Re: virus: META: Should the list be moderated? (was Fund

Bill Godby (wgodby@sun.tir.com)
Wed, 29 May 1996 01:07:43 -0400

At 12:02 AM 5/29/96 -0400, Bill Godby wrote:
>I think it's clear that for the time being the odd spam isn't much of a
>problem, yet. I'm for staying with the unmoderated for now. I don't
>particularly find any redeeming value in them, but if something seems
>particularly interesting enough to peak everyones interest so be it.

Not to be vague the "so be it" is refering to the actual discussion of a
particular spam as a topic, as several others have mentioned as a possibility.

>At 11:56 AM 5/28/96 -0600, David McFadzean wrote:
>>At 11:53 PM 27/05/96 -0700, EASYSTREET BROKERAGE wrote:
>>>EARN $1.00 PER MINUTE FOR YOUR ORGANIZATION!!!
>>
>>A question for the list: would you rather put up with the odd
>>spam message like this one, or have a moderated list? One
>>disadvantage of having a moderated list (i.e. I would have to
>>approve every message that gets sent out) is that traffic on
>>the list would stop while I'm away from e-mail access.
>>
>-----
>Bill Godby
>wgodby@tir.com
>
>
>
-----
Bill Godby
wgodby@tir.com