[Fwd: Re: Spamhaus issues? (fwd)]

Scott Silva ssilva at sgvwater.com
Tue Aug 14 02:07:25 IST 2007

Glenn Steen spake the following on 8/13/2007 1:29 PM:
> On 13/08/07, Scott Silva <ssilva at sgvwater.com> wrote:
>> Julian Field spake the following on 8/12/2007 3:58 AM:
>>> This is the comment I got from Res in reply to my gentle tap on the
>>> shoulder.
>>> I've had enough of his attitude for a very long time. Sorry, but he
>>> asked for it.
>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>> Subject:      Re: Spamhaus issues? (fwd)
>>> Date:         Sun, 12 Aug 2007 08:42:59 +1000 (EST)
>>> From:         Res <res at ausics.net>
>>> To:   Julian Field <MailScanner at ecs.soton.ac.uk>
>>> Its about as on topic as the rest of the crud around on list, so is this
>>> selective censorship I am seeing... probably, since you dont make a point
>>> of shutting down all off topic threads. If you want me off your list
>>> just unsub me, you have my blessing, as I doubt I contribute anything to
>>> the mailscanner community anyway. Remember to take me off the beta list
>>> as well.
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 23:27:33 +0100
>>> From: Julian Field <MailScanner at ecs.soton.ac.uk>
>>> Reply-To: MailScanner discussion <mailscanner at lists.mailscanner.info>
>>> To: MailScanner discussion <mailscanner at lists.mailscanner.info>
>>> Subject: Re: Spamhaus issues?
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>> C'mon guys, let's call it a day for this thread. The discussion is no
>>> longer relevant to others. If you wish to argue/debate/discuss, feel
>>> free, just do it off-list.
>>> Thanks,
>>> Jules.
>>> Res wrote:
>>>> * PGP Signed by an unknown key
>>>> *yawn*
>>>> I got your point Kai, the fact is you introduced something (dynamic ip
>>>> blocks) into the debate that was completely irrelevant, pay closer
>>>> attention next time.
>>>> On Sat, 11 Aug 2007, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
>>>>> Res wrote on Sat, 11 Aug 2007 07:54:58 +1000 (EST):
>>>>>> *sigh*
>>>>> Indeed, you didn't get the point from the beginning and are still not
>>>>> getting it and are not even trying to get it. EOT.
>>>>> Kai
>>> Jules
>> I have but one question.
>> Did you remove him, or did he remove himself?
>> I hope that he did not just leave in anger, as he has made many worthwhile
>> contributions, and maybe he will regret his hasty in-anger response, and come
>> back.
>> In your defense, you have "tapped" other off topic threads before, and it is
>> usually when they turn into virtual fist fights. You seem to have great
>> tolerance for the occasional off-topic thread, even though they get very far
>> from the original topic.
> I think it is the "community" thing... Even though Jules has never
> actually said so, I think he keeps it this way because a) he likes the
> idea of a MailScanner community, and b) because it is polite to answer
> even the most rudimentary and off-topic questions, and c) because he
> is to darned nice;-)
> Hm, how come you and I have featured in quite afew of those
> off-topic-tapped threads, friend Scott?:-)
I must confess that sometimes I tread where others fear to go... ;-D

I might have climbed Everest in another reality.

I guess I'm diverting the topic again....


MailScanner is like deodorant...
You hope everybody uses it, and
you notice quickly if they don't!!!!

More information about the MailScanner mailing list