I'm using gmail and haven't noticed anything strange. Am I just not
seeing the protected emails at all? Could I be one of the ones sending
them and not even know? Will anyone ever be able to read this? :)
Maybe you could post the names of the senders concerned (assuming you
can actually see the sender field), just in case they don't realise
themselves that they are doing this.
On 26/05/06, THOMAS, BRIAN M (SBCSI) <bt0008(a)att.com> wrote:
Though I generally eschew "me-too" posts, I feel the need to pile on here,
and partly because it's not just "me-too" but a bit of a more detailed
approach.
I am unable to open them, though it may just be a matter of configuration in
my mail reader. I haven't been able to find out how it's done, though, and
I'm beginning to suspect that it requires some plugin or other that I don't
have - which I would gladly acquire if this weren't a fairly
tightly-controlled standard corporate desktop machine.
I think it's truly stupid of Outlook to refuse to open a message merely
because it can't verify it (and maybe that's the trick- find the config
option, if any, to tell it not to), particularly if it thinks that I can't
because it can't find my own "digital ID" which is in no way required for
verification, and I certainly wouldn't use it if I weren't required to. On
the other hand, if the message is actually encrypted as well, then Brandon
is absolutely correct that the messages can't be read except by those to
whom it was specifically addressed, which likely includes none of us, but
only the mail-list daemon. Fortunately it can store the message's
plaintext so that it can be read in the archive and in the digests.
If the sender (or anyone else) knows, and can tell us, how those of us with
this particular affliction can read the messages (with the verification
feature off, of course, so we can read it...!), I'd appreciate it, and that
would satisfy me. And it certainly galls me to suggest, or hear suggested,
that a very valuable feature should not be used because a significant number
of people are trapped in a situation where they must use inferior products,
thus forcing even those who don't use the monopoly product to do without the
feature. Needless to say, I have been galled in this way a great deal
during the last couple of decades, to see the strength of this argument grow
stronger with the monopoly and in turn strengthen it, so that the predatory
business practices that engendered it are almost not even needed to
perpetuate it.
So, if the message is indeed encrypted, please ignore the ranting in the
previous two paragraphs and stop doing that if you want all of us who
receive the mailing list directly to be able to read your messages; if it's
not, any help on how to beat Microsoft Outlook into submission would be
appreciated.
brain[sic]
-----Original Message-----
From: Esbach, Brandon [mailto:Esbachb@tycoelectronics.com]
Sent: Friday, May 26, 2006 3:20 AM
To: xwiki-users(a)objectweb.org
Subject: [xwiki-users] Slightly off-topic: Digital ID required by some mail
Folks, a fair chunk of group emails the last few weeks have had digital id
control.
From looking over the last few weeks, these are the emails that are less
likely to be responded to, as I suspect they are not readable except by a
select few. I suspect the online archive is able to display these messages
fine enough, but to be honest (I'm not sure if I'm alone here); unless I'm
researching a problem before mailing the group, I don't really go looking
there for new posts.
Suggestion:
If it's to a mailing group I would consider not using this method, to ensure
whoever has a solution/suggestion can reply to you.
--
You receive this message as a subscriber of the xwiki-users(a)objectweb.org
mailing list.
To unsubscribe:
mailto:xwiki-users-unsubscribe@objectweb.org
For general help: mailto:sympa@objectweb.org?subject=help
ObjectWeb mailing lists service home page:
http://www.objectweb.org/wws