At 08:17 PM 3/5/2004, you wrote:
Kevin wrote:
should the east coasters provide answers for the rest of the country?
OSL
Sure, why not.
Which answers would those be, BTW? And what's OSL?
Kevin T. - VRWC
My cat's breath smells like cat food!
(or, this is my friday night? sob)
OK, everyone's an
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 11/30/2003 6:21:23 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Zim wrote:
It seems my messages have not made it to the list in the
past week or
so. is anyone out there
Looks like you're back...
But my long and
Zim wrote:
It seems my messages have not made it to the list in the past week or
so. is anyone out there
Looks like you're back...
--
Doug
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems my messages have not made it to the list in the past week or
so. is anyone out there
I'm out there. I think I'm *way* out there.
Julia
___
At 05:34 PM 11/30/03 -0600, Julia Thompson wrote:
On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems my messages have not made it to the list in the past week or
so. is anyone out there
I'm out there. I think I'm *way* out there.
whistles innocently
-- Ronn! :)
On Sun, 30 Nov 2003, Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
At 05:34 PM 11/30/03 -0600, Julia Thompson wrote:
On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems my messages have not made it to the list in the past week or
so. is anyone out there
I'm out there. I think I'm *way* out there.
In a message dated 11/30/2003 6:21:23 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
Zim wrote:
It seems my messages have not made it to the list in the
past week or
so. is anyone out there
Looks like you're back...
But my long and elegant response to one of Gautam's post
David Hobby wrote:
Sorry, just a test. My email is having problems, so
I want to see if this message makes it into the archives.
---David
What, you wanted content?!
YES! :)
Now, what can you tell me about the number 28?
Julia
At 09:08 PM 9/1/03 -0500, Julia Thompson wrote:
David Hobby wrote:
Sorry, just a test. My email is having problems, so
I want to see if this message makes it into the archives.
---David
What, you wanted content?!
YES! :)
Now, what can you tell me
Now, what can you tell me about the number 28?
Julia
It is nominally the number of days in a month.
It is a perfect number, the only even perfect number that
is a multiple of 7. (There are some LARGE odd perfect numbers
that are multiples of 7, but they don't count. : ) )
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
David Hobby
...
Now, what can you tell me about the number 28?
Julia
It is nominally the number of days in a month.
It is a perfect number, the only even perfect number that
is a
And I happen to be born on the 28th of May...
--
From: David Hobby[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply To: Killer Bs Discussion
Sent: Dienstag, 2. September 2003 17:36
To: Killer Bs Discussion
Subject: Re: Test
Now, what can you tell me about the number 28
Nick Arnett wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
David Hobby
...
Now, what can you tell me about the number 28?
Julia
It is nominally the number of days in a month.
It is a perfect number, the only
At 12:33 PM 9/2/03 -0700, Nick Arnett wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
David Hobby
...
Now, what can you tell me about the number 28?
Julia
It is nominally the number of days in a month.
It is a perfect
- Original Message -
From: Ronn!Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 8:19 PM
Subject: RE: Test
At 12:33 PM 9/2/03 -0700, Nick Arnett wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And I happen to be born on the 28th of May...
And I on the 14th of December.
Now, what can you tell me about the number 28?
Julia
...
All that may be true, but it certainly is not a 42, so who cares?
As we have just demonstrated, the
Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
At 12:33 PM 9/2/03 -0700, Nick Arnett wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
David Hobby
...
Now, what can you tell me about the number 28?
Julia
It is nominally the
At 10:17 PM 9/2/03 -0400, David Hobby wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And I happen to be born on the 28th of May...
And I on the 14th of December.
Now, what can you tell me about the number 28?
Julia
...
All that may be true, but it certainly is not a 42, so who cares?
Julia Thompson wrote:
The redistricting fight in Texas has inspired a humor columnist in
Austin to come up with a new word - Perrymandering.
If this message gets back to me, I'll reply and include a URL.
Otherwise, well, if you go to statesman.com and look for today's John
Kelso column,
Not sure what went wrong while I was away, but it apparently healed itself.
