Re: Technical problem, or something far worse? :o(
Nick said: > We have never "covertly moderated" anyone on this list, nor do I > plan to do so. That's all I wanted to know. Thanks. Rich ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Technical problem, or something far worse? :o(
On Nov 9, 2004, at 7:32 AM, Horn, John wrote: Behalf Of Alberto Monteiro If I were a .nler and I wanted to break into the list to cause trouble, I would _never_ use a .nl address. There are so many other free emailiers, like yahoo, hotmail, etc. Alberto has a point. I've suffered from the paranoia that anyone from that particular address might be a certain someone. Perhaps it's time to put that behind us? We can't judge an entire country on the basis of one individual, can we? No, we can't, but as I wrote in an off-list message to an anonymous friend in the Netherlands, the reality is that showing up with an email address from the same ISP as a certain individual, having extraordinarily detailed information about the list's troubles with that certain individual (despite the fact that the list archives at mccmedia.com don't even go back that far) , and immediately launching the same kinds of attacks as that certain individual on the same three or four people on the list as that certain individual naturally leads one to assume that you /are/ that certain individual. My advice to my anonymous friend in the Netherlands was to sign up from Yahoo and don't act like that certain individual. Dave ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Technical problem, or something far worse? :o(
- Original Message - From: "Horn, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 9:32 AM Subject: RE: Technical problem, or something far worse? :o( >Alberto has a point. I've suffered from the paranoia that anyone >from that particular address might be a certain someone. Perhaps >it's time to put that behind us? We can't judge an entire country >on the basis of one individual, can we? We can't...but that's not what's being done. Historically, what fraction of annonomous .nl posters have been him? It might be 100%, but it is definately over 50%. Thus, while it would be unreasonable to reject all .nl posts, a strong suspicion that a new, annonomous .nl poster is him is very justified. All posters are on moderation to begin with. Watching the posts to determine if there is other evidence (familiary with list members) is prudent. A note to the poster asking for some identitywith an explaintion for the reasons, does not seem out of line. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Technical problem, or something far worse? :o(
> Behalf Of Alberto Monteiro > > Robert Seeberger wrote: > > > > In Sonja's case, well she and anyone > > who has an .nl address suffers fallout from one certain persons bad > > behavior and frequent efforts to break into the list. > > > If I were a .nler and I wanted to break into the list to cause > trouble, I would _never_ use a .nl address. There are so many > other free emailiers, like yahoo, hotmail, etc. Alberto has a point. I've suffered from the paranoia that anyone from that particular address might be a certain someone. Perhaps it's time to put that behind us? We can't judge an entire country on the basis of one individual, can we? - jmh ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Technical problem, or something far worse? :o(
Richard Baker wrote: I don't recall Sonja ever saying anything that might justify her messages being moderated for any reason other than having subscribed a new address. Her *address* was moderated briefly because, as she mentioned in her next message, the list suddenly started receiving spam with her return address. We don't know how or why. None of her legitimate list mail was ever blocked. When it seemed to stop, we removed the moderation flag. If she has been put on moderation for any reason other than this, I too would like to know when and why, and I'd also like to know if anybody else is being covertly moderated. We have never "covertly moderated" anyone on this list, nor do I plan to do so. Nor do I expect to become a perfect list manager, either in reality or in the eyes of any subscribers. Nor do I expect immunity from criticism, even though part of me fantasizes that I deserve it. Nick ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Technical problem, or something far worse? :o(
Robert Seeberger wrote: > > In Sonja's case, well she and anyone > who has an .nl address suffers fallout from one certain persons bad > behavior and frequent efforts to break into the list. > If I were a .nler and I wanted to break into the list to cause trouble, I would _never_ use a .nl address. There are so many other free emailiers, like yahoo, hotmail, etc. Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Technical problem, or something far worse? :o(
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sonja said: Shees indeed. I'm still wondering what all this gall's got to do with MY complaint. I'm my own person and I think I've earned my stripes on this list for being an earnest, concerned and carefull poster. Thus this, your behaviour towards _me_ is totally unwarrented and completely undeserved. I don't recall Sonja ever saying anything that might justify her messages being moderated for any reason other than having subscribed a new address. If she has been put on moderation for any reason other than this, I too would like to know when and why, and I'd also like to know if anybody else is being covertly moderated. Rich I'm sorry that I was unclear about that. It is how I percieved the actions as I felt were taken against me. It's not what was actually happening that made me go ballistic, but the lack of information about it that did it. And I feel that that had to do with a serious lack of transparency. Afterwards Julia apologised and I accepted the appology. BUT ... ...at the time it felt really very bad especially since the rational part of the explanation came from Julia, not Nick. I eventually took it in good faith, but considering the whole of the picture I'm getting now, I am seriously questioning myself whether that was a wise decision, seen the animosity toward me in all of Nick's responses that is. And not only this time around. I'm not one to