Subject: Re: rfc2228 in ftpd
To: Theo de Raadt <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Jason R Thorpe <email@example.com>
Date: 06/30/2002 19:02:54
On Sun, Jun 30, 2002 at 07:42:23PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> 4 messages directly on topic were not sent through until I asked for
> them to be sent through. Then they were sent through. Was sending
> them through a mistake, or was blocking them a mistake? Can you
> please clarify?
Only the moderator of the list in question can clarify that. You'll
have to ask that person.
> Hugh's messages in port-vax with booting bug fixes were also censored
> and he had to replace his email address.
Hugh's messages are not censored. They are bounced to the moderator
if they originate from the openbsd.org domain. The moderator of the
port-vax mailing list has historically approved all of Hugh's posts,
and I have received word that this is the case for all recent posts
(unfortunately, there was a backlog in that moderator's queue).
> This is a message which was blocked until after:
> Was this above message not relevant?
At the very least, I would certainly not classify the message you cite
as constructive. It was certainly "relevant" to the subject at hand,
but was filled with accusatory remarks and has an overly-aggressive tone.
That's generally not the ways adults carry on a conversation.
Especially that last paragraph -- I mean, no where in my mail (as you cite
here below) did I accuse you of being untrustworthy. I did say that the
way the OpenSSH hole event transpired was not a trust-building experience,
but that is not the same thing as accusing you of being untrustworthy.
However, my opionion about the appropriateness of your message is
irrelevant. The moderator of tech-security's is.
> It was in response to this message:
> Does this above message meet the requirements, where mine doesn't?
-- Jason R. Thorpe <firstname.lastname@example.org>