Unfortunately, my admin backup is my friend fighting brain cancer, so when
I'm away, it's difficult to cover this sort of problem.
Redundancy -- that's what we need!
Nick
--
Nick Arnett
Phone/fax: (408) 904-7198
[EMAIL
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Julia Thompson
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 9:18 PM
To: Killer Bs Discussion
Subject: Re: test
Deborah Harrell wrote:
Ping?
Pong. I'm waiting to hear from Nick as to just what happened
Nick Arnett wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Julia Thompson
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 9:18 PM
To: Killer Bs Discussion
Subject: Re: test
Deborah Harrell wrote:
Ping?
Pong. I'm waiting to hear from Nick
At 06:34 2003-07-10 -0700, Nick wrote:
Believe me, I would have noticed -- we're on a very short deadline...
announcement to follow in the next three hours.
Nick
Nice way to pique my curiosity, Nick.
Should I put some bubbly in the refrigerator?
Jean-Louis
Deborah Harrell wrote:
Ping?
Pong. I'm waiting to hear from Nick as to just what happened there.
Julia
who was out for over 4 hours and missed most of the interruption (and
who had a good time this evening)
___
Now it is... there was a corrupted Python module that screwed up
administration last night. I fixed that, but apparently the list failed to
restart properly afterwards. All seems well now.
Nick
--
Nick Arnett
Phone/fax: (408) 904-7198
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From:
Read it.
Read it.
Read it.
Sticks fingers in ears
Read it.
William Taylor
It should be easy to figure out
which one was Ronn's
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
At 10:27 AM 6/13/03 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Read it.
Read it.
Read it.
Sticks fingers in ears
Read it.
William Taylor
It should be easy to figure out
which one was Ronn's
Some list software though it's obvious now that the software in use on
this list is not
test
Tap, tap, tap... Is this thing on?
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
: Saturday, February 15, 2003 5:55 PM
To: Killer Bs Discussion
Subject: Re: test
Hey, I got this one and none of the others. Go figure!
George A
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2003 1:24 AM
Subject: Re: test
In a message dated 2/15/2003 7:19:20 AM US Mountain Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Again.. Sent several e-mails today. None appeared.
George A
I've gotten 2 copies of some messages.
Maybe there's an attempt to even things out?
William Taylor
-
This message
Hey, I got this one and none of the others. Go figure!
George A
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2003 1:24 AM
Subject: Re: test
In a message dated 2/15/2003 7:19:20 AM US Mountain Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Erik Reuter wrote:
On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 02:33:24PM +0100, Sonja van Baardwijk-Holten wrote:
Sonja van Baardwijk-Holten wrote:
GCU: The eternal electronic huntingrounds loom before the fabric of my
e-mails...
I should have used a spell checker before I sent that one. Ouch...
Jon Gabriel wrote:
The brin-l server will 'eat' posts made in html. You'll need to change your
posts to plain text before sending. I had the same problem a few months
ago, and this was the explanation Nick gave me. :)
For me that cannot be the reason then. I only write and send in
Then how did my Test e-mail get through.
George A
- Original Message -
From: Jon Gabriel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 1:03 AM
Subject: Re: Test, was Re: Test
From: Sonja van Baardwijk-Holten [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED
Um... ask Nick? :)
Sorry, the html ban is the only reason I know the server might devour
messages.
Jon
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
On Behalf Of G. D. Akin
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 5:11 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Test
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of Jon Gabriel
...
Um... ask Nick? :)
Sorry, the html ban is the only reason I know the server might devour
messages.
But I don't know of any other reason, either.
If they got caught in some sort of
Me too. So far one lost and two returned.
I'm not *really* _that_ controversial, am I?
puzzled
Sonja ;o)
GCU: The eternal electronic huntingrounds loom before the fabric of my
e-mails...
G. D. Akin wrote:
Test.
Sent several e-mails the other day -- did not receive one of them.
George
Sonja van Baardwijk-Holten wrote:
GCU: The eternal electronic huntingrounds loom before the fabric of my
e-mails...
I should have used a spell checker before I sent that one. Ouch... :o)
That should have been 'hunting grounds' of course.
