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 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 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Do not quote messages that were sent to you by other people in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
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
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 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
41 matches
Mail list logo
