On Wed, 2004-12-29 at 13:33 -0800, Paul Johnson wrote: > On Wednesday 29 December 2004 01:01 pm, Sue Spence wrote: > > List subscribers shouldn't have to clean religious/political flamebait > > (& flames) from the messages they receive. To have to do this means > > that there are people on the list who are perfectly prepared to send > > out messages containing content that is essentially equivalent to the > > lowest-common-denominator advertisements for drugs, porn, phishing > > scams, hot stock tips, whatever. > > That happens anyway. Open list. > > > Putting "OT", "Off Topic", "Way off topic" etc. in the subject title > > doesn't even begin to justify that kind of poor listizenship. > > So what's your excuse for using Reply-to-All instead of > Reply-to-mailing-list, like the list rules also encourage? She's a bad netizen, and should be flogged with a wet packet! -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail. "Vanity, my favorite sin." Larry/John/Satan, "The Devil's Advocate"
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part