Cooked/umodified lists? (was: Re: MIME-encoded PGP / GPG...)

[Bill Stewart]

At 03:07 PM 09/26/2001 -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote:
>on Wed, Sep 26, 2001 at 01:15:54PM -0700, Meyer Wolfsheim (wolf at priori.net)
>wrote:
> > > I'm not set up to run same, but I'm interested in finding one that
> > > doesn't demime.
> > http://www.ssz.com/cdr/index.html
>
>I don't see a 'cooked' filter, unmodified, list.  Am I missing
>something?
>
>How bad's the spam?

The spam was fairly bad - now that I've been on the lne.com list,
there's much less that gets through.  (Yay!).
I've found the message-mangling less annoying than the spam.
One problem you'll find is that even if you mutt-sign your messages,
the people on the lne.com list are going to receive them de-mimed,
so you can't depend on the mutt-mime-sigs getting through.

I don't mind MIME attachments, much, though it's much nicer to be
able to read PGP-signed messages inline than to have to
double-click on the things and feed them to PGP just to read them;
the versions of Mutt that didn't have this problem were almost
always hand-hacked by users who didn't like mutt's choices of options.
I use Eudora, which AFAIK doesn't lie about attachment filenames,
(e.g. the classic attack on MS Mail products of sending something
named foo.doc.exe or bar.jpg.pif and triggering an executable),
so I think I've been safe when I've opened attachments.
But I'd generally rather not have to deal with them.