Klistvud klist...@gmail.com writes:
c) the *fact* of going private is indication enough of the person's
intention
Sadly, it is not. There are a lot of people that are not very facile
with their MUA...
-Miles
--
Politics, n. A strife of interests masquerading as a contest of
principles.
On Jo, 12 mai 11, 15:28:03, Freeman wrote:
[big snip]
Except for top posting. That's an absolute. :)
Well, it can be argued that bottom-posting-without-trimming is even
worse :p
Regards,
Andrei
--
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
On Jo, 12 mai 11, 16:20:39, Klistvud wrote:
Dne, 12. 05. 2011 12:21:49 je Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. napisal(a):
+1 all all points made by Boyd and Klistvud.
Regards,
Andrei
--
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
On Thu, 12 May 2011 16:10:45 -0700, Robert Holtzman wrote:
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 08:30:49PM +, Camale�n wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2011 11:55:48 -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Lisi wrote:
It is list policy not to send private replies to list mail. And I
thought that it was rude of you
On Thu, 12 May 2011 16:57:53 -0700, Robert Holtzman wrote:
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 09:59:42AM +, Camale�n wrote:
.snip
I'm fine if someone asks me off-list about anything (I reply almost all
of them) but something that is being discussed in a public thread
On Friday 13 May 2011 15:43:43 Camaleón wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2011 16:57:53 -0700, Robert Holtzman wrote:
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 09:59:42AM +, Camale�n wrote:
.snip
I'm fine if someone asks me off-list about anything (I reply almost all
of them) but
Hello teddi...@tmo.blackberry.net,
Am 2011-05-11 12:43:29, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
I try to ignore threads like these, but here's a few thoughts...
This list receives a good 100 messages any given day, and your complaining
about a couple bogus messages that make it through?
Hello Camaleón,
Am 2011-05-11 20:30:49, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
As a rule of thumb I always *reply* to the list and *resend* to the list
all the messages I receive, unless:
1/ I know beforehand the person is replying me and can easily see the
user wants to go private.
1+
2/ The
On Friday 13 May 2011 22:52:17 Michelle Konzack wrote:
What are you talking about? You mail make no sense to me...
Please learn to reply correctly
TeddyB's email is fine, and perfectly comprehensible. Presumably you find it
difficult because you are not a native speaker. (Incidentally, it
For hopefully my last remark on this thread, I urge that anybody's decision
(to whom to reply) err rather on the side of courtesy than on its dismissal.
Otherwise, for starters, your message will reduce to the power you feel in
being untrustworthy.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Wed, 11 May 2011 23:24:30 -0500, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
On 2011-05-11 17:35:20 Freeman wrote:
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 08:30:49PM +, Camaleón wrote:
(...)
IMHO, that rule lacks the following preface: Should a user states
his/ her desire to keep a private conversation...
+1
In pan.2011.05.12.09.59...@gmail.com, Camaleón wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2011 23:24:30 -0500, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
On 2011-05-11 17:35:20 Freeman wrote:
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 08:30:49PM +, Camaleón wrote:
IMHO, that rule lacks the following preface: Should a user states
his/ her
On Wed, 11 May 2011 20:11:47 -0400, PMA wrote:
Camaleón wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2011 11:55:48 -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Lisi wrote:
Do not quote messages that were sent to you by other people in
private mail, unless agreed beforehand.
IMHO, that rule lacks the following preface: Should
In pan.2011.05.12.10.29...@gmail.com, Camaleón wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2011 20:11:47 -0400, PMA wrote:
Camaleón wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2011 11:55:48 -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Lisi wrote:
Do not quote messages that were sent to you by other people in
private mail, unless agreed beforehand.
On Thu, 12 May 2011 05:21:49 -0500, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
In pan.2011.05.12.09.59...@gmail.com, Camaleón wrote:
It's nearly impossible to infer whether the sender meant the message
to be private or not.
No, it is not.
I am writing to a public mailing list and I expect that any reply
On Thu, 12 May 2011 05:49:53 -0500, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
In pan.2011.05.12.10.29...@gmail.com, Camaleón wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2011 20:11:47 -0400, PMA wrote:
Camaleón wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2011 11:55:48 -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Lisi wrote:
Do not quote messages that were sent
Camaleón said:
It's nearly impossible to infer whether the sender meant the message to
be private or not.
No, it is not.
I am writing to a public mailing list and I expect that any reply to any
of what I wrote on it is kept the same -public- and directed to the
mailing list.
