Even an unmoderated list requires some filtering
of abusers. Otherwise, what good is a list charter?
my point exactly.
-d
___
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
On Fri, 11 Oct 2002, David Vincent wrote:
Even an unmoderated list requires some filtering
of abusers. Otherwise, what good is a list charter?
my point exactly.
At first, I thought the Poot messages were just spam. But the GOBBLES
identity possesses a certain amount of credibility.
As discussed to death in the past couple of weeks, if you don't like
the messages, see procmail(1) and procmailrc(5).
From http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html :
It is expected that the list will be largely self-policing, however in
special circumstances (eg spamming,
On Thu, 10 Oct 2002, Damian Gerow wrote:
Spake David Vincent on 10/10/2002, 13:41:25 -0700:
i'm a patient person, but surely the 25+ copies of this spam being sent to
the list is enough to get this address banned/bumped for at least a few
days?
spam sucks.
It's not actually gobbles
Spake David Vincent on 10/10/2002, 13:41:25 -0700:
i'm a patient person, but surely the 25+ copies of this spam being sent to
the list is enough to get this address banned/bumped for at least a few
days?
spam sucks.
It's not actually gobbles sending out the message. Check the validity
of
i'm a patient person, but surely the 25+ copies of this spam being sent to
the list is enough to get this address banned/bumped for at least a few
days?
spam sucks.
-d
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: October 10, 2002 9:13 AM
To: [EMAIL
