I always check signatures, by the way...
Who gave you my public key? It shouldn't be on the keyservers...
In the words of Dr. Strangelove:
Yes, but the... whole point of the doomsday machine... is lost...
if you keep it a secret! Why didn't you tell the world, eh?
pgpb0oCuaLcQD.pgp
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I always check signatures, by the way...
Who gave you my public key? It shouldn't be on the keyservers...
In the words of Dr. Strangelove:
Yes, but the... whole point of the doomsday machine... is lost...
if you keep it a secret! Why didn't you tell the world,
On Friday 06 September 2002 11:33, MonMotha wrote:
In theory it shouldn't show up as an attachment.
I get an attachment with Kmail 3.02
dean
On Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Robert Green wrote:
Perhaps the best idea would be to have a separate list centered
around the Linux for Schools project, particularly for the non-geek
types?
If the people who joined LUAU for the LTSP complain, then yes.
--jc
--
Jimen Ching (WH6BRR) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--MonMotha
P.S. Good to see another person who uses PGP :) I've been using it to
sign my firewalls for a while, but just recently got around to setting
up Enigmail to use it with mail.
+
Do you mean that attachment? (.dat file)
What is it used for? I've seen
I believe the so called list policy should actually contain a mission
statement in preference to a set of rules and regulations.
R. Scott Belford wrote:
The eventual Upcoming List Policy will not need to say much. No more than a
few intellectual objectives you all have and the means by which
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 2:08 AM
Subject: RE: [luau] IMPORTANT - Upcoming List Policy
--MonMotha
P.S. Good to see another person who uses PGP :) I've been using it to
sign my firewalls for a while, but just recently got around to setting
up Enigmail
Randall Oshita wrote:
--MonMotha
P.S. Good to see another person who uses PGP :) I've been using it to
sign my firewalls for a while, but just recently got around to setting
up Enigmail to use it with mail.
+
Do you mean that attachment? (.dat file)
What
Joe Linux wrote:
I believe the so called list policy should actually contain a mission
statement in preference to a set of rules and regulations.
Agreed. There shouldn't be any hard rules per se. Obviously don't go
posting your cursing fit because your SO just dumped you to the list.
, but obviously I
can't complain since I'm using windows to read a linux mailing list.
-Eric Hattemer
- Original Message -
From: MonMotha [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 2:33 PM
Subject: Re: [luau] IMPORTANT - Upcoming List Policy
blank as far as OE is concerned :)
On 9/6/2002 11:20 Eric Hattemer wrote:
The basic idea behind the gpg checksum in an email is that its a code that
uniquely distinguishes mon motha. If you go into your mail client and set
the from line to MonMotha and throw his email address in there, there's no
other way to verify that its
Jim McQueeney wrote:
I always check signatures, by the way...
Who gave you my public key? It shouldn't be on the keyservers...
--MonMotha
pgpPnLMkG8Ea0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On 9/6/2002 12:29 MonMotha wrote:
Jim McQueeney wrote:
I always check signatures, by the way...
Who gave you my public key? It shouldn't be on the keyservers...
--MonMotha
No one gave me your public key, and you're correct, it doesn't appear to
be on the key servers. However,
Jim McQueeney wrote:
No one gave me your public key, and you're correct, it doesn't appear to
be on the key servers. However, checking a signature doesn't imply that
the check is *always* sucessful. In your case it wasn't because I lacked
your public key...
You want it? :)
--MonMotha
On 9/6/2002 13:01 MonMotha wrote:
Jim McQueeney wrote:
No one gave me your public key, and you're correct, it doesn't appear to
be on the key servers. However, checking a signature doesn't imply that
the check is *always* sucessful. In your case it wasn't because I lacked
your public
On 4 Sep 2002, Warren Togami wrote:
1. No unsubstantiated controversial comments unless you are prepared to
back up your claims. Rational discourse is encouraged. Irrational
flames are not.
Heh...Why not require peace on earth and good will towards man. ;-)
I think trimming the qoutes is the
I don't have the money to try every new M$ release, but I don't care for
what I've tried, and I continue to believe that they have caused great
damage to competition and choice within the computer industry.
W. Wayne Liauh wrote:
As for flaming M$, have at it. They deserve it.
Microsoft is
Jimen Ching wrote:
Perhaps specialized topics like linux for schools does not belong in a
general purpose mailing list like Luau. I believe the idea of censorship
came up in the past and was shot down. Of course, videl is your server
and no one can force you to host a list you don't like.
On Thu, 2002-09-05 at 02:57, Joe Linux wrote:
Maybe the problem here is that it's too much of a one man show.
[SNIP]
I like opinions, and have no objection to a person expressing their own
feelings, beliefs, and thoughts. I enjoy controversy. What I detest is
persons who impose their own
I thought the issue here was to discourage flaming. I didn't mention
any names in my post and generally don't flame individuals.
In general terms, it's difficult to be all, and do all. Persons who
attempt this often become overly stressed out, irritable, and more often
than not,
If this is the character that
you want for this group, then please continue the bashing. Just
because all other Linux User Groups do it, does that make it right?
I consider a local user mailing list to be from the shallow trenches, with
usenet, irc to be the deeper holes and many web sites to
On Thursday 05 September 2002 03:59 am, Warren Togami wrote:
[SNIP]
I am offended that you now try to make yourself look to be the victim
and especially saying that the one man show (implying me) is to blame.
For a while now I thought you had stopped with posts that that in my
opinion
All very well put (for self explanatory reasons, and I'm choosing not to
trim this response.)
R. Scott Belford wrote:
On Thursday 05 September 2002 03:59 am, Warren Togami wrote:
[SNIP]
I am offended that you now try to make yourself look to be the victimand
Okay, I was wrong in publicly blasting George on the list. You are
right, everyone has their right to make their own opinion, and I have no
right to impose anything upon anyone. Although I personally feel
offended by what has been said, I realize that this is counterproductive
to argue. I
With the Linux for Schools project successfully underway, more and more
educators and non-techies are joining this mailing list. The
self-censorship that MonMotha mentioned would be ideal, and possibly
crucial, to keep these people interested in the Open Source community.
Wouldn't they
, 2002 12:19 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [luau] IMPORTANT - Upcoming List Policy
With the Linux for Schools project successfully underway, more and
more
educators and non-techies are joining this mailing list. The
self-censorship that MonMotha mentioned would be ideal, and possibly
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
With the Linux for Schools project successfully underway, more and more
educators and non-techies are joining this mailing list. The
self-censorship that MonMotha mentioned would be ideal, and possibly
crucial, to keep these people interested in the Open Source
On Thu, 5 Sep 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I will not support efforts to water down geek culture for the sake of
keeping appearances with the bourgeois. Tactically speaking, an informal
prohibition against some of the 'baser' elements of geek language and
culture might be a good way to attract
Perhaps the best idea would be to have a separate list centered
around the Linux for Schools project, particularly for the non-geek
types?
--- Jimen Ching [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 5 Sep 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I will not support efforts to water down geek culture for the sake
of
It seems to me that so far there has been a great mixture of basic and
advanced discussions. Some things are over my head, and some things are
under it. This seems a great way to know where one's head is.
Hopefully there will continue to be many newcomers to the list totally
intimidated by
You don't see me often on the list but I read it religiously. I have to
say though the past few days have made me wonder about the maturity of
those who contribute regularly. I have my gripes and complaints as much
as the next guy but come on. The contributions of the past couple of
days make
I prefer Internet forums which are wide open and not micro managed. As
for flaming M$, have at it. They deserve it. On the other hand I don't
think personal attacks on individuals because of their honest opinions
and feelings are in order. The delete key works fine on my computer.
If the
As for flaming M$, have at it. They deserve it.
Microsoft is indeed a very good company, and, from my own experience it does
produce very good products.
Abstractly bashing Microsoft only makes one look ignorant.
On Wed, 2002-09-04 at 03:14, Joe Linux wrote:
I prefer Internet forums which are wide open and not micro managed. As
for flaming M$, have at it. They deserve it. On the other hand I don't
think personal attacks on individuals because of their honest opinions
and feelings are in order.
On 04 Sep 2002 08:04:56 -1000
Warren Togami [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2002-09-04 at 03:14, Joe Linux wrote:
I prefer Internet forums which are wide open and not micro managed.
As for flaming M$, have at it. They deserve it. On the other hand I
don't think personal attacks on
On Wed, 2002-09-04 at 09:19, Gary Sublett wrote:
Frankly, I am more troubled by the lack of trimming and off topic
threads than the unsubstantiated controversial comments.
Thank you for your polite suggestion. I will need to look into that
later today.
I am in agreement that lack of
--- Warren Togami [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2002-09-04 at 09:19, Gary Sublett wrote:
Frankly, I am more troubled by the lack of trimming and off topic
threads than the unsubstantiated controversial comments.
Thank you for your polite suggestion. I will need to look into
that
Gary Sublett wrote:
Warren,
Of course you can take you bat and ball and go home if you want, but I
am not sure that would solve much. I have to admit your original post
on this matter troubled me a bit and sounded like there might be a
potential for unwarrented censorship.
I think what
Aloha,
2. No childish name calling - this includes Microsoft bashing. This
type of banter really pollutes the signal to noise ratio of any group.
It scares people. Really. I will elaborate more tomorrow.
I fully agree with all of these points, except for #2. Micro$oft bashing is a
On Wed, 2002-09-04 at 10:22, Robert Green wrote:
I agree with the overall ideas of the policy that was posted before,
but I think some of it is probably worded too strongly.
Yes, that was my mistake. I sent it off a bit too hastily.
In my opinion, the lack of trimming is a GLARING problem
On Wed, 4 Sep 2002 13:33:38 -1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I fully agree with all of these points, except for #2. Micro$oft
bashing is a time-honoured and loved aspect of any Linux Users Group.
It's what gives us our character! :)
cheers,
charles (writing from a Winblows machine)
In my
41 matches
Mail list logo
