email in From:

[Ivan Shmakov]

[Cross-posting to news:news.misc, and dropping
news:alt.free.newsservers from Followup-To:.]

[...]

Jeff-Relf.Me is at bat-shit crazy as they come. He thinks NNTP from
headers should have a website, not an email address.

And frankly, I tend to agree with that, in part. The email
address in From: currently serves no purpose: typically, it's
simply invalid. (Yet, it may just as well be a valid one, but
not that of the poster, although it's now an extreme rarity.)

Now that every other Usenet poster puts his or her own email in
the signature (in some cryptic form), I'd vote for making the
email part of the header optional, or abolishing it altogether.

He thinks the RFCs should be changed to fit his world view.

Yes. But then, RFCs are constantly changing to meet /someone's/
world view.

He meets the classic definition of insanity: He keeps on with the
same rant, expecting different results each time.

I have no comments on this one.

[...]

[cipher]

On Sun, 24 Mar 2013 09:15:42 +0000, Ivan Shmakov Inscribed upon the Golden

Post by Ivan Shmakov
[Cross-posting to news:news.misc, and dropping
news:alt.free.newsservers from Followup-To:.]
[...]

Jeff-Relf.Me is at bat-shit crazy as they come. He thinks NNTP from
headers should have a website, not an email address.

And frankly, I tend to agree with that, in part. The email
address in From: currently serves no purpose: typically, it's
simply invalid. (Yet, it may just as well be a valid one, but
not that of the poster, although it's now an extreme rarity.)

Neither would a URL. Also, with URLs there is serious abuse potential.
Why does Relf think that A) everyone has a web site and B) wants to
broadcast it?

If his vision were implemented and you didn't have a web site, what would
you do?
Munge a URL just to make the software work?
His fascination with some weird-assed fusion of NNTP and HTML is deranged.
He can put his URL in his sig if he wishes.
And he doesn't address the issue of posters with no URL to share.
In his view you must have one. Obsession...

Post by Ivan Shmakov
Now that every other Usenet poster puts his or her own email in
the signature (in some cryptic form), I'd vote for making the
email part of the header optional, or abolishing it altogether.

Yes, sounds reasonable. But Relf doesn't want options, he wants to
change it to his way.

Post by Ivan Shmakov

He thinks the RFCs should be changed to fit his world view.

Yes. But then, RFCs are constantly changing to meet /someone's/
world view.

I thank my Upright Walking God everyday that it is not his...
And likely will never be...

Post by Ivan Shmakov

He meets the classic definition of insanity: He keeps on with the
same rant, expecting different results each time.

I have no comments on this one.
[...]

[Ivan Shmakov]

Post by cipher

He thinks NNTP from headers should have a website, not an email
address.

And frankly, I tend to agree with that, in part. The email address
in From: currently serves no purpose: typically, it's simply
invalid. (Yet, it may just as well be a valid one, but not that of
the poster, although it's now an extreme rarity.)

Neither would a URL.

I've said /in part./ I don't quite support the "URI idea,"
either.

Post by cipher
Also, with URLs there is serious abuse potential.

Namely?

Post by cipher
Why does Relf think that A) everyone has a web site and B) wants to
broadcast it?

... That being said, allowing URIs would give the user greater
flexibility, as URI can be used to designate a Web site (http:
or https: URI), an XMPP address (xmpp:), a phone number
(tel: URI), or what not.

Post by cipher
If his vision were implemented and you didn't have a web site, what
would you do? Munge a URL just to make the software work?

I'd use a mailto: URI, as in: mailto:***@example.org.

[...]

[Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz]

Post by Ivan Shmakov
Yes. But then, RFCs are constantly changing to meet /someone's/
world view.

Normally, however, not the world views of people who blatantly ignore
existing RFC's.