Date:         Wed, 18 Apr 2001 12:43:52 -0300
Reply-To:     Jean-Guy Savoie <jgsavoie@NBNET.NB.CA>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Jean-Guy Savoie <jgsavoie@NBNET.NB.CA>
Subject:      Re: >> WET TEEN (you know the rest)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;

Tom, 

Following is the pertinent section of the reply to your inquiry, saying, essentially not that it is technically not feasable, but rather that it's not worth it, because 1. too restrictive or 2. that the word would get out and the rule defeated.  

I don't think that either of these points are valid for a list such as this, if a simple inclusion rule were adopted (I concur that the banned word approach is difficult or useless).  

1. First of all, despite the fairly large number of VW models and options we enjoy, they are ALL the specific "Vanagon", not the generic "car" or "van" (i.e. the specific "chrysthantemums" as opposed to the generic "flower" or "plant").   

2. Second, the danger that the rule would be defeated by spammers is an unlikely scenario:  spammers like to sent a standardized E-Mail message to as many million addresses as they can find. They are not in the business of customizing they're spam anymore than necessary. They won't be including "Vanagon" in their text either, despite the inherent sexyness of that particular vehicle.

The inclusion rule could be "defeated" by legit interested third parties looking for our usual advice in a friendly, OPEN list, as aggravating as some of the stupid questions and postings can be. The benefit of the simple inclusion list rule would be to force the outsiders to read the rules, as pointed out in Ron's "Great Solution for Spamless