Females in the community.

[Bruno Medeiros via Digitalmars-d]

On 26/03/2016 01:18, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 3/25/2016 5:57 PM, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
>> Yeah, but how many NNTP clients would support that? Certainly one
>> could build
>> this feature on top of NNTP, but then it would not be pure NNTP anymore,
>> and I guess it would break many clients, no?
>
> No, it wouldn't. The PGP signature doesn't break clients. They just
> ignore it (i.e. consider it part of the message body).

For reading posts, it wouldn't break clients, no. But what about writing 
messages with PGP signatures? If the client doesn't supported creating 
them automatically, it's too much of a pain the ass to do that manually.

> You'd have the
> option of what client to use, and if you use DFeed, it could be set to
> not present unregistered postings to you (a perq of registering
> yourself, you can customize the settings).
>

Oh, no, no, no. That's a broken system. If one were to add such a layer 
of only allowing registered postings, this would have to be enforced for 
all users, not on a per-user preference. Otherwise you'd have a 
two-layer forum that would get super confusing. What if a registered 
poster replies to a non-registered poster message? I'd still see such 
messages. Or what about people that I want to see their posts, but they 
didn't bother to register and post unregistered?

This is one of those things what would have to be a like a code 
formatting guidelines: it has to be the same for all developers in a 
project. It can't be like the choice of IDE/editor, which can be left to 
individual preference.

-- 
Bruno Medeiros
https://twitter.com/brunodomedeiros