Full Disclosure mailing list archives
Re: Why FD should unban n3td3v.
From: vulcanius <vulcanius () gmail com>
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2009 01:50:41 +0000
The readers did decide, that's why he's banned. If you still like reading his garbage go find whatever bridge he's currently living under and subscribe. If you believe that the days with n3td3v on the list were FD's glory days you're either ignorant or stupid. On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 1:56 AM, John Q Publix<johnqpublicr () hush com> wrote:
Some of you may call n3td3v annoying, others may call him funny, but others may genuinely value his comments on the list. Leave it up to the reader to decide. FD exists to be unmoderated and uncensored. This list is a great thing, and I'm requesting that it be restored to it's former glory. While I'm no fan of n3td3v, censoring him sets a dangerous precedent. If I wanted to filter out his mails client-side, I still could btw. Just don't censor him on the server. Just my 2 cents. john q public _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Current thread:
- Why FD should unban n3td3v. John Q Publix (Aug 30)
- Re: Why FD should unban n3td3v. Lane Christiansen (Aug 30)
- Re: Why FD should unban n3td3v. Anders Klixbull (Aug 31)
- Re: Why FD should unban n3td3v. vulcanius (Aug 31)
- Re: Why FD should unban n3td3v. Lane Christiansen (Aug 30)