full-disclosure - Administrivia: Poll

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

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

From: jjacobs at Radford.edu (James Jacobs)
Subject: Administrivia: Poll

-----Original Message-----
From: full-disclosure-admin@...ts.netsys.com
[mailto:full-disclosure-admin@...ts.netsys.com] On Behalf Of Nick
FitzGerald
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 6:14 AM
To: full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com
Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] Administrivia: Poll

"morning_wood" <se_cur_ity@...mail.com> wrote:

>   You could have just asked  people to vote instead of pointing out a
> negative.
> I would prefer an unbiased judgement. But by stating the above, you
imply to
> the
> general list that I already have done "bad" in some way.

Whilst -- gulp -- in general I agree with this observation of yours, 
the fact that enough folk have asked the list admins to address your 
"situation" that they have been "driven" to do this does, in fact, 
mean you have "done bad".  Unfortunately for you, your ego is such 
that you saw the mainly no-names encouraging you to continue posting 
as evidence you were "doing good" (or at least "not bad"), rather 
than properly weighting the commentary of those suggesting you 
desist.

(And no, much as on average I find your posts irritating, clueless, 
and largely irrelevant and childish, I was not one of the 
complainers.  After all, there's a Delete key on this keyboard, my 
Email client listens to it and if you continue to get worse I can 
even go the further step of filtering out your messages...)

Regards,

Nick FitzGerald
--------------------------

	What do you mean the list admins have been driven to this? They
can just as easily delete all the unwanted "Kick morning wood" emails
that they get just as easily as we can delete all of morning wood's
emails if we wish. There's no need for voting to moderate someone on an
unmoderated list. If morning wood is indeed silenced then this list
should no longer be considered moderated and those of us who joined
because it stated that it was un-moderated should unsubscribe. I don't
think the flamers realize that if wood get's moderated then they will
get moderated as well, and if they are not then something is seriously
wrong with this list. This is my first post to the list, and I'm ashamed
that it had to be on this topic.