funsec mailing list archives
Re: no poison for Joplin
From: Gadi Evron <ge () linuxbox org>
Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2011 02:14:24 +0300
On 6/1/11 9:33 PM, Ned Fleming wrote:
I think Gadi is looking to more of a legal or clinical definition.
More of a plea to be careful when making use of such terminology, which is not day-to-day as some may think. We as professionals need to be careful in our language.
If spamming is a mental illness, don't the spammers deserve our sympathy -- and our support with AA-like programs? It's not evil; it's a disease. I could see Rich K starting a home for destitute (but reformed!) spammers. Well . . . maybe not.
Hahahahahahaha I would have spilled my coffee if I was drinking any. That is a grand specimen of "turning the tables" on an argument I have seen in a while, even if it is a logical fallacy which does not really invalidate Rich's position (IMO). Well played. Respects, Sir. Gadi. _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
Current thread:
- Re: no poison for Joplin, (continued)
- Re: no poison for Joplin Valdis . Kletnieks (May 31)
- Re: no poison for Joplin Gadi Evron (May 31)
- Re: no poison for Joplin Valdis . Kletnieks (May 31)
- Re: no poison for Joplin Gadi Evron (Jun 01)
- Re: no poison for Joplin Gadi Evron (Jun 01)
- Re: no poison for Joplin Mike Preston (Jun 01)
- Re: no poison for Joplin Rich Kulawiec (Jun 01)
- Re: no poison for Joplin Gadi Evron (Jun 01)
- Re: no poison for Joplin Valdis . Kletnieks (Jun 01)
- Re: no poison for Joplin Ned Fleming (Jun 01)
- Re: no poison for Joplin Gadi Evron (Jun 01)
- Re: no poison for Joplin der Mouse (Jun 01)
- Re: no poison for Joplin Rich Kulawiec (Jun 02)