full-disclosure - Re: The point, kids.

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <OFB3437B5A.7201DF6D-ON85256D44.00019E9E-85256D44.000B7B1F@tco.census.gov>
From: lee.e.rian at census.gov (lee.e.rian@...sus.gov)
Subject: Re: The point, kids.

> I read the charter, and saw no mention of penalties for off-topic speech.

Read the charter again:

   It is expected that the list will be largely self-policing, however
   in special circumstances (eg spamming, misappropriation) then
   offending members may be removed from the list by the management.

eg = exempli gratia = for example
In other words, spamming and misappropriation are not the only activities
  that can get someone removed from the list.

> I thought, in addition to its utility, this list represented
> an ideal (openness), but apparently I was mistaken.

It is an open list.  But it's a list devoted to discussing security related
issues and morning wood doesn't have that great a record of on-topic
posting.  Throw in his [her?] knack for posting messages that generate so
many off-topic replies and I can see where removing morning wood from the
list would be an attractive proposal.  But I think that the real problem is
with the people that can't find the delete key and/or resist responding
with their own off-topic replies.

Regards,
Lee

|---------+-------------------------------------->
|         |           "Paul M. Hirsch"           |
|         |           <paul@...tagenoir.org>     |
|         |           Sent by:                   |
|         |           full-disclosure-admin@...ts|
|         |           .netsys.com                |
|         |                                      |
|         |                                      |
|         |           06/12/03 06:01 PM          |
|         |                                      |
|---------+-------------------------------------->
  >------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
  |                                                                                                                              |
  |       To:       Mike Fratto <mfratto@....com>                                                                                |
  |       cc:       full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com                                                                             |
  |       Subject:  [Full-Disclosure] Re: The point, kids.                                                                       |
  >------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

On Thu, Jun 12, 2003 at 03:03:29PM -0400, Mike Fratto wrote:
> Here is the confusion. The discussion is not about unpopular speech.
> It's about off-topic speech. Go read the frigging Charter. If you can't
> abide by the charter, get off the list and then start your own list with
> your own charter, or no charter, I don't care. Step off the free-speech
> stump.

I read the charter, and saw no mention of penalties for off-topic speech.
My point was that the choice being considered will change the
nature of the list, and from my point of view, violates the spirit
of this list.  My apologies for rambling off into a free speech
diatribe.  I thought, in addition to its utility, this list represented
an ideal (openness), but apparently I was mistaken.

-Paul
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html