Sonja
On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 02:33:24PM +0100, Sonja van Baardwijk-Holten wrote:
Sonja van Baardwijk-Holten wrote:
GCU: The eternal electronic huntingrounds loom before the fabric of my
e-mails...
I should have used a spell checker before I sent that one. Ouch... :o)
That should have
From: Sonja van Baardwijk-Holten [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Test, was Re: Test
Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2003 14:24:15 +0100
Me too. So far one lost and two returned.
I'm not *really* _that_ controversial, am I?
puzzled
Sonja ;o)
GCU: The eternal
- Original Message -
From: Ronn Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 02, 2002 7:13 PM
Subject: Re: Dinging plans (was RE: test)
And does your friend consider himself a professional person?
Definately. It was after we were discussing how
At 02:32 PM 10/29/02, Deborah Harrell wrote:
As for one of the subjects in this post: trying to
use someone to get at someone else is just plain
wrong. And cursing at the first someone (ie. Sonja)
is despicable. :(
Amen.
--Ronn! :)
Sometimes A One-Word Reply Is All That Is Needed
At 04:02 PM 10/30/02, Deborah Harrell wrote:
--- Julia wrote:
Deborah Harrell wrote:
--- Julia wrote:
Deborah Harrell wrote:
I'm trying to find out what the problem is: I
just got
Sonja's post on this, but Jim's was already in
my inbox before lunch, so clearly others received
At 09:50 AM 10/31/02, Dan Minette wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Jean-Louis Couturier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 9:41 AM
Subject: RE: Dinging plans (was RE: test)
De : Sonja van Baardwijk-Holten [mailto:prutje;softhome.net]
Male
Julia Thompson wrote:
clarification of Peter Principle available upon request
Not necessary in my case.
The Principal of my school is called Peter
Regards, Ray.
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Behalf Of Jean-Louis Couturier
If ever you work in close contact with marketing, look at some of
the people gravitating around the director or VP.
De : Nick Arnett [mailto:narnett;mccmedia.com]
Hey! I've been both! (Director and VP of marketing, that is.)
LOL! And you've never
On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 08:30:10AM +0100, Sonja van Baardwijk-Holten wrote:
Erik Reuter wrote:
Maybe we could also have things that decrease your ding number. Not
dongs (I give you the dong! :-) ummm, tips or nods? Or you could call
them kisses (or carresses, or ...) and then the codes
On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 02:31:22PM +0100, Sonja van Baardwijk-Holten wrote:
Erik Reuter wrote:
On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 08:30:10AM +0100, Sonja van Baardwijk-Holten wrote:
Erik Reuter wrote:
Maybe we could also have things that decrease your ding number. Not
dongs (I give you the
- Original Message -
From: Jean-Louis Couturier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 9:41 AM
Subject: RE: Dinging plans (was RE: test)
De : Sonja van Baardwijk-Holten [mailto:prutje;softhome.net]
Male whore, interesting idea. I always thought
Nick Arnett wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:brin-l-bounces;mccmedia.com]On
Behalf Of Jean-Louis Couturier
...
If ever you work in close contact with marketing, look at some of
the people gravitating around the director or VP.
Hey! I've been
In a message dated 10/31/02 12:09:24 PM US Mountain Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If ever you work in close contact with marketing, look at some of
the people gravitating around the director or VP.
Hey! I've been both! (Director and VP of marketing, that is.)
Ding.
At 09:00 AM 10/31/2002 -0600 Julia Thompson wrote:
In older English murder mysteries, it's not
necessarily assumed that the gigolo is actually sleeping with his
client. (And now can someone help exorcize David Lee Roth's song from
my head?)
And Neneh Cherry's song too!
JDG
John D. Giorgis wrote:
At 09:00 AM 10/31/2002 -0600 Julia Thompson wrote:
In older English murder mysteries, it's not
necessarily assumed that the gigolo is actually sleeping with his
client. (And now can someone help exorcize David Lee Roth's song from
my head?)
And Neneh Cherry's
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:brin-l-bounces;mccmedia.com]On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
...
