Subject: Re: namedroppers, continued

From: Randy Bush <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 11:05:27 -0800

> From: "D. J. Bernstein" <[email-masked]>
> To: [email-masked]
> Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
> Subject: namedroppers, continued
> ...
> Okay, Bush: Put [email-masked] on the list of addresses from which
> submissions are automatically accepted.

sorry bernstein.  as your message also was addressed to lists to
which i subscribe, the copy to namedroppers-owner was deleted
locally due to dupe message-id: detection.  erik and harald pointed
it out, and rob just forwarded a copy to me.  so i have done the
addition.

thanks, as approving all your postings was becoming a pain in the
butt.

randy

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>

---

From: Lloyd Wood <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 23:56:14 +0000 (GMT)

[ post by non-subscriber.  with the massive amount of spam, it is easy to miss
  and therefore delete posts by non-subscribers.  if you wish to regularly
  post from an address that is not subscribed to this mailing list, send a
  message to <listname>[email-masked] and ask to have the alternate
  address added to the list of addresses from which submissions are
  automatically accepted. ]

On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, Randy Bush wrote:

> locally due to dupe message-id: detection.

As I said and as this has clearly demonstrated, Randy doesn't
understand admin/policy separation, or that namedroppers-owner should
be a completely different entity to Randy Bush (or at the very least,
carefully and deliberately treated as such).

djb _does_ understand admin/policy separation (as his software
demonstrates) - but far too well, as he insists on applying it to all
of his emails and addresses in a somewhat perverse and rather schizoid
way.

Paul Vixie writes:

$ for the record, we must each work to create the world we want to
$ live in (and that we want our children to live in.)

our children and not all children? can't say I'm big on the Divine
Rights of Parents.

$ i'm not in universal agreement with dbj nor with randy bush, but i
$ won't fault them for their passion about making the world more like
$ whatever they each think "better" means.

Oh, come on. This entire thread has been about each of them trying to
make their personal email better for themselves, about whom they are
naturally deeply, deeply passionate.

L.

hitler had loads of passion for remaking the world in his desired
image. is this thread over now?

<http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/><[email-masked]>