lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <NMRC.666.6.66.0208281237550.3765-100000@www.nmrc.org> From: hellnbak at nmrc.org (hellNbak) Subject: Just a suggestion I think you misunderstood the question. full-disclosure is *NOT* moderated. I am wondering why people prefer this over the model that VulnWatch uses. On Wed, 28 Aug 2002, Ka wrote: > Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 18:31:49 +0200 > From: Ka <ka@...dr.net> > Reply-To: full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com > To: full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com > Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] Just a suggestion > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > At Mittwoch, 28. August 2002 17:47 Steve Manzuik wrote: > > As someone who moderates a mailing list or two, I am curious. What is the > > issue with moderation? Why does a model where there are multiple > > moderators not work compared to this model? > > AFAIK the list is unmoderated (please correct me, if I'm wrong). > > Ka > - -- > http://www.khidr.net/users/ka/pgpkey.asc > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org > > iD8DBQE9bPr172vu22ltWBERAtU0AJ48nUOHLHcyf6642lky9RGL35hpWwCfa/Ax > 3NCwvyfnhE7FMKl+XjfzA0o= > =PgO6 > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > _______________________________________________ > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. > Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html > -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- "I don't intend to offend, I offend with my intent" hellNbak@...c.org http://www.nmrc.org/~hellnbak -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Powered by blists - more mailing lists