In a message dated 10/31/2002 6:30:55 PM US Mountain Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ding. Ding. Ding.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jean-Louis Couturier wrote:
De : Deborah Harrell [mailto:harrellmedleg;yahoo.com]
And after further consideration, I have to agree with
Erik that anonymous dinging should be severely
penalized. If allowed at all. And you ought to try
talking it out offlist first [*politely*], as
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:brin-l-bounces;mccmedia.com]On
Behalf Of David Hobby
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 7:05 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Dinging plans (was RE: test)
...
Sorry, I guess that I missed the post where the dinging
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 09:14:19AM -0800, Nick Arnett wrote:
Ratings a la Slash wouldn't work very well, either, since people read
mailing lists via a variety of applications, in which there is no
standard way to accommodate ratings.
That is not so. Anyone who has capability for simple
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 01:42:36PM -0500, Erik Reuter wrote:
Ah, great idea, better than my subject: line idea! Also, instead of
Umm, I should have said, much better than my formulation of the
subject: line idea, since I did not think of the idea.
--
Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 01:56:42PM -0500, Jean-Louis Couturier wrote:
I'd have separate scores for dings received an dings given. If Erik's
codes are applied to dings received, we could have a code for dingers
along the lines of Tolerant, Capricious and Opinion Police
Great idea! I like it.
Maybe we could also have things that decrease your ding number. Not
dongs (I give you the dong! :-) ummm, tips or nods? Or you could call
them kisses (or carresses, or ...) and then the codes for people who use
them would mean friendly, promiscuous, and real whore.
--
Erik Reuter [EMAIL
De : Erik Reuter [mailto:ereuter;erikreuter.com]
Maybe we could also have things that decrease your ding number. Not
dongs (I give you the dong! :-) ummm, tips or nods? Or you could call
them kisses (or carresses, or ...) and then the codes for people who use
them would mean friendly,
At 21:10 29-10-2002 -0500, John Giorgis wrote:
My opinion on listmail is that if you don't like what somebody has to
say, ignore it. People have a right to an opinion, fortunatly others
have just as much right to ignore it. Use that right. Use filters, be it
it just mere mental or state of the
At 10:16 30-10-2002 +0100, Sonja van Baardwijk-Holten wrote:
I'm with you on that one for 100%. Indeed, better to have no dinging.
Ignoring what you don't like, respond to what is interesting. We used to
be able to do that quite well in the very far back past. Now the list
gets clogged with
Hi, Jeroen!
Hiss - siss - crackle $%%^^*(^^%#%^$*#!$
TRANSMISSION TERMINATED
Oops. Sonja reads your messages? Yikes. I'd rather not
send you my personal collection of thousands of pictures
of beautiful naked brazilian guys that you requested me.
[let's hope I hit the private key...]
Alberto
Jean-Louis Couturier wrote:
De : Erik Reuter [mailto:ereuter;erikreuter.com]
Maybe we could also have things that decrease your ding number. Not
dongs (I give you the dong! :-) ummm, tips or nods? Or you could call
them kisses (or carresses, or ...) and then the codes for people who use
Jeroen wrote:
I thought beautiful and brazilian guys were mutually exclusive.
[in fact, it's beautiful and guys that are mutually exclusive,
by definition of beautiful. At leat it was so when I learned
English, more than a quarter of a century ago]
BTW, does your wife know about your
--- Jean-Louis Couturier wrote:
Erik Reuter [wrote:]
I would suggest at
least 3 codes meaning roughly: well-though-of,
somewhat annoying,
real asshole. Dings could be any real number
that people decide (but I
still think absolute minimum of 1 ding cost to
ding someone else), and
Jeroen wrote:
I thought beautiful and brazilian guys were mutually exclusive.
Alberto replied:
[in fact, it's beautiful and guys that are mutually exclusive,
by definition of beautiful. At leat it was so when I learned
English, more than a quarter of a century ago]
Yes and no. By
At 09:16 PM 10/30/2002 +0100 J. van Baardwijk wrote:
You were not ignoring *me*, you were ignoring my questions and my requests
for proof for your claims.
