thats funny, I could have sworn I replied and addressed to jdebert, oh lookie, so I did, you just cant help yourself fool, I think we know who the paranoid delusional stalker is reindl, get help, but no one here is qualified to give you the help you need, and might i remind you again dumb fuck, I was on this list a long time before you showed up here, so check hte definition of stalk, you fruitcake, I warned you what would happen if you contact me again, what happens now is your own doing skitzo boy.
On 10/3/14, Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net> wrote: > > Am 03.10.2014 um 12:56 schrieb Nick Edwards: >> jdebert, (since im not reply to the bully troll) >> >> he doesnt learn, worried about flame wars but kicks off by calling >> other people smart asses, just ignore him, most of the rest of the >> internet has done for a while > > creep away damned stalker - nobody asked you and the only smart > ass here is you - what was that with "don't write me again and > I wont have any need to abuse you back" below and how did you > treat roundcube developers and continue to abuse against me days > later each time you are bored and seek posts from me? > > Nick Edwards | 26 Sep 18:01 2014 > http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.mail.roundcube.user/4500 > > -------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht -------- > Betreff: Re: [RCU] Time for new HTML Editor > Datum: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 21:14:43 +1000 > Von: Nick Edwards <nick.z.edwa...@gmail.com> > An: Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net> > > you hate how im talking to you? good! now you know what it felt like > by all those newbies you belittle and bully, maybe you will think > twice about bullying them and coming over as a fucking dictator again > huh but probably not, nutters like you never learn. > > so you fuck off and dont write me again, and I wont have any need to > abuse you back. > > starting now, so if you want no contact you better fucking not reply > >> On 10/1/14, Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net> wrote: >>> Am 30.09.2014 um 18:12 schrieb jdebert: >>>> On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 19:19:10 +0200 >>>> Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Am 29.09.2014 um 19:14 schrieb Nels Lindquist: >>>>>> On 9/29/2014 10:54 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> please remove markers like [SPAM] if a mesage was flagged before >>>>>>> reply - they lead often that a message goes to junk- instead the >>>>>>> list-folder :-) >>>>>> >>>>>> Please teach your users to filter on the List-ID: header rather than >>>>>> Subject: for this list. The issue can be entirely avoided without >>>>>> requiring everyone else in the world to alter their behaviour >>>>> >>>>> the [SPAM] marker comes *before* all other sieve-filters >>>>> otherwise it would not catch faked From-Headers >>>>> >>>>> it's not a big deal but i see that mistake sometimes >>>>> also in business communication - not real good >>>> >>>> I do not see any subject lines in this thread with [SPAM] in them. I >>>> rarely see them in this list at all. (I suspect people are aware it can >>>> cause some poorer filtering implementations to delete them.) >>> >>> so what - this was a new thread to not hijack others >>> >>>> Perhaps you need to look closer to home for this problem? >>> >>> for sure not if it appears in the middle of subjects >>> >>>> Meantime, it is highly recommended that, if someone subscribes to a >>>> list about spam, one MUST make an exception to their filtering rules as >>>> previously mentioned. It's also very sensible. It is ridiculous to >>>> insist that people talking about spam stop using the word "spam" >>> >>> the SA list has a -100 score >>> >>> that won't change the fact that it is in general a bad >>> attitude not look at the subject of a mail someone >>> writes, but so be it until another flamewar starts >>> because some smart asses need to reply to a hint >>> wich needs no repsonse at all and was intended to >>> just point out a common mistake > >
