nanog mailing list archives
Re: Anti-spam System Idea
From: Etaoin Shrdlu <shrdlu () deaddrop org>
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 20:41:24 -0800
Tim Thorpe wrote:
Seeing as this system would directly impact network operators (the NO in naNOg) I must disagree.
Go right ahead and disagree, however: http://www.nanog.org/listfaq.html
If Merit's staff feels otherwise then I sincerely apologize and will of course move the discussion, I will limit the out of context chatter to a minimum however.
Merit's staff DOES feel otherwise; it's just been the weekend and all, or you'd have heard from Susan by now. Oh, and PUH-LEEZE -- trim your posts. I deleted a bazillion lines of unnecessary cruft from this.
Current thread:
- Re: Clueless service restrictions (was RE: Anti-spam System Idea), (continued)
- Re: Clueless service restrictions (was RE: Anti-spam System Idea) Todd Vierling (Feb 17)
- Re: Clueless service restrictions (was RE: Anti-spam System Idea) Dave Crocker (Feb 18)
- RE: Clueless service restrictions (was RE: Anti-spam System Idea) Tony Hain (Feb 18)
- Re: Clueless service restrictions (was RE: Anti-spam System Idea) Guðbjörn S . Hreinsson (Feb 18)
- Re: Clueless service restrictions (was RE: Anti-spam System Idea) Dave Crocker (Feb 18)
- Re: Clueless service restrictions (was RE: Anti-spam System Idea) Guðbjörn S . Hreinsson (Feb 18)
- Re: Anti-spam System Idea Sean Donelan (Feb 15)
- Re: Anti-spam System Idea Tim Wilde (Feb 15)
- RE: Anti-spam System Idea Tim Thorpe (Feb 15)
- Re: Anti-spam System Idea Etaoin Shrdlu (Feb 15)
- Re: Anti-spam System Idea Valdis . Kletnieks (Feb 15)
- Spam issue discussion lists [was Re: Anti-spam System Idea] Mark Jones (Feb 16)
- Re: Anti-spam System Idea Petri Helenius (Feb 14)
- RE: Anti-spam System Idea Tim Thorpe (Feb 14)
- Re: Anti-spam System Idea Valdis . Kletnieks (Feb 15)