full-disclosure - Call for moderation

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

Message-ID: <acdc033d0605191148n571f6fccwda771a99129e42cc@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri May 19 19:48:45 2006
From: michealespinola at gmail.com (Micheal Espinola Jr)
Subject: Call for moderation

I hope it was clear that I was suggesting that filtering "utter crap"
would not turn the list into bugtraq.

People use this argument repeatedly, and I'd like to see an example
that isn't in my opinion irreverent speculation.

If there is an example of how a list like this magically changed into
something like bugtraq because of simple filtering of offensive and
abusive content, I would love to know it - and I'll kindly and
respectfully stfu and never bring up or reply to the topic again.

Sincerely...

On 5/19/06, J.A. Terranson <measl@....org> wrote:
>
> bugtraq != reasonably full disclosure either.
>
>
> On Fri, 19 May 2006, Micheal Espinola Jr wrote:
>
> > Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 14:26:12 -0400
> > From: Micheal Espinola Jr <michealespinola@...il.com>
> > Reply-To: micheal.espinola@...il.com
> > To: Full Disclosure <full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk>
> > Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Call for moderation
> >
> > moderation for utter crap != bugtraq
> >
> >
> > On 5/19/06, evilrabbi <evilrabbi@...il.com> wrote:
> > > If for some reason this guy gets taken seriously and his request actually
> > > gets considered. I would like to say I wouldn't like a moderated list.. If I
> > > did I'd be looking at bugtraq right now.
> > >
> > >
> > > On 5/19/06, Aaron Gray <angray@...b.net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Regarding some previous threads.
> > > >
> > > > Some people just show how low they are !
> > > >
> > > > This is why we need some form of "Code of Conduct" or even better change
> > > to a moderated list.
> > > >
> > > > Otherwise the whole list just gets ruined and will ndeteriate over time.
> > > >
> > > > Heres a call for moderation before it gets too late.
> > > >
> > > > Anything that is too off topic or inflamatory should get junked.
> > > >
> > > > Aaron
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> > > > Charter:
> > > http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> > > > Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > -- h0 h0 h0 --
> > > www.nopsled.net
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> > > Charter:
> > > http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> > > Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Yours,
>
> J.A. Terranson
> sysadmin@....org
> 0xBD4A95BF
>
>
> 'The right of self defence is the first law of nature: in most governments
> it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest
> limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of
> the people to keep and bear arms is, under any colour or pretext
> whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the
> brink of destruction.'
>
> St. George Tucker
>


-- 
ME2