on Sat, Nov 03, 2001 at 11:15:44AM -0500, Hall Stevenson ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> > Hmmm...I still think that's moderately f*cked -- anyone who's
> > transmitting linux kernel sources is sending more than a few
> > obscenities. I'm also of the mind that there's a time and a place for
> > stron
* Jens M?ller ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [011103 11:53]:
> Hall Stevenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > What does 'transmitting linux kernel sources' have to do with this
> > ?? I think that would be in violation of this rule:
> >
> > Never send your messages in HTML; use plain text instead. Avoi
Hall Stevenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What does 'transmitting linux kernel sources' have to do with this ?? I
> think that would be in violation of this rule:
>
> Never send your messages in HTML; use plain text instead. Avoid
> large attachments.
IMO that rule is more important t
> > > > "Do not use foul language; besides, some people receive the
> > > > lists via packet radio, where swearing is illegal."
> > > >
> > >
> > > But here it is not about format, but about content. And please
> > > tell me in which country swearing on packet radio is illegal. US?
> > > Might be.
"Karsten M. Self" wrote:
>
> on Sat, Nov 03, 2001 at 08:57:42AM +0100, Hans Ekbrand ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 10:52:13PM +0100, Jens Müller wrote:
> > > Hans Ekbrand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> > > > I think Karsten is wrong here. There is a "Code of Conduct
on Sat, Nov 03, 2001 at 08:57:42AM +0100, Hans Ekbrand ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 10:52:13PM +0100, Jens Müller wrote:
> > Hans Ekbrand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > I think Karsten is wrong here. There is a "Code of Conduct" section
> > > on http://www.debian.or
On Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 10:52:13PM +0100, Jens M?ller wrote:
> Hans Ekbrand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I think Karsten is wrong here. There is a "Code of Conduct" section
> > on http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/ that prohibits the use of
> > foul language. Let me quote
> >
> > "Do not u
Jens Müller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>---snip---<
> OT: Do you have any links to judicial decisions as to the
> constitutionality of that "no swearing on packet radio" law?
>
Packet radio is heavily used by the "hams" (amateur radio) in the U.S.
The US FCC rules and regulations have had a pro
Hans Ekbrand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think Karsten is wrong here. There is a "Code of Conduct" section
> on http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/ that prohibits the use of
> foul language. Let me quote
>
> "Do not use foul language; besides, some people receive the lists
> via packet radio
On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 03:17:23PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> on Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 04:54:10PM -0500, DvB ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
>
> > P.S. I was informed off-list that the debian-user list policy prohibits
> > the use of symbols to represent profanity. I'm ashamed to say that I
> >
On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 03:39:30PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> on Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 05:23:08PM -0500, Nathan E Norman ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 03:17:23PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > > > Cool, didn't know 'whois' took IPs... nslookup wasn't very useful o
DvB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've been putting up with deleting spam from my email account for quite
> a while... it's kind of routine by now. The other day, however, I
> received the following in my Yahoo! Mail inbox, which leads me to
> believe that some @#*$&% is placing my address in the "
On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 03:17:23PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > > I'd post to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and report the issue. There's not a whole
> > > lot
> > ^
> > Do you know this is the correct address to send complaints to or are you
> > just assuming the "abuse" part?
on Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 05:23:08PM -0500, Nathan E Norman ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 03:17:23PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > > Cool, didn't know 'whois' took IPs... nslookup wasn't very useful on
> > > that IP address.
> >
> > Right. If whois doesn't return a resul
>
> > > I'd post to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and report the issue. There's not a whole
> > > lot
> > ^
> > Do you know this is the correct address to send complaints to or are you
> > just assuming the "abuse" part? If so, where did you find it?
>
> It's a convetional address
On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 03:17:23PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > Cool, didn't know 'whois' took IPs... nslookup wasn't very useful on
> > that IP address.
>
> Right. If whois doesn't return a result, traceroute (or its
> replacements, which I'm less familiar with) may be useful. As these
> t
on Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 04:54:10PM -0500, DvB ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> on Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 02:26:25PM -0700, George W. Bush ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> wrote:
> > > Received: from 38.210.6.214 (38.210.6.214) by midnet.co.uk with SMTP
> > > (Eudora Internet Mail Server 3.0.3); Fri, 12 Oct 2001
> > Any idea how I can make this person stop? Is there some place I can
> > report stuff like this?
>
> >
> > Received: from 38.210.6.214 (38.210.6.214) by midnet.co.uk with SMTP
> > (Eudora Internet Mail Server 3.0.3); Fri, 12 Oct 2001 03:55:06 +0100
>
> This is a point of origin for the
on Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 11:14:00AM -0500, DvB ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I've been putting up with deleting spam from my email account for quite
> a while... it's kind of routine by now. The other day, however, I
> received the following in my Yahoo! Mail inbox, which leads me to
> believe that s
I've been putting up with deleting spam from my email account for quite
a while... it's kind of routine by now. The other day, however, I
received the following in my Yahoo! Mail inbox, which leads me to
believe that some @#*$&% is placing my address in the "From:" header of
his/her scourge as he/s
20 matches
Mail list logo
