Re: The probes have worked.

Hello Jimmie, Wednesday, May 19, 2004, 8:40:49 AM, Jimmie Toney wrote: JT> I think it is great to be on a list where the moderator cares enough JT> to take the steps to remove something like this. Thanks again and no JT> problem from here with the probes. Agreed. BTW I like that tagline. :-) --

Re: The probes have worked.

Hello Leif! On Wednesday, May 19, 2004, 12:15 PM, you wrote: Mary>> I was 100 per cent *for* what you were doing. LG> Thanks Tril... If we're not careful, people will begin to think LG> we pay you to say nice things about us! If we were on tbot, I would promise, at this point, not to tell the

Re: The probes have worked.

Hello Eddie, Wednesday, May 19, 2004, 7:50:07 AM, you wrote: Eddie> It was an inconvenience also for me as I got around 6-8 such Eddie> messages. At the End I really thought it was Spam so have to Eddie> move it back to 'normal'. Leif, but this inconvenience was for Eddie> a good cause to keep thi

Re: The probes have worked.

Hello Mary, Tuesday, May 18, 2004, 7:18:48 PM, you wrote: Mary> I was 100 per cent *for* what you were doing. I hope my small Mary> joke about finding my first two probes inedible and putting them Mary> in the trash wasn't taken the wrong way!! Thanks Tril... If we're not careful, people will be

Re: The probes have worked.

Hello Kevin! On Wednesday, May 19, 2004, 10:33 AM, you wrote, in part: KC> After reading this thread I can begin to appreciate how undesirable KC> these C/R systems can be. While spam is definitely annoying, with KC> BayesIT or the many other solutions that work with The Bat!, C/R KC> simply isn'

Re: The probes have worked.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Mary, On Tue, 18 May 2004 22:49:11 -0500 (11:49 PM here), Mary Bull [MB] wrote in : MB> It would have been more than annoyance for me, if the mail from MB> RiskFreeMail had arrived in my Inbox before I read about the MB> pro

Re: The probes have worked.

Hallo Leif, -->> Mittwoch, 19. Mai 2004, 02:54:49: > We have discovered the true address for the user who subscribed with > an improperly configured C/R system. > Right now the moderators are bidding, arguing, punching and slapping > to see who will get to delete that subscriber with extreme

Re: The probes have worked.

Hello MAU, Wednesday, May 19, 2004, 8:27:01 AM, you wrote: MAU> Nope. I never ask for Reading Confirmation anywhere and I got MAU> quite a few mails from RiskFreeMail.com, I am not sure if it was MAU> every time I posted to the list though. Errr. No, I meant I was making an analogy in terms of be

Re: The probes have worked.

Hello Leif, > I liken it to people who post to lists with the Reading Confirmation > Flag set. Nope. I never ask for Reading Confirmation anywhere and I got quite a few mails from RiskFreeMail.com, I am not sure if it was every time I posted to the list though. -- Best regards, Miguel A. Urech

Re: The probes have worked.

Hello Jimmie, Wednesday, May 19, 2004, 7:40:49 AM, you wrote: Jimmie> I think it is great to be on a list where the moderator cares Jimmie> enough to take the steps to remove something like this. Thanks Jimmie> again and no problem from here with the probes. As Bartles and James would say, "Thank

Re: The probes have worked.

On 5/19/04, at 8:38 AM, Leif Gregory sent the following: LG> I only had one dissenting voice among you all who seemed to think our LG> attempts at making this list better was an inconvenience. LG> Thanks to all the rest of you who put up with the probes. I think it is great to be on a list whe

Re: The probes have worked.

On Tuesday, May 18, 2004, 8:54 PM, you wrote: LG> Right now the moderators are bidding, arguing, punching and slapping LG> to see who will get to delete that subscriber with extreme prejudice. hey, wait, don't we get a vote??? just walk softly and carry a big trout! LG> I only had one dissentin

Re: The probes have worked.

Hello Kevin! On Tuesday, May 18, 2004, 9:44 PM, you wrote, in part: KC> Thanks for the background information. I'm not a fan of the C/R KC> philosophy. It seems much too annoying when controlling spam can KC> simply be resolved by having an efficient spam filtering system. It would have been mor

Re: The probes have worked.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Leif, On Tue, 18 May 2004 20:02:14 -0600 (10:02 PM here), Leif Gregory [LG] wrote in : KC>> I have to ask can you now disclose the purpose of the probes KC>> and what the initial problem was? If I missed the original th

Re: The probes have worked.

Hi Kevin, On Tue, 18 May 2004, at 21:42:49 [GMT -0400] (which was 7:42 PM where I live) you wrote: KC> I have to ask can you now disclose the purpose of the probes KC> and what the initial problem was? If I missed the original thread KC> can you point me in the right direction? A user subscr

Re: The probes have worked.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Leif, On Tue, 18 May 2004 18:54:49 -0600 (8:54 PM here), Leif Gregory [LG] wrote in : LG> We have discovered the true address for the user who subscribed with LG> an improperly configured C/R system. I have to ask can

Re: The probes have worked.

Hello Leif! On Tuesday, May 18, 2004, 7:54 PM, you wrote: LG> We have discovered the true address for the user who subscribed with LG> an improperly configured C/R system. Hooray for our persistent, smart moderators! LG> Right now the moderators are bidding, arguing, punching and slapping LG> t

The probes have worked.

Hello users, We have discovered the true address for the user who subscribed with an improperly configured C/R system. Right now the moderators are bidding, arguing, punching and slapping to see who will get to delete that subscriber with extreme prejudice. I only had one dissenting voice among