So as I am not
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 8:16 AM, teddi...@tmo.blackberry.net wrote:
+20
Oh and as far as that thing I said about having Cred, Camaleón assist more
people on this list than just about anyone, so he's got Cred.
Pick your battles a bit wiser.
TeddyB
I have tried (rather well) to steer
Dne, 12. 05. 2011 12:21:49 je Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. napisal(a):
In pan.2011.05.12.09.59...@gmail.com, Camaleón wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2011 23:24:30 -0500, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
On 2011-05-11 17:35:20 Freeman wrote:
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 08:30:49PM +, Camaleón wrote:
IMHO, that
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 11:24:30PM -0500, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
On 2011-05-11 17:35:20 Freeman wrote:
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 08:30:49PM +, Camaleón wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2011 11:55:48 -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Lisi wrote:
It is list policy not to send private replies to
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 02:15:55PM -0700, evenso wrote:
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 11:24:30PM -0500, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
On 2011-05-11 17:35:20 Freeman wrote:
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 08:30:49PM +, Camaleón wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2011 11:55:48 -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 08:30:49PM +, Camale�n wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2011 11:55:48 -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Lisi wrote:
It is list policy not to send private replies to list mail. And I
thought that it was rude of you to email me privately, not to mention
unpleasant.
What
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 09:59:42AM +, Camale�n wrote:
.snip
I'm fine if someone asks me off-list about anything (I reply almost all
of them) but something that is being discussed in a public thread should
be kept public... unless (I repeat) the user
Actually Re: Posting Style (nevermind a new thread):
It seems to me that bottom-posting is for people who want to read
in one direction, while top-posting is for people who want to see the
current message immediately.
I am wedded to the latter by profession, game in any case for either,
and
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 8:22 PM, PMA peterarmstr...@aya.yale.edu wrote:
Actually Re: Posting Style (nevermind a new thread):
It seems to me that bottom-posting is for people who want to read
in one direction, while top-posting is for people who want to see the
current message immediately.
I
Sorry, i did not cc to the list:
Chris Brennan wrote:
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 8:22 PM, PMApeterarmstr...@aya.yale.edu wrote:
Actually Re: Posting Style (nevermind a new thread):
It seems to me that bottom-posting is for people who want to read
in one direction, while top-posting is for
Chris Brennan writes:
This list and many others policy is to bottom-post.
With appropriate trimming of quoted material.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 10:03:52AM -0400, Chris Brennan wrote:
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 8:16 AM, teddi...@tmo.blackberry.net wrote:
+20
Oh and as far as that thing I said about having Cred, Camaleón assist more
people on this list than just about anyone, so he's got Cred.
Pick your
Putting this back on list.
-- Forwarded Message --
Subject: Re: [OT] Re: Defending yourself
Date: Wednesday 11 May 2011
From: Jeroen van Aart jer...@mompl.net
To: Lisi lisi.re...@gmail.com
Lisi wrote:
I have used this list for some years now, and find it to be very well
Lisi wrote:
Putting this back on list.
This was a private email. It was not meant to be sent to the list. I
would think it's generally accepted that it's rather rude to do so.
--
http://goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/
http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/faq/plural-of-virus.html
--
To
Jeroen Van Aart wrote:
I see one of the main reasons spam emails actually make it to the list
is the policy of allowing non subscribers to email the list. I find this
policy, even though it's commendable, not something suited for this day
and age of email abuse.
[...]
A mailing list
On Wednesday 11 May 2011 08:31:36 Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Lisi wrote:
Putting this back on list.
This was a private email. It was not meant to be sent to the list. I
would think it's generally accepted that it's rather rude to do so.
--
http://goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/
On May 11, 2011 4:33 AM, Lisi lisi.re...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday 11 May 2011 08:31:36 Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Lisi wrote:
Putting this back on list.
This was a private email. It was not meant to be sent to the list. I
would think it's generally accepted that it's rather rude to
On Wednesday 11 May 2011 09:53:38 shawn wilson wrote:
On May 11, 2011 4:33 AM, Lisi lisi.re...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday 11 May 2011 08:31:36 Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Ahhh, I read threads like this on reddit (and other online forums) when I'm
bored or just want to cringe at something. I
2011/5/11 Andrei Popescu andreimpope...@gmail.com:
I think of spammers like terrorist, abusing the internet. If defending
from them makes the internet less free then they won.
