Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com From: "Paul Derbyshire" To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 03:30:13 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Retraction Reply-to: derbyshire AT globalserve DOT net Message-ID: <3D51E5C5.12150.97E53F0@localhost> Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body On 8 Aug 2002 at 17:13, Robert Collins wrote: > On Thu, 2002-08-08 at 16:56, Paul Derbyshire wrote: > > > Chris, > It appears that the flame fest is still festering. The message you're following up wasn't a flame, was it? Was there an uncivil word outside the quoted material? Hmm? > I really hesitate to ask this, but can we set a deadline, effective from > your reply to this email (should you reply, and it being affirmative), > and any emails continuing the flame fest sent after that point result in > a ban on the individual sending the email (with appropriate headers > inspected for forging, of course). Terrible idea. What if someone posts a defamatory message against me that squeaks in just under the deadline? It will leave me no capability to reply in my own defense, save using a throwaway Hotmail account, and people will question the credibility of a defense coming from a different (and easily created) address than my normal one. The danger of an unfair outcome for one innocent user is too great IMO. Since 24 hours have gone by without a single new uncivil posting, I think we have reason to hope it's over regardless. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/