If I was not ignoring you, why did you start sending your questions for me
to all of my e-mail addresses that you knew about, so as to find a
Jean-Louis Couturier wrote:
I'd have separate scores for dings received an dings given. If Erik's
codes are applied to dings received, we could have a code for dingers
along the lines of Tolerant, Capricious and Opinion Police
Now *that* would be interesting... ;o)
Sonja
Erik Reuter wrote:
Maybe we could also have things that decrease your ding number. Not
dongs (I give you the dong! :-) ummm, tips or nods? Or you could call
them kisses (or carresses, or ...) and then the codes for people who use
them would mean friendly, promiscuous, and real whore.
It
I'm trying to find out what the problem is: I just got
Sonja's post on this, but Jim's was already in my
inbox before lunch, so clearly others received it in
timely fashion.
We have a T1 line at the office; emails from my
Hotmail to Yahoo accounts and vice versa take no more
than moments - 5
At 18:02 29-10-2002 +0100, Sonja van Baardwijk-Holten wrote:
Out of context from exchange between Debbi and Nick:
Debbi:
I must once again respectfully disagree. Anonymous dings, no matter the
value they are given, go against the idea of transparency. If someone
dings me, I want to know who
At 13:03 29-10-2002 -0500, Jim Sharkey wrote:
Jeroen can be difficult at times, and yes he bugs me sometimes as I do
him, I'm sure,
OH YES! GRIN
Jeroen Where's the bug spray? van Baardwijk
__
Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L
--- J. van Baardwijk wrote:
Sonja van Baardwijk-Holten wrote:
Out of context from exchange between Debbi and
Nick:
Debbi:
I must once again respectfully disagree.
Anonymous dings, no matter the
value they are given, go against the idea of
transparency. If someone
dings me, I
At 13:27 29-10-2002 -0800, Deborah Harrell wrote:
And after further consideration, I have to agree with Erik that
anonymous dinging should be severely penalized.
Excellent idea. So, what type of penalty did you have in mind for those
anonymous dingers? Hanging? Beheading? Bullet through the
De : Deborah Harrell [mailto:harrellmedleg;yahoo.com]
And after further consideration, I have to agree with
Erik that anonymous dinging should be severely
penalized. If allowed at all. And you ought to try
talking it out offlist first [*politely*], as somebody
has already suggested.
I
--- Julia wrote:
Deborah Harrell wrote:
I'm trying to find out what the problem is: I just
got
Sonja's post on this, but Jim's was already in my
inbox before lunch, so clearly others received it
in timely fashion.
We have a T1 line at the office; emails from my
Hotmail to Yahoo
--- J. van Baardwijk wrote:
Deborah Harrell wrote:
And after further consideration, I have to agree
with Erik that
anonymous dinging should be severely penalized.
Excellent idea. So, what type of penalty did you
have in mind for those
anonymous dingers? Hanging? Beheading? Bullet
Deborah Harrell wrote:
--- Julia wrote:
Deborah Harrell wrote:
I'm trying to find out what the problem is: I just
got
Sonja's post on this, but Jim's was already in my
inbox before lunch, so clearly others received it
in timely fashion.
We have a T1 line at the office;
Debbi wrote:
And after further consideration, I have to agree with
Erik that anonymous dinging should be severely
penalized. If allowed at all. And you ought to try
talking it out offlist first [*politely*], as somebody
has already suggested.
Somehow, the thought of anonymous dinging had
Jim Sharkey wrote:
BUT I'm really absolutely totally completely sick and tired of
people telling me what an 'ignorant fool', 'arrogant basterd'
or 'fucking son of a bitch' etc my husband is.
