Re: Full Disclosure "Code of conduct"

[n3td3v <n3td3v () gmail com>]

On 5/7/06, lee.e.rian () census gov <lee.e.rian () census gov> wrote:
> > >You would have to agree that Full Disclosure is a rather different (if
> > >not alternate) mailing list. So one of the things i would do would be
> > >using your favourite email client filters to reduce the noise and make
> > >sure you won't read from specific people anymore, i've done so :)
> >
> > What do you do about the replies to that persons posts from others ?
> >
> > Do you filter them as well ?
>
> Yes.
>
> There aren't that many people that keep responding to *those* people - and
> I've noticed they aren't worth listening to either.

I find the folks who talk about filtering individuals actually turn
out to be more lame than the folks they were complaining about.
Usually the folks complaining about the list have never contributed in
any form to the list whatsoever. For me I think the folks people talk
about filtering offer a better insight into whats going on than nobody
users who complain and ask about content filtering. Its been many a
time folks on this list have complained about me, then a couple of
days later they post a lame question onto the mailing list. To be
honest if you're having personal problems with the content of any list
then perhaps you should be unsubscribing. To me, filtering anyone is a
great injustice to yourself and others around your work place.
Professionals, good ones, don't filter anyone around here, they want
to see the full-picture landscape of whats going on and whats being
said, even the lame baited comments seen lots around unmoderated
international communications networks like Full-Disclosure.

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/