clearly or consistently explained, and I'd appreciate a cogent explanation of just what harm this causes.
\r\n\r\nAs has been frequently explained: the IWE mailing list is subscriber-only. Nonsubscriber posts are held for moderation. The bulk of these are spam. Occasionally a user posts form a new or previously unknown account, and they're either subscribed or (per announced policy in the past year) the message is rejected with a note to the sender to please subscribe via the list web interface. Spam is deleted. Forwarded posts (if sufficiently announced or the moderator is aware) can be approved on a special-case basis. Discussion with a fellow list moderator indicates that the overhead to date of dealing with registration-generated email is "little other than the increased administrative overhead" -- of which he's seen precisely nil.
\r\n\r\nAn alternative has been proposed, and was apparently in use prior to a formal offer from Greg Folkert (domain administrator), to use iwethey@iwethey.org/iwethey as a registration code. Interesting, in spot checks of a number of group members, nobody actually seems to know a site for which this code is valid (though I strongly suspect any mailing list member could name all those for which the list address works). At the same time, this is a use of a shared resource (a valid, and potentially useful address in the iwethey.org domain). As the sites aren't being publcized, this strikes me as a preemption of group resources for personal gain. By contrast, I've been explicitly registering and publishing registrations. Those who don't care to make use of the service are welcome not to.
\r\n\r\nI'm at a loss to come up with any other negatives. Again, I invite anyone who has complaints to come forward and state them.