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: <3D6D5D75.6090100@snosoft.com> From: dotslash at snosoft.com (KF) Subject: Re: Administrivia: Reply-To Preferences Anyone wanna take bets... this could be like a horse race hehe. http://www.netalarms.com/poll/1030557676_QUuGWtuE -KF Dan Brosemer wrote: >On Wed, Aug 28, 2002 at 11:17:21PM +0100, John Cartwright wrote: > >>After seeing much debate on the subject, we've decided to resolve this >>issue in a democratic manner. Please vote at the below URL for your >>reply-to preference: should it be to the poster, or the list, by >>default. >> >>http://www.netalarms.com/story/2002/8/28/1462/54551 >> >>We'll make changes (if necessary) once the closing date has been reached >>(the 31st of this month). >> > >How about leaving it as the poster specifies? It took me long enough to >remove the "[Full-Disclosure]" BS from the subject lines. I'd rather not >have to find a way to un-mangle the Reply-To: header as well. > >http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html > >-Dan >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists