Let's recapitulate. We have a downunder nutcase who's using this public resource for private dumping ground, while posting *a lot* (including profanity and casual death threats, iirc) and constantly changing his email address, thus avoiding filtering.
I don't propose the list policy to be changed, this particular forum should be unmoderated. However, complaining to Matt's ISP (whose terms he's clearly in violation with) and some grassroot pressure (if there are 100 people on his list willing to send back each of his messages 10x, he's dealing with a 1000x amplification factor on each and single of his messages) seems to be in order. Does anyone see anything wrong with this plan? On Sat, 23 Feb 2002, matt taylor wrote: > >>LONDON (Reuters) - Authors of emails and Internet postings that > > contain racist or xenophobic material may face criminal charges under > a > proposed European treaty that is dividing the Internet and law > > enforcement communities. << > > How about ANY material euronazi Eugene leitl doesn't like on this list? > > >>From: Eugene Leitl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 12:19:45 +0100 (MET) > In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Because Matt Taylor won't keep a single email address, and thus making > filtering him impractical, and because the cypherpunks list does not seem > to encourage limits on communication I suggest returning every single > message to him, whether manually, or via a procmail recipe. > He stores information on cypherpunks archives, let us store a few large > binaries in his inbox. > -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org";>leitl</a> ______________________________________________________________ ICBMTO: N48 04'14.8'' E11 36'41.2'' http://www.leitl.org 57F9CFD3: ED90 0433 EB74 E4A9 537F CFF5 86E7 629B 57F9 CFD3
