[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20051215173208.5e8af22f.rembrandt@jpberlin.de>
Date: Thu Dec 15 16:32:29 2005
From: rembrandt at jpberlin.de (Rembrandt)
Subject: A CALL FOR FULL-DISCLOSURE TO BECOME A
MODERATED LIST
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 08:16:46 -0800
<uber@...h.com> wrote:
> I WOULD JUST LIKE TO EXPRESS MY DEEP SUPPORT FOR THIS IDEA. MAKING
> THE LIST MODERATED WOULD REALLY HELP MY JOB AS A SECURITY
> RESEARCHER. I COULD MAKE QUICKER, MORE WELL INFORMED CHOICES IN MY
> DAY TO DAY TASKS OF PEN TESTING LEGITIMATELY. I WILL ONLY GET THE
> GOOD STUFF AND NONE OF THIS PISSING CONTEST WHICH IS KILLING THIS
> LIST. MODERATING WOULD MAKE THE LIST MUCH MORE PROFESSIONAL AND
> WOULD BRING IT ONE STEP ABOVE SECURITY FOCUS.
>
> ONCE AGAIN. I AM 150% FOR THE MODERATION OF FULL-DISCLOSURE.
Moderation... moderation...
Well..
If you smoke a pipe and think about it you'll get 2 problems:
1. Moderation is a kind of cencorship
2. Who should moderate the list? 1 guy? 2? 3? 4?
Do they realy know what IS importent for everybody?
I would angree that users who spam too much should get kicked of.
But as I said.. if you smoke a pipe you'll get some ideas:
You could delete e-Mails from such idiots. Or you could train "bmf". ;-)
Kind regards,
Rembrandt
- --
God did a bless on me,
So accapt the dark side in you.
Hate leads me to victory, so give me a war.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (OpenBSD)
iD8DBQFDoZqIHXWDTKj6tTkRAk6XAKCWyvXnKQGLyo9VrYk5Jlzgi4+dOQCgzJnL
Z8JKp0tI4vrcyeMR8UAzock=
=KSKI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Powered by blists - more mailing lists