It's certainly easy to take that position (as I previously did as well), but this list does not represent the Internet as a whole and in that respect it is not comparative. This list has a very particular audience, and it has a very specific intent.
I'm here for Full Disclosure - not the town square soapbox (which I now find myself on, and I hate it). On 3/21/06, Sol Invictus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This list is unmoderated just like the entire Internet. If we're going > to moderate this list, why not the entire Internet? It's the way Al > Gore would have wanted it! > > Everyone on the Internet carries the responsibility to secure the > machines under their control. It's the same here. If people can't > control themselves, then one must take the necessary steps to protect > themselves. > > Sol. > > Micheal Espinola Jr wrote: > > >No he shouldn't. Because if people cannot moderate themselves from > >childish behavior, and if this list is the target of repeated abuse, > >it needs some sort of check. > > > >I don't think anyone here wants to see actual content moderation - and > >I don't think that's the answer to the problem anyways. And certainly > >no one wants the possibility of information not freely flowing. But > >this list NEEDS a filter of some sort. A content/SPF filter of some > >perhaps? > > > >On content: Perhaps the list can go un-moderated without allowing > >profanity - thus filtering out a lot of needless bitch sessions [and > >continued retribution] ? Certainly there are words that have no place > >in Full-Disclosure. > > > >On SPF: Perhaps some of the bogus impersonation posts would get > >caught/blocked by a simple SPF check? > > > >I don't need a public spanking for posting this. I'm only trying to > >think of a way that we can do something about what is becoming the > >serious decline of the list. I can ignore and filter my email just > >fine - but I know what's going on and I just want to see things get > >better. They seem to continuously get worse. > > > >On 3/21/06, Dave Korn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >>Edward Pearson wrote: > >> > >> > >>>I shouldn't have to get the fucking spamfilter involved when we're > >>>talking about a mailing list. > >>> > >>> > >> Yes, you fucking should. This is a NON-moderated list. There are plenty > >>of perfectly good moderated lists out there which you won't have to filter. > >>But /this/ list is a non-moderated list, on which every individual > >>subscriber is handed the full responsibility for and control over what they > >>do or do not see. That's the whole point. > >> > >> In short, exactly what you want is perfectly easily available, but you'd > >>rather complain about something else not being it. That's like filling your > >>car with diesel when it takes unleaded, complaining that your tank is now > >>full of crap that you didn't want in it, and when someone points out that > >>the other pipe on the same pump gives you unleaded you just stand there, > >>waving the diesel hose and complaining about how *this* one ought to give > >>unleaded as well because that's the one you want it to come out of. > >> > >> Go elsewhere and you will be happy. Go to bugtraq, where you *will* be > >>spoonfed the prefiltered predigested pap that appears to be what you want. > >> > >> cheers, > >> DaveK > >>-- > >>Can't think of a witty .sigline today.... > >> > >> > >> > >>_______________________________________________ > >>Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. > >>Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html > >>Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/ > >> > >> > >> > > > > > >-- > >ME2 > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. > >Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html > >Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/ > > > > > > > > -- ME2 _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