Well, that's just plain messed up. The folks that have the
temerity to insult your
At 06:02 PM 10/29/2002 +0100 Sonja van Baardwijk-Holten wrote:
My opinion on listmail is that if you don't
like what somebody has to say, ignore it. People have a right to an
opinion, fortunatly others have just as much right to ignore it. Use
that right. Use filters, be it just mere mental or
Reggie Bautista wrote:
Somehow, the thought of anonymous dinging had never
entered my mind before this discussion started. Since
I first heard mention of dinging, I always assumed it
would be an open, transparent process. Personally,
I'd like to see the ding-er give an explanation to the
- Original Message -
From: Steve Sloan II [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2002 10:32 PM
Subject: Re: test
Reggie Bautista wrote:
Somehow, the thought of anonymous dinging had never
entered my mind before this discussion started. Since
I first
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:brin-l-bounces;mccmedia.com]On
Behalf Of Jim Sharkey
[snip]
Do we know if he intended for the dings to be anonymous? Anyone?
I know! At first, that was the thought, but that was because DB borrowed
the notion from live chat, where
At 07:17 27-10-2002 -0800, Nick Arnett wrote:
Why not make a webpage (I hereby volunteer some space at Brin-L.com for
it) that lists the full history of Brin-L dinging then? It will make
the system more transparent, and it will be easy to notice by everyone
if someone is trying to abuse the
At 16:56 27-10-2002 -0600, Julia Thompson wrote:
Well, if in the end the net result is slowing of messages, if we want to
limit it to one *unanswered* ding per dinger per dingee per day and allow
unlimited back-and-forthing of it, what that will do is to greatly limit
the amount of traffic
At 06:27 27-10-2002 -0600, Adam Lipscomb wrote intolerantly:
Maybe we should just permanently ban misbehaving listmembers, like the
ones that make threats to hold the list hostage to their idea of how we
should behave.
GREAT. I ALREADY WAS A NAZI AND AN ANTI-SEMITE (ACCORDING TO SOME VERY
Jeroen wrote:
GREAT.
*snipped some apparent typographical errors*
I WILL ONCE AGAIN ... BE ... SHUTTING UP
*more snippage - editing mine*
Jeroen, I appreciate your decision on this. I know it
came hard to you, but it's a big step, and I'm proud
of you.
I look forward to reading your
At 17:18 26-10-2002 -0500, Julia Thompson wrote:
What I would like would be an automated[1] system with web-based
interface where the dinger indicates who they want to ding, with a field
for explanation for the ding, and for anonymous dinging to be possible,
but penalized; the dingee would be
At 00:20 27-10-2002 -0500, Dan Minette wrote:
Our aim is to find a set of rules, or heuristics, that prevent abuse --
not necessarily the possibility of abuse, but certainly from a
practical standpoint.
That makes sense. I support the idea of dings because it allows the
community to slow
Jeroen wrote:
At 00:20 27-10-2002 -0500, Dan Minette wrote:
That makes sense. I support the idea of dings because it allows
the
community to slow down mail bombs, quiet flame wars, etc. without
throwing anyone off.
Dinging will not stop it, it will only delay it. The only difference
will
Nick wrote (I think)
It is quite literally a moderating effect.
Jeroen replied.
EXACTLY! Which is exactly why this is a bad idea -- it goes straight
against David Brin's wishes that this list be unmoderated.
Not all moderation is created equal. I would be opposed to moderation or
- Original Message -
From: Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2002 9:17 AM
Subject: RE: test
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:brin-l-bounces;mccmedia.com]On
Behalf Of J. van Baardwijk
...
Sounds like
Dan Minette wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2002 9:17 AM
Subject: RE: test
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:brin-l-bounces;mccmedia.com]On
Behalf Of J. van Baardwijk
- Original Message -
From: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2002 11:08 AM
Subject: Re: test
Dan Minette wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2002
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:brin-l-bounces;mccmedia.com]On
Behalf Of Dan Minette
...
I think that is reasonable. But, I've got a neat, IMHO,
variation on that.
If person A dings person B, who dings back, person A should be
free to ding
again. But, then
Dan Minette wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2002 11:08 AM
Subject: Re: test
Dan Minette wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED
At 11:42 PM 10/26/02, William Taylor wrote:
Ten dings = one dong
Ronn Blankenship wrote:
And 10 dongs = 1 dung?
That makes an odd sort of sense, because if we ever need that
many dings, it will probably be during a major shit-storm... ;-)
1 - 100 of 135 matches
Mail list logo
