"Mikkel L. Ellertson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> > >>No need for deep analysis. Your tools aren't up to it anyway.
> >
> > Harry, are you telling on yourself? (which might explain #1 above)
> >
> > Look, I made it clear this woman was a witch right from jump street.
> > I've never seen anything like it. At first she started out as some
> > sex kitten, but before I knew it, she's getting a breast reduction-!?
> > Now, I admit- unlike you- I've known a lot women, but that gives
> > new meaning and dimension to the term: "houchie bixch"
Admittedly humorous but is it something we need to concern ourselves
with here. You're personal relationships with women and your need to
spy on them?
> > I didn't know trying to take a quick peek at what is essentially post
Perpetrators of sleasy and unethical conduct always say they `didn't
know'. Hard to believe that snooping in some one elses email seems like
common acceptable activity to you.
> > card communicae's was illegal. Regardless, I asked the question in a
> > direct forthright manner. No big deal. But, Harold, why try get all
Your bogus name doesn't see all the forthright to me.. Feel free
to use a real name here.
Have you still not noticed that `handles' aren't that common here. This
mailgroup is not designed for dealing with your personal relationships.
> > the others, the innocent ones, all worked up. Look, I'm sure there
> > are quite a few others that would like some sense as to how it is
> > done...just out of intellectual curiosity if nothing else.
The psuedo direct manner is exactly what is out of place here. I hope
instructions for privacy invasion are something most people would know
not to ask here. This kind of messy bs belongs on Judge Judy .. not here.
> > Harold, you have to help me stop her.
Who is Harold?
> >
> I have to admit, I have had a few good laughs with this thread. But all
> in all, I have to admit I agree with Harold. Helping you in this case
> would be unethical. You would also be a shacky legal ground if you did
> read her mail. It has more in common with a wire tap, then it does with
> taking a peek at a postcard. (Taking a peek at a postcard can also get
> you in trouble, depending on where the card is.)
>
> The best part of all this is that intercepting the mail in no harder
> then taping a phone line. The information is out there, you just have
> to dig for it...
There you go PHD ... Do you notice no one is jumping in with the
advice you seek. If you conduct yourself in an ethical way in your
dealings with people you won't have need of sleasy aids. You need to
leave this woman alone and pursue your career as a standup comedian.
_______________________________________________
Redhat-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