If preventing non subscribers from sending email is too big of a step
you can always automatically moderate emails
I try to ignore threads like these, but here's a few thoughts...
This list receives a good 100 messages any given day, and your complaining
about a couple bogus messages that make it through?
Consider the other side of this policy, say an individual uses Debian and is
getting a given error,
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 4:53 AM, shawn wilson ag4ve...@gmail.com wrote:
Ahhh, I read threads like this on reddit (and other online forums) when I'm
bored or just want to cringe at something. I never thought the likes of that
would reach this list.
This thread has been nothing but hysterical
Lisi wrote:
It is list policy not to send private replies to list mail. And I thought
that it was rude of you to email me privately, not to mention unpleasant.
What you say is untrue. The code of conduct clearly states the following:
http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct
Do not
On Wed, 11 May 2011 11:55:48 -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Lisi wrote:
It is list policy not to send private replies to list mail. And I
thought that it was rude of you to email me privately, not to mention
unpleasant.
What you say is untrue. The code of conduct clearly states the
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Camaleón noela...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2011 11:55:48 -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
There are plenty of broken webmail services (i.e., Gmail) that by
default reply to the user's e-mail address instead to the e-mail address
of the mailing list and
On 05/11/2011 06:40 AM, consul tores wrote:
[snip]
Could you please explain which concept of terrorists are you referring to?
Real or political?
Do any terrorists have (in the broad sense of the term) non-political aims.
--
Neither the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure
the
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 08:30:49PM +, Camaleón wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2011 11:55:48 -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Lisi wrote:
It is list policy not to send private replies to list mail. And I
thought that it was rude of you to email me privately, not to mention
unpleasant.
What
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 04:54:05PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 05/11/2011 06:40 AM, consul tores wrote:
[snip]
Could you please explain which concept of terrorists are you referring to?
Real or political?
Do any terrorists have (in the broad sense of the term) non-political aims.
--
Jeroen privately mailed a reply to my message as well, in which he completely
ignored every validation to the points I made, especially the ones about
helping others before you go off trying to dictate group policy...
I find emailing somebody off list like this, especially after one user in
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 6:50 PM, teddi...@tmo.blackberry.net wrote:
Jeroen privately mailed a reply to my message as well, in which he completely
ignored every validation to the points I made, especially the ones about
helping others before you go off trying to dictate group policy...
I
It's hard to see a humble opinion (IMHO) in this, flatly denying the rule.
Camaleón wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2011 11:55:48 -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Lisi wrote:
Do not quote messages that were sent to you by other people in private
mail, unless agreed beforehand.
IMHO, that rule lacks the
On 2011-05-11 03:32:58 Lisi wrote:
On Wednesday 11 May 2011 08:31:36 Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Lisi wrote:
Putting this back on list.
This was a private email. It was not meant to be sent to the list. I
would think it's generally accepted that it's rather rude to do so.
It is list policy not
On 20110511_084522, Andrei Popescu wrote:
On Ma, 10 mai 11, 13:42:34, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
Not forgotten, but a consequence of the policy decision to let
Debian lists be open.
I question the wisdom of that decision. There are ways to, on the
one hand not hinder
On 2011-05-11 17:35:20 Freeman wrote:
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 08:30:49PM +, Camaleón wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2011 11:55:48 -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Lisi wrote:
It is list policy not to send private replies to list mail. And I
thought that it was rude of you to email me privately,
On 2011-05-11 17:50:25 teddi...@tmo.blackberry.net wrote:
Jeroen privately mailed a reply to my message as well.
And again your complaining about spam jeroen, yours is the only spam I have
seen today,
From http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/spam:
spam (countable and uncountable; plural spams)
1.
On 2011-05-11 18:11:56 shawn wilson wrote:
this thread still doesn't have an OT in the subject!
It does here: Re: Fwd: Re: [OT] Re: Defending yourself.
--
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =.
b...@iguanasuicide.net ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 01:27:55AM -0400, shawn wilson wrote:
Wrong person - meant Aaron. (Note to self - call someone out, confirm the
name)
s/Aaron/Aart/
Ahem, don't you mean Jeroen? Sorry, couldn't resist.
Cheers,
Tom
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Tom Furie wrote:
Ahem, don't you mean Jeroen? Sorry, couldn't resist.
Yeah me, thanks. :-)
Thing is, normally I see little to no spam from a mailing list. That's
because they're managed in such a way spam hasn't got a chance of
getting through.
