This also seems to fall into the definition of intimidation. Other similar
messages by Michel Py have been included below.
I ask the Chair to take the appropriate action.
--Dean
On Tue, 3 Jun 2003, Michel Py wrote:
> Added to the pro-troll and pro-spammer list: Richard Perlman.
>
> Michel.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Perlman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 6:53 PM
> To: 'IETF Discussion'
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: This IETF discussion list
>
> All:
>
> I have been loosely tracking the SPAM discussion and really had nothing
> significant to add. However, a related posting did catch my attention
> and interest, enough so to warrant a response.
>
> While I certainly am not interested in taking sides on the personal
> accusations that have been seen recently, I do have serious concerns
> about the message quoted below. I personally detest the daily deluge of
> unwanted unsolicited e-mails I receive. However, I would be even more
> upset to find that one's belief or support for or against any topic
> should be the criteria by which their contributions were judged.
>
> As despicable as I may find the concepts, opinions and thoughts of
> others, a world in which the expression of only those ideas that I found
> acceptable would be far worse.
>
> Having said that, I do want to be clear, that while I think there needs
> to be freedom for expression of ideas, that expression must be done in a
> way that encourages discussion and values the participation of everyone.
> There is no room for personal remarks and attacks in a conversation of
> ideas.
>
> Richard
>
> On 6/3/03 15:00, "Dean Anderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> quoted:
> > ==================
> > Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 02:09:25 +0200
> > From: "Tomson Eric (Yahoo.fr)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: 'Eric A. Hall' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 'John Stracke'
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: spam
> >
> > Guys,
> >
> > Dean Anderson obviously supports and defends SPAM.
> > No further conversation with him could lead to anything constructive.
> > Stop feeding the Troll, now.
> >
> > E.T.
>
>
>
>
================
Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 13:39:24 -0700
From: Michel Py <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: spam
> Eric A. Hall wrote:
> Nobody seems to think there is a cost associated
> with "hit delete"
Typical spammer answer.
Added to troll list: Eric A. Hall.
Michel.
================
Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 21:30:39 -0700
From: Michel Py <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Paul Vixie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: spam
> Paul Vixie wrote:
> warning, i'm answering an obvious troll from an obvious spammer.
> hit D now.
Yeah I think we should work on a system to ban obvious spammers from
IETF lists. Maybe we should also ban people that are so full of it that
they could double as a sceptic tank such as the ones that try to convey
the idea that handling spam has no cost.
Paul, I'm curious: why are you wasting your time with this? Any
withdrawals from not fighting it on a daily basis?
=================
