On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 4:22 AM, xor wrote:
> On Wednesday 13 May 2009 22:48:53 Evan Daniel wrote:
>> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 4:28 PM, xor wrote:
>> > On Wednesday 13 May 2009 10:01:31 Luke771 wrote:
>> >> Thomas Sachau wrote:
>> >> > Luke771 schrieb:
>> >> >> I can't comment on the technical
On Wednesday 13 May 2009 22:48:53 Evan Daniel wrote:
> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 4:28 PM, xor wrote:
> > On Wednesday 13 May 2009 10:01:31 Luke771 wrote:
> >> Thomas Sachau wrote:
> >> > Luke771 schrieb:
> >> >> I can't comment on the technical part because I wouldnt know what im
> >> >> talking
On Wednesday 13 May 2009 22:48:53 Evan Daniel wrote:
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 4:28 PM, xor x...@gmx.li wrote:
On Wednesday 13 May 2009 10:01:31 Luke771 wrote:
Thomas Sachau wrote:
Luke771 schrieb:
I can't comment on the technical part because I wouldnt know what im
talking about.
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 4:22 AM, xor x...@gmx.li wrote:
On Wednesday 13 May 2009 22:48:53 Evan Daniel wrote:
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 4:28 PM, xor x...@gmx.li wrote:
On Wednesday 13 May 2009 10:01:31 Luke771 wrote:
Thomas Sachau wrote:
Luke771 schrieb:
I can't comment on the technical
On Wednesday 13 May 2009 10:01:31 Luke771 wrote:
> Thomas Sachau wrote:
> > Luke771 schrieb:
> >> I can't comment on the technical part because I wouldnt know what im
> >> talking about.
> >> However, I do like the 'social' part (being able to see an identity even
> >> if the censors mark it down
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 4:28 PM, xor wrote:
> On Wednesday 13 May 2009 10:01:31 Luke771 wrote:
>> Thomas Sachau wrote:
>> > Luke771 schrieb:
>> >> I can't comment on the technical part because I wouldnt know what im
>> >> talking about.
>> >> However, I do like the 'social' part (being able to
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 4:01 PM, Luke771 wrote:
> Thomas Sachau wrote:
>> Luke771 schrieb:
>>
>>> I can't comment on the technical part because I wouldnt know what im
>>> talking about.
>>> However, I do like the 'social' part (being able to see an identity even
>>> if the censors mark it down it
On Wednesday, 13. May 2009 10:24:52 Daniel Cheng wrote:
> In fms, you can always adjust the MinLocalMessageTrust to get whatever
> message you please to read. -- ya, you may call it censorship..
> but it is the one every reader can opt-out with 2 clicks. --- Even
> if majority abuse the
Thomas Sachau wrote:
> Luke771 schrieb:
>
>> I can't comment on the technical part because I wouldnt know what im
>> talking about.
>> However, I do like the 'social' part (being able to see an identity even
>> if the censors mark it down it right away as it's created)
>>
>
> "The
Thomas Sachau wrote:
Luke771 schrieb:
I can't comment on the technical part because I wouldnt know what im
talking about.
However, I do like the 'social' part (being able to see an identity even
if the censors mark it down it right away as it's created)
The censors? There is no
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 4:01 PM, Luke771 luke771.li...@gmail.com wrote:
Thomas Sachau wrote:
Luke771 schrieb:
I can't comment on the technical part because I wouldnt know what im
talking about.
However, I do like the 'social' part (being able to see an identity even
if the censors mark it
On Wednesday, 13. May 2009 10:24:52 Daniel Cheng wrote:
In fms, you can always adjust the MinLocalMessageTrust to get whatever
message you please to read. -- ya, you may call it censorship..
but it is the one every reader can opt-out with 2 clicks. --- Even
if majority abuse the
On Wednesday 13 May 2009 10:01:31 Luke771 wrote:
Thomas Sachau wrote:
Luke771 schrieb:
I can't comment on the technical part because I wouldnt know what im
talking about.
However, I do like the 'social' part (being able to see an identity even
if the censors mark it down it right away
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 4:28 PM, xor x...@gmx.li wrote:
On Wednesday 13 May 2009 10:01:31 Luke771 wrote:
Thomas Sachau wrote:
Luke771 schrieb:
I can't comment on the technical part because I wouldnt know what im
talking about.
However, I do like the 'social' part (being able to see an
14 matches
Mail list logo
