[TAG] My apologies

[Benjamin A. Okopnik]

On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 11:16:50AM -0500, Jack Carlson wrote:
> I apologize for resending that to everyone.  I responded to the email address
> that indicated it was it was for reporting problems with the mailing list.  I
> never meant it to be sent to all.

The problem, Jack, is that there wasn't a problem - except for your
mis-read of that spam and its headers. This doesn't make you a bad guy,
or stupid, or flameworthy; however, accusing people on the list, or its
administrator, of incompetence (no, you did not do so explicitly - but
"your mailing list has been hijacked" tended in that general direction)
was certain to set off at least a bit of grumbling. If you consider
either the mildly grumpy commentary from Thomas or Rick's informative
and clue-loaded post as "flaming", I suggest that you need to turn down
the sensitivity knob a little - except for the part that allows you to
smell the coffee. If you want to see what actual flaming looks like,
groups.google.com can _easily_ oblige you - start with the "alt." (or
perhaps the "comp.") hierarchy and drill down. You won't have far to go.

> I'm not a complete newbie.  My point was that, despite the headers (which I did
> read , thank you for the flaming replies on that point), the spam was sent so
> as to appear to be from TAG.

[blink] Therefore, if I pretend to be you and commit a crime, you should
be punished? Your reasoning escapes me.

> Obviously TAG would not forward mail from PayPal to members.  Obviously this
> spoof has been around the Web for years.  I was simply wishing to make a point
> that it appears that the spam harvesters have used the TAG mailing list for
> leads.

Erm, no. The TAG mailing list is not available to the spammers to use;
it's simply that messages sent to TAG get broadcast to the members of
that list. That's how it's set up; we live with that setup and its costs
because we're willing to do so in order to provide a service to the
Linux community.

> If that's of no concern to anyone else, great.
> I will still read and recommend The Linux Gazette, but if this is the sort of
> "helpful" response I can expect from TAG, then I will indeed go avail myself of
> the "remove me from this mailing list" option.

You're always welcome to do so. I believe you're doing it for completely
erroneous reasons, but I will not try to dissuade you; the people who
_subscribe_ to this list (as opposed to simply posting here) generally
either have a relatively high clue level or are trying to achieve it.
As I've mentioned, there are costs associated with this; I would not
wish for anyone who is not pursuing those ends to pay them.

> Thanks Thomas and Rick.

I will echo those thanks, but in full sincerity. Thomas and Rick have
behaved just as I would wish to behave in similar circumstances: perhaps
slightly grumpy at the implied insult but still radiating clues in every
direction. I don't know about you, but I *like* living in a world of
competent people. I wish you the best of luck in coping with the
alternatives available elsewhere.


* Ben Okopnik * Editor-in-Chief, Linux Gazette * http://linuxgazette.net *