The other thing is, it's not so much about
On 05/10/2011 02:26 AM, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Tom Furie wrote:
Ahem, don't you mean Jeroen? Sorry, couldn't resist.
Yeah me, thanks. :-)
Thing is, normally I see little to no spam from a mailing list. That's
because they're managed in such a way spam hasn't got a chance of
getting through.
Ron Johnson wrote:
Not forgotten, but a consequence of the policy decision to let Debian
lists be open.
I question the wisdom of that decision. There are ways to, on the one
hand not hinder openness much at all and on the other hand prevent spam
from getting through to the list.
The impact
On 05/10/2011 03:42 PM, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
Not forgotten, but a consequence of the policy decision to let Debian
lists be open.
I question the wisdom of that decision. There are ways to, on the one
hand not hinder openness much at all and on the other hand prevent spam
On May 10, 2011 5:07 PM, Ron Johnson ron.l.john...@cox.net wrote:
On 05/10/2011 03:42 PM, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
Not forgotten, but a consequence of the policy decision to let Debian
lists be open.
I question the wisdom of that decision. There are ways to, on the one
Ron Johnson wrote:
You're getting *for free* stupendous amounts of bandwidth and the
results of hundreds of thousands of man-hours of labor.
So, you have 3 choices:
1) Buy Windows.
2) Use another distro.
3) Shut up and be grateful.
:-)
+1
--
In theory, there is no difference between
shawn wilson wrote:
LOL. I would've tried to be a bit more graceful but the thought did cross my
mind.
The reply you are replying to didn't strike me as helpful or
constructive. Neither does a LOL style reply, but I digress.
BTW, sense we're talking mailing list policy and NOT debian (or
On Tuesday 10 May 2011 22:47:40 Jeroen van Aart wrote:
I'd gladly volunteer and take over administration of this list in order
to help prevent its abuse and make sure it runs as smoothly as possible.
I have used this list for some years now, and find it to be very well managed.
It is not
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 02:47:40PM -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
...
I'd gladly volunteer and take over administration of this list in
order to help prevent its abuse and make sure it runs as smoothly as
possible.
I'd also make available resources, for free, in order to run it, if
Jeroen writes:
I am curious if discussing list policy is on topic.
See http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ListMaster/
I'd gladly volunteer and take over administration of this list in
order to help prevent its abuse and make sure it runs as smoothly as
possible.
Excellent. The first step is to
John Hasler wrote:
Jeroen writes:
I am curious if discussing list policy is on topic.
See http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/ListMaster/
I appreciate the suggestion and I took the time to read the various
documents found. However I fear that my ideas about spam fighting and
MTAs in general (and
On Ma, 10 mai 11, 13:42:34, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
Not forgotten, but a consequence of the policy decision to let
Debian lists be open.
I question the wisdom of that decision. There are ways to, on the
one hand not hinder openness much at all and on the other hand
On 05/09/2011 11:00 PM, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
[snip]
This must be the most spam infested mailing list I have subscribed to,
and I am only subscribed for half a day, 3 or 4 spam emails in about 8
hours. Has this list list been forgotten by its maintainer(s)?
Aren't you running your own spam
On May 10, 2011 12:34 AM, Ron Johnson ron.l.john...@cox.net wrote:
On 05/09/2011 11:00 PM, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
[snip]
This must be the most spam infested mailing list I have subscribed to,
and I am only subscribed for half a day, 3 or 4 spam emails in about 8
hours. Has this list list
On 05/09/2011 11:57 PM, shawn wilson wrote:
[snip]
To Ron Johnson, do you always reply to spam or just when a thousand plus
people see it? (That's a rhetorical question btw)
I don't understand your question.
--
Neither the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure
the liberty and
On May 10, 2011 1:06 AM, Ron Johnson ron.l.john...@cox.net wrote:
On 05/09/2011 11:57 PM, shawn wilson wrote:
[snip]
To Ron Johnson, do you always reply to spam or just when a thousand plus
people see it? (That's a rhetorical question btw)
I don't understand your question.
Wrong person
On May 10, 2011 1:26 AM, shawn wilson ag4ve...@gmail.com wrote:
On May 10, 2011 1:06 AM, Ron Johnson ron.l.john...@cox.net wrote:
On 05/09/2011 11:57 PM, shawn wilson wrote:
[snip]
To Ron Johnson, do you always reply to spam or just when a thousand
plus
people see it? (That's a
69 matches
Mail list logo
