1997-01-11 - Re: another idea?

Header Data

From: Eric Murray <ericm@lne.com>
To: bad@uhf.wireless.net (Bernie Doehner)
Message Hash: 6cf0663d683c3ec1e3f43b58cf4c4d0f3fef121d913cc6e85d38211f1a69ab9e
Message ID: <199701111710.JAA08932@slack.lne.com>
Reply To: <Pine.BSF.3.95.970111112441.602B-100000@uhf.wdc.net>
UTC Datetime: 1997-01-11 17:11:40 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 09:11:40 -0800 (PST)

Raw message

From: Eric Murray <ericm@lne.com>
Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 09:11:40 -0800 (PST)
To: bad@uhf.wireless.net (Bernie Doehner)
Subject: Re: another idea?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95.970111112441.602B-100000@uhf.wdc.net>
Message-ID: <199701111710.JAA08932@slack.lne.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

Bernie Doehner writes:
> Hi again:
> Upon rereading comments in favor of no moderation, it occured to me that a
> possible solution that will make most people  happy:
> How about, we have
> cypherpunks-raw: unmoderated 110% SPAM
> cypherpunks: moderated by Sandy and other moderator.

That was the original proposal.
Now that the 'discussion' has come around full circle, can we
stop talking about it and DO it?

Eric Murray  ericm@lne.com  ericm@motorcycle.com  http://www.lne.com/ericm
PGP keyid:E03F65E5 fingerprint:50 B0 A2 4C 7D 86 FC 03  92 E8 AC E6 7E 27 29 AF