|
|
 | | Re: SPAM and OT messages
|
| <Snip> (...) </Snip> Mr. S, Thank you for your insightful and thoughtful post. As far as I can tell, the only person who is overreacting here is you. As you can very well read, you may have noticed that I did, infact, forward these concerns to the (...) (20 years ago, 3-Nov-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Can we help?
|
| (...) You see it as a mock of someone. I see it as a mock of an outrageous claim. (...) Mocks of some people are acceptable, though perhaps not appropriate, outside the administrative area. (...) And yet, Larry, you mocked me... -snip- (...) One (...) (20 years ago, 2-Nov-04, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Can we help?
|
| (...) Possibly. But by no means necessarily. In my view, sometimes the way a point is made contributes to the understanding of the point being made. (...) But your condescending reprimand to me contained both sarcasm and mockery, right? And I note (...) (20 years ago, 2-Nov-04, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: SPAM and OT messages
|
| (...) It is certainly true that there is a considerable level of effort required to ensure an open access mailing list is free of spam. (...) I didn't see any complaints about the specific messages. I saw a question as to why there is a linkage (...) (20 years ago, 2-Nov-04, to lugnet.robotics, lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Can we help?
|
| (...) Hi! (...) Exactly why getting the FUT right is very helpful to the goal of keeping things well compartmentalized. (...) That's certainly not the intent, nor is it my perception. However if you could provide a few cites where you feel that's (...) (20 years ago, 2-Nov-04, to lugnet.admin.general, FTX)
|
|
