From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu May 1 21:59:29 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id VAA12391 for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 1 May 1997 21:59:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mixcom.mixcom.com (mixcom.mixcom.com [198.137.186.100]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id VAA12385; Thu, 1 May 1997 21:59:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mixcom.mixcom.com (8.6.12/2.2) id AAA00578; Fri, 2 May 1997 00:01:37 -0500 Received: from p75.mixcom.com(198.137.186.25) by mixcom.mixcom.com via smap (V1.3) id sma029914; Fri May 2 00:01:16 1997 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970502000116.00b5f7a4@mixcom.com> X-Sender: sysop@mixcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Fri, 02 May 1997 00:01:17 -0500 To: "Jonathan M. Bresler" From: "Jeffrey J. Mountin" Subject: Re: SPAM target Cc: FreeBSD-Hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk At 05:26 PM 5/1/97 -0700, Jonathan M. Bresler wrote: --snip-- >> (sigh) I've asked previously why each list doesn't require >> the originators of posts to also subscribe to the list (and received >> sensible answers). Perhaps it might be time to start changing that >> policy?? > > yes, that would stop some of the bozos, > others would learn hwo to perform the obvious manuever. It would require more work, at least. Why make it easy. Not certain but it looks like the "who" command is blocked... if it isn't... Don't see any reason why it should be allowed. Just another way to collect addresses for the all-time-granddaddy-list-of-a-zillion-e-mail-addresses. A few people here on on another list I participate on and I didn't like the "that's they way it comes" response. I'd expect better from a group of hackers and it doesn't look I was disappointed. 8-) ------------------------------------------- Jeff Mountin - System/Network Administrator jeff@mixcom.net MIX Communications Serving the Internet since 1990