Re: spam (was: re: code duplication)

2017-08-27 Thread chohag
leo_...@volny.cz writes:
>
> Lesson: never configure a public machine to misbehave. People might be
> trying to get work done and take offense if they're stopped in that rude
> manner (just a huge delay, 'permission denied' and closing the connection
> would've IMO certainly sufficed).

Excuse me, I apologise to butt in on what clearly of great importance to
the future development of OpenBSD but I've not really been paying this
argument much attention and I want to clear something up.

Is this farce all because you're upset that a machine insulted you?

Matthew



fu: spam (was: re: code duplication)

2017-08-27 Thread leo_tck
I wrote:
> Look at the uproar it created here...

Okay *sigh*, I can see how this can be misinterpreted; what I meant was
that someone offended (in this case somewhat unwittingly) created the
uproar, specifically, me.

I'm never too good to shoot flak at myself, don't worry...

--schaafuit.



spam (was: re: code duplication)

2017-08-27 Thread leo_tck
Hi,

bytevolc...@safe-mail.net wrote:
> Just a tip from an outsider.

Those are always more than welcome :)

> I would suggest you show a little sympathy for those who are getting
> spammed by useless Nigerian scammers, cryptovirus authors, and the
> like, claiming to be some kind of "Head of Financial Business
> Management Department Business Managing Director" or some other sort of
> made up title.

Yeah, that's why I normally use a maildir w/ a notification filter -- I
don't get alterted if the message contains certain terms. And at the end
of the day, it's easy to get rid of such messages using something along
the lines of 'fgrep | cut | xargs rm'.

Having to go through them with mail(1) must be a real horror...

> It would do you a lot better than whinging over a generic piece of text
> that wasn't directed specifically towards you anyway, and then calling
> people names,

That's your misconception, right there. I called the machine a jerkass,
and whether its admin is or not remains to be seen (I sent him an
apology, just in case he indeed took it personally, but I'm still
awaiting a potential answer).

> then whinging when your behaviour gets called out.

Lesson: never configure a public machine to misbehave. People might be
trying to get work done and take offense if they're stopped in that rude
manner (just a huge delay, 'permission denied' and closing the connection
would've IMO certainly sufficed).

Look at the uproar it created here...

> If I received the same piece of text, the first thought would be that
> at least the OpenBSD mailing list maintainer thinks the same way as I
> do about spammers.

That they should die in hell, or worse? Sure I agree! But not at the
expense of breaking e-mail in any manner. Then the forces of evil just
win.

> I even had a recent spammer impersonate Theo de
> Raadt!

That doesn't sound like a spammer to me, that sounds personal. Was it
in bulk?

> This is why the OLPC rubbish that went on about a decade ago did not
> sit well with me.

'cause every child might be a potential suicide bo^W^Wspammer? :X

Though I agree w/ you that it's rubbish.

--schaafuit.