On 3/8/07, Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, 2007-03-08 at 21:03 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Tom Wesley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Please could you stop attempting to create new threads by replying to
> > existing emails to the list? It's considered bad netiquette an
On Thu, 2007-03-08 at 21:03 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Tom Wesley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Please could you stop attempting to create new threads by replying to
> > existing emails to the list? It's considered bad netiquette and
> > generally makes new threads difficult to spot. The
Tom Wesley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please could you stop attempting to create new threads by replying to
> existing emails to the list? It's considered bad netiquette and
> generally makes new threads difficult to spot. The list is hard enough
> to parse as it is, without this added hindranc
If you really wanna flamefest... at least do it in private in our
forums: http://forums.gentoo.org (SSL enabled, if you want). At least
the flames will remain internal! :)
On 3/8/07, Tom Wesley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 08, 2007 at 02:50:11PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi,
>
On Thu, Mar 08, 2007 at 02:50:11PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi,
>
> to place my personal opinion, too but seperated from information/facts:
>
> I feel like a netiquette should be developed, people who break it too often
> should be warned, then banned.
> When the situation normalizes ag
Hi,
to place my personal opinion, too but seperated from information/facts:
I feel like a netiquette should be developed, people who break it too often
should be warned, then banned.
When the situation normalizes again, there will be no banning anymore anyway
automatically.
Would be nice to kn
