On Sun, 2005-05-15 at 15:41 -0400, Bill McGonigle wrote:
> Let's just make a list rule that if you post OT stuff without [OT] in
> the subject then you're asking for us to see if you have a currently
> patched version of OpenSSL on your server. Simply enforcing [OT]
> should make most everybody
Let's just make a list rule that if you post OT stuff without [OT] in
the subject then you're asking for us to see if you have a currently
patched version of OpenSSL on your server. Simply enforcing [OT]
should make most everybody happy.
I'll start the ball rolling with a procmail recipe:
:0
^
On May 12 at 12:34am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Okay, I'm going to officially request a KILLTHREAD on this topic This
thread's grown six heads, four arms, eighteen legs, and just gotten way out
of control
All in favor, type:
!kill -TERM $PPID
Okay, but what will that do%+&$NO CARRIER
__
On May 11 at 2:28pm, Jeff Kinz wrote:
Shitting on the floor is doing what comes naturally.
Discussions about the impacts of technology do come about naturally as part
of discussions about technology.
The "SOTF" point is irrelevant and raising it does no one credit.
It is not irrelevant, althoug
Numberwhun wrote:
Derek Martin wrote:
having topic police rarely helps...
Ok, so what about having it posted to the "GNHLUG Off Topic" mailing
list that was started a few months ago. Personally there have been OT
posts here to the main list, but nobody has bothered to post them
there. I thin
Okay, I'm going to officially request a KILLTHREAD on this topic
This thread's grown six heads, four arms, eighteen legs, and just
gotten way out of control
All in favor, type:
!kill -TERM $PPID
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@m
The signal on this channel is Linux; the more your
transmissions stray from Linux, the more they qualify as
noise. High S/N ratio is good, low is bad. This channel
has historically had relatively high S/N ratio and that
is its primary value, the reason we gather here.
Sadly, that is precisely
On Wed, May 11, 2005 at 08:13:26PM -0400, David Ecklein wrote:
> One who would follow Ben's apparent precedent here might well ask "who the
> h-e-double-toothpicks is Ben"? But everyone on the list knows that Ben can
> do, and usually does, better than "SOTF". In my opinion, the only thing
> wors
rom a fire hose!
Dave E.
- Original Message -
From: "Jeff Kinz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Ben Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 2:28 PM
Subject: Re: List topics (was Re: Help kill the Surveillance State Bill)
> On Wed, May 11
On Wed, May 11, 2005 at 04:57:07PM -0400, Tom Buskey wrote:
> On 5/11/05, Jeff Kinz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, May 11, 2005 at 03:10:56PM -0400, Tom Buskey wrote:
> > > Blah blah blah.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > /dev/null>
> > > *sigh*
> >
> >
>
> If that was directed at me, persona
On Wed, May 11, 2005 at 03:10:56PM -0400, Tom Buskey wrote:
> Blah blah blah.
>
>
>
> /dev/null>
> *sigh*
*sigh*
--
Jeff Kinz, Emergent Research, Hudson, MA.
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.or
Blah blah blah.
/dev/null>
*sigh*
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
On Wed, May 11, 2005 at 01:12:01PM -0400, Ben Scott wrote:
> [The order of quotations has been re-arranged for editorial purposes.]
> Derek:
> > People are going to do it anyway, and it's NOT about being rude, and it's
> > NOT
> > about being irresponsible. It's about doing what comes natural i
On 5/10/05, Derek Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think this really misses the point, which was that people want to
> discuss them here, with this group of people.
That is, apparently, incorrect.
A small number of people want to assert their opinions on a given
subject, repeatedly. A s
[The order of quotations has been re-arranged for editorial purposes.]
On 5/10/05, Derek Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Note that as with most political issues that surface on the list, this
> topic IS at least tangentially related -- it's about the politics of
> technology.
That particul
On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 09:57:13PM -0400, Numberwhun wrote:
> Derek Martin wrote:
>
> >having topic police rarely helps...
> >
>
> Ok, so what about having it posted to the "GNHLUG Off Topic" mailing
> list that was started a few months ago. Personally there have been OT
> posts here to the
Derek Martin wrote:
having topic police rarely helps...
Ok, so what about having it posted to the "GNHLUG Off Topic" mailing
list that was started a few months ago. Personally there have been OT
posts here to the main list, but nobody has bothered to post them
there. I think it was a pretty
On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 11:15:31AM -0400, Ben Scott wrote:
> Hey people!
>
> Not too long ago we had a rather prolonged discussion about whether
> political stuff like this appropriate for this forum. While a formal
> vote was not taken, informally, a clear majority voiced the opinion
> that th
18 matches
Mail list logo
