FOSS, Science, and Public activism

Chris Green chrisgreen at
Wed Jul 5 15:46:12 IST 2006

The appropriateness of using an on-line discussion list which is devoted to 
the reduction of spam to raise something that is dear to your heart is 
certainly misjudged. I consider myself fortunate that this list is 
subscribed to by people who wish to help others, remain objective and 
continue building a community that has grown through the selfless actions of 
Julian and many others too numerous to mention. Proclus, please be more 
considerate. This is not a forum in which you will find the sympathy you are 
seeking. With respect, please move on.

>From: Alex Neuman van der Hans <alex at>
>Reply-To: MailScanner discussion <mailscanner at>
>To: MailScanner discussion <mailscanner at>
>Subject: Re: FOSS, Science, and Public activism
>Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2006 20:49:17 -0500
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Well said. Best post so far.
>I'm archiving this thread next to "mailscanner causes swap" and "it's bad 
>to use MailScanner with postfix because Wietsev Enema said so!"...
>Chris Sweeney wrote:
>>Only your speech has no place here in this forum.  This is a forum for 
>>supporting MailScanner and not your soap box.  What you are saying is its 
>>ok to SPAM if it applies to some people.  Well that makes it ok for 
>>everyone to SPAM here.  Let the present of the US come here and talk about 
>>war, its ok then it applies to some people here.  Let the bankers come 
>>here and post about banking problems today, that applies to most everyone 
>>here we all use banks, oh and lets not leave out the oil company's, they 
>>deserve a place here to post why they think they are not taking us to the 
>>cleaners on oil prices!  Keep your posting's where they really belong 
>>because all you have done here is draw support away from what you wanted 
>>us to support.  Take your "expression" and post it on the list you 
>>moderate and don't subject people trying to support a product to your 
>>Good day sir and good riddance.
>>proclus at wrote:
>>>On  4 Jul, Anders Andersson, IT wrote:
>>>>I second the opinion to keep the list clean from "SPAM"
>>>Clearly I am arguing that the label of spam should not be used to quell
>>>expression.  As a list moderator of several lists, I know what spam
>>>is, and it is usually dealt with automatically, but that process must
>>>not exclude legitimate speech, which could quell discussion in our
>>>forums.  I've seen that happen too, and it is a really a shame to see a
>>>good forum go dark.
>>Thanks Chris
>>Check me out!
>>Finally setup a account
>>csweeney at
>>This message has been scanned for viruses and
>>dangerous content by *MailScanner* <>, and is
>>believed to be clean.
>MailScanner mailing list
>mailscanner at
>Before posting, read
>Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!

More information about the MailScanner mailing list