full-disclosure - Administrivia: Moderation of Individuals

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: <20051222134540.GA20972@grok.org.uk>
Date: Thu Dec 22 13:46:43 2005
From: johnc at grok.org.uk (John Cartwright)
Subject: Administrivia: Moderation of Individuals

Hi

Given the recent activity I felt it best to make a statement regarding
my decision to temporarily moderate certain individuals.

After weeks of attempting to solve the issue through diplomacy, I have
come to the unfortunate conclusion that this selective moderation is 
necessary for a short period of time. This moderation is based on the 
inability of several individuals to abide by the list charter and 
does not reflect on any particular piece of research.

The personal attacks must stop, and this decision was taken purely for
that reason. All list members have a right to express their opinions
and publish on-topic information. Similarly, they also possess the 
right to do so without excessive ridicule. 

For the record, I do believe that XSS and similar bugs in large sites 
should be reported, given the size of the list I am sure that all 
information is useful to some list members. It is unrealistic to
assume that every post will be relevant to every subscriber.  If a 
given topic is not of interest to you as a list member, please take 
the simple step of ignoring it. Nobody here has the right to say
what is or isn't useful and I positively encourage all contributions.

Therefore I would ask that anyone posting any form of original 
security information is afforded the common courtesy that 99% of the
list's subscribers demonstrate as a matter of course. I do not intend 
to allow further abuse of individuals posting on-topic, charter-
relevant information for any reason.

If an individual is clearly being disruptive then this situation is
best resolved off-list. Public attacks serve only to further the
disruption and potentially leads to additional moderation, arguments
about who is to blame, and other needless complications.

Thank you to those individuals who have responded to my private 
requests and have stopped their abusive behaviour. To those who have
not heeded my requests, I will state once again that your moderated
status is based purely on inappropriate postings.

Anyone with a clear disregard for the list charter who seeks to 
prolong the recent animosity will be dealt with in a similar manner.

Cheers
- John