Great Circle Associates List-Managers
(April 1998)

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re: Prevalence of mailing-list bombing
From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" <rfg @ monkeys . com>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 1998 16:31:38 -0700
To: list-managers @ GreatCircle . COM
In-reply-to: Your message of Fri, 01 May 1998 07:26:01 +1200. <3548D049 . FA32667B @ ihug . co . nz>

In message <3548D049 .
 FA32667B @
 ihug .
 co .
Olwen Williams <olwen @
 ihug .
 co .
 nz> wrote:

>> Name three.
>My obesity surgery support list for a start.  I knew zilch about running
>a mailing list when I started it, and the only reason I started it was
>that I could not believe that there was not a list already.  No one else
>seemed to be volunteering to set up a list.  I didn't have sponsership
>for the list.  It just seemed as if it needed doing, and time has proved
>Pull you head in Ron, your postings seems to smack of techno-arrogance
>to me.

That's fine by me.

Look, I don't do obesity surgery.  I stay out of that completely and leave
it entirely to the experts.  All I ask in return is that obesity surgeons
stay out of the business of trying to pretend like they know what the hell
they are doing when it comes to computers in general, and mailing lists in

>People are here to learn and your attitude doesn't make me for
>one want to stay.

I'll be sorry to see you go, but that's your decision.  I am not going to
apologize for my beliefs that (a) mailing lists can be dangerous and that
(b) there are some awfully clue-impared people running some of these things
who shouldn't be.

>Incidentally I've never been forge subscribe to a mailing list.  If it
>happens to Ron all the time does that say samething about him?

It says that I have controversial opinions.  So what's yer point?  Are you
suggesting that anyone with controversial opions deserves to be mailbombed?
Is that what you are really trying to say?

I don't think that you really means that, but if you do, that I would have
to say that you have about as much respect for free speech online as did
the people who wrote the CDA (e.g. Senator Exon).  It seems that as far as
_you_ are concerned anyone who got mailbombed back in the old days for
being anti-apartide (sp?) or anyone who gets mailbombed these days for
being pro-choice just deserves what they get.

_I_ have been subscription bombed three times by spammers who don't like
the fact that (and, not coincodently, a few thousand other people) are
working constantly to get their accounts yanked.

>Could he have antagonised people so that they do this to him.

I did and I freely admit that.  I antagonized spammers by asking them and
their service providers not to spam people.  However the vast majority of
people online who I have spoken to seem to feel that the work that I do
is good and useful and (yes) even noble, and most _thank_ me for doing it.

Being controversial is not the same as being evil and no, being contro-
versial DOES NOT mean that you deserve to me mailbombed (as you seem to

I suggest that you rethink your attitudes about this.

-- Ron Guilmette, Roseville, California ---------- E-Scrub Technologies, Inc.
-- Deadbolt(tm) Personal E-Mail Filter demo:
-- Wpoison (web harvester poisoning) - demo:

Indexed By Date Previous: Re: Prevalence of mailing-list bombing
From: Lazlo Nibble <lazlo @ swcp . com>
Next: Re: Prevalence of mailing-list bombing
From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" <rfg @ monkeys . com>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: Prevalence of mailing-list bombing
From: Olwen Williams <olwen @ ihug . co . nz>
Next: Re: Prevalence of mailing-list bombing
From: Olwen Williams <olwen @ ihug . co . nz>

Search Internet Search