I know how to use my delete key, although protected, I did not like the fact morning_wood deliberately sent a post with a virus....that to me is very unprpofessional and is against everything we here stand for. Maybe a previous post asking who would be interested in receiving such a post, and then emailing those people privately.
Maybe setup the list to deny attachments would do it? Thanks, -Chris- IT Director Sundowner Interiors >-----Original Message----- >From: Daniel M. Edwards [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 12:09 PM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: RE: [Full-Disclosure] Morning Wood Poll > > >The morning wood posts themselves are not what annoy me. It >is the barrage >of posts that follow that do. Both sides of this argument are >guilty. The >anti-wood party posts how Morning Wood is a moron after he >posts then the >pro-wood party responses by calling that person a moron. It just keeps >going until I have 40 e-mails that can be summed by "Am Not" >and "Are Too". > > >I like the idea for two full-disclosure lists one for >disclosures and one >for discussions. > >Daniel M. Edwards >Network Specialist >A. Duda & Sons, Inc. > >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of >David Sentelle >Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 11:27 AM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >I've already cast my vote, but I think a simple yes/no is not >sufficient for >the real solution. > >The real solution is to have a fully open full-disclosure >mailing list, only >for full-disclosure. People not disclosing vulnerabilities or >bugs would be >warned then banned on repeat offenses. > >To resolve the issue of ongoing correspondence regarding >disclosures made on >the full-disclosure list, there would be a >full-disclosure-DISCUSSION list. >That would be the 'noise' list, that would contain 99% of what >is currently >in full-disclosure. > >This post should go to the discussion list. Many of Morning >Wood's posts >would hopefully go to the discussion list, with the >disclosures he's made >going to the full-disclosure list. > >Would the addition of a discussion list, and the policy change for the >full-disclosure list, really cramp anyone's freedom of speech >or the value >of the full-disclosure list? > > > >This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and >intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they >are addressed. If you have received this e-mail in error, you are >prohibited from using, divulging any of its contents, or forwarding >this email. Please notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] and delete it from >your system. > >_______________________________________________ >Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. >Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html > >_______________________________________________ >Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. >Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html > _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