hold a grudge easily but I never forget either. As a result of this whole moderation mess because of spoofing, and a few other less nice surprises like not being able to subscribe a new adress, without explaination, a few off remarks against my person. It's starting to add up in my mind. For a while now I've been filtering brin-l for moderated posts, so that is how I now automatically know when people are moderated, including me. I'm suspicious about it and I have questioned moderation decisions off-list before, and always got nice and polite answers FROM JULIA, never from Nick. So after all this, I now have to say that the whole incident at the time seriously did stop me from posting for a very long while. And call me crazy, but at the moment I really don't feel all that welcome here anymore. No and I'm not fishing for compliments, it's just how I feel about the list. Or should I say the listowner. Sonja :o( GCU: I still reserve the right to be critical, even if the list owner hates it. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Technical problem, or something far worse? :o(
- Original Message - From: "Richard Baker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 4:45 AM Subject: Re: Technical problem, or something far worse? :o( > Sonja said: > > > Shees indeed. I'm still wondering what all this gall's got to do > > with MY complaint. I'm my own person and I think I've earned my > > stripes on this list for being an earnest, concerned and carefull > > poster. Thus this, your behaviour towards _me_ is totally > > unwarrented and completely undeserved. > > I don't recall Sonja ever saying anything that might justify her > messages being moderated for any reason other than having subscribed a > new address. If she has been put on moderation for any reason other than > this, I too would like to know when and why, and I'd also like to know > if anybody else is being covertly moderated. > You can be moderated if someone spoofs your address for spamming. It has happened to me, but that is something you deal with in order to fight a persistent evil. In Sonja's case, well she and anyone who has an .nl address suffers fallout from one certain persons bad behavior and frequent efforts to break into the list. It is this persons fixations that are the cause of such woes. But, I think the Moderators could send a message explaining why one is being moderated when moderation is applied. It would be a transparent policy to do so, and would spare Sonja a great deal of grief. As things are, I think it a bit unfair to leave her with a situation that often causes her to believe that she is the victim of an old prejudice. I do not believe there is such a bias on the part of the moderators, but I can also see where someone could get the idea that there is. xponent Off To Work Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Technical problem, or something far worse? :o(
Sonja said: > Shees indeed. I'm still wondering what all this gall's got to do > with MY complaint. I'm my own person and I think I've earned my > stripes on this list for being an earnest, concerned and carefull > poster. Thus this, your behaviour towards _me_ is totally > unwarrented and completely undeserved. I don't recall Sonja ever saying anything that might justify her messages being moderated for any reason other than having subscribed a new address. If she has been put on moderation for any reason other than this, I too would like to know when and why, and I'd also like to know if anybody else is being covertly moderated. Rich ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Technical problem, or something far worse? :o(
Sorry about the time lapse in the thread, but I had to seriously cool off before I did something rash. Nick Arnett wrote: Sonja van Baardwijk-Holten wrote: [Various complaints snipped.] From the e-mail that *everyone* receives when they subscribe: "Your first messages will be moderated. If you do not see your message appear on the list, give it some time, and if it still hasn't appeared in a few hours, e-mail the admins. Please don't send the same message repeatedly." How much more transparent can we be? How about something along the line of: 'As a new member your first ten messages will be moderated. If further moderation is in order you will be informed accordingly.' And when people are moderated suddenly (like you did to me a couple of times) it would be nice to be informed of the reason and the time you think it'll take to resolve the problem. I hope that isn't too rational for you? Wouldn't it be more transparent to the newer people to note your relationship to the Netherlander who was at the center of so much trouble related to moderation? I guess you are talking about your percieved nemesis that is my husband who once was one of the greater members of brin-l. Any transparency you're like to offer about "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"? Huh? What are you talking about? It's not one of mine. I checked. But since we are throwing accusations around is there any chance on giving me some transparency on the refusal to subscribe any (all three in fact) of my other freeler adresses _you'd_ like to offer? Sheesh. Shees indeed. I'm still wondering what all this gall's got to do with MY complaint. I'm my own person and I think I've earned my stripes on this list for being an earnest, concerned and carefull poster. Thus this, your behaviour towards _me_ is totally unwarrented and completely undeserved. I've been subject to a number of your 'returned mail' because of 'rejected by the moderator' surprises. No explaination ever recieved. You know how very injust that feels when in the middle of a heated discussion conducted by the rules of politeness? I for one feel very insulted and totally ticked off. I don't mind being moderated but at least I'd like to know why I'm being moderated and how long this is going to last for. And that is exactly BECAUSE your motives in moderating f.i. little ol' me, cannot always be considered innocuous, as shown perfectly by your response toward what I see as a valid complaint from me as a person previously subjected to what I at the time percieved to be moderation on a whim. Sonja :o( GCU: Lack of empathy ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
