 |
 |
At 11:32 10/06/2013 +0000, Macfarlane, Alison wrote: >It's debatable whether Google /GCHQ make their booty public, though, isn't >it? Having said that, if there is a majority which wants the setting >changed back to public, this is easily done. I think that to talk of 'Google/GCHQ booty' is perhaps somewhat over-dramatising the main issue - which I thought was about the ability (or not) of members of the general public to search list archives for material which might be of interest to them. If 'GCHQ' actually had an interest, I seriously doubt that your chosen list 'settings' would have more than briefest of impact on their ability to get at the archives! Kind Regards, John ---------------------------------------------------------------- Dr John Whittington, Voice: +44 (0) 1296 730225 Mediscience Services Fax: +44 (0) 1296 738893 Twyford Manor, Twyford, E-mail: [log in to unmask] Buckingham MK18 4EL, UK ---------------------------------------------------------------- ****************************************************** Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your message will go only to the sender of this message. If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's 'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically to [log in to unmask] Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk. *******************************************************