Antigen found =*.exe file

Aaron Blosser ablosser@virtuoso.com
Mon, 29 Oct 2001 09:52:47 -0800


Just so you all don't have to stretch your brains too much, I've taken
the liberty of subscribing fork@xent.com to some spam lists that made it
through our own blacklists.

I'm just curious to see how well your blacklists are running and whether
or not you do block spam.

Looking at the list archives (no, I still haven't subscribed to the list
and don't plan to), I see one made it in so far.

Am I trying to prove a point?  Yes.  Will it work?  Probably not since
you all don't seem to mind the occasional spam (and neither do I since
most gets blocked by our blacklists).

Just gotta roll with these things.  I guess the price you pay for having
an open list is that you gotta deal with the "jerks" like me and the
occasional spam.

Hey, if that's cool with you, then so be it.  Who am I to judge?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Masnick [mailto:mike@techdirt.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 9:43 AM
> To: Aaron Blosser; Jeff Bone
> Cc: fork@xent.com
> Subject: RE: Antigen found =3D*.exe file
>=20
> At 09:00 AM 10/29/01 -0800, Aaron Blosser wrote:
> >Comments like yours, and also from Tom:
> >---
> > "If you cant be held responsable for the email that comes from your
> >computer system maybe you should rethink your using that computer
> >system.
> >
> >Learn the tool or play the fool.
> >
> >As to making closed in communities simply becuase there are hordes of
> >careless and self imposed ignoramouses...I say we nuke the fuckers
back
> >to the stone ages and then they will learn ...oh wait wrong thread.
> >
> >Actualy, it works here too. Heads up."
> >---
> >Just show that you don't know what the FoRK you're talking about when
it
> >comes to email systems.
>=20
> Or that we're not completely closed minded...
>=20
> >I'm blaming the FoRK list!  ANY list that simply allows
non-subscribers
> >to post is asking for all kinds of trouble.  I'm not merely
suggesting
> >anything anymore --  I'm flat out stating that what our antivirus
> >software did was totally, 100% fine, expected, anticipated, and so
on.
> >If you don't like it, by all means add our mail server to your
> >blacklist.
>=20
> Isn't it possible that there are some completely valid reasons to
allow
> non-subscribers to post?  I like when people who aren't even on the
list
> tell us what to do (see, Aaron, we wouldn't even be having this lovely
> discussion without this great ability where you can feel free to
suddenly
> decide what a mailing list you have nothing to do with should do).  It
> makes for some arguments and yet another day of 100 FoRK-posts to
ignore.
> That's just one of the many reasons why FoRK lets non-subscribers
post.
>=20
> Personally, I don't see anything wrong with it, and every six months
or so
> when this argument comes up, I don't see what the big deal is.
>=20
> We've had plenty of interesting discussions here where someone who
wasn't
> a
> list member was cc'ed and had a chance to contribute their valuable
(or
> idiotic - it doesn't really matter) thoughts on the matter without
having
> to become a full-fledged FoRKer.
>=20
> Except for an occasional spam and some guy, Aaron, who thinks he can
tell
> us what to do, we haven't had much trouble with the open posting on
the
> list (in my opinion).
>=20
> >Out of curiousity, how much *real* spam does your list get because of
> >this hare-brained "allow all" policy that nobody remembers voting on?
>=20
> Not so much these days... actually.  I think credit belongs to JoeBar,
but
> I'm not sure I was paying attention to when or how that all happened.
>=20
> >Oh, and considering some of the questionable spelling, perhaps I
> >*should* have a spelling bot automatically send back corrections.
> >(Another joke!  See?  Life isn't always so serious, is it?)
>=20
> Heh.  Anyone who faults Tom for his spelling obviously has no idea
what
> he's talking about.  Aaron, I think you've made a mistake...  In the
> future, when flaming random mailing lists, it might help to do some
> research on who you're flaming... Besides, I think that was one of the
> least misspelled of Tom's posts.
>=20
> Wait... so far Aaron has brought up closing the list to
non-subscribers &
> made fun of Tom's postings... Is he trying to force us to relive all
the
> arguments of flamewars past?  This is going to take quite a while if
you
> don't speed it up, Aaron.  You haven't even touched on "should we keep
the
> archives open or closed?", the CobraBoy project, jbone's ability to
post
> in
> his sleep, web services, traffic problems (the ones with cars),
> SOAP/RDF/XML/RSS/REST/Blah/Blah, the Israel-Palestinian question, Dave
> Winer, global warming, Echelon, and just who's economic theories do
*you*
> subscribe to?
>=20
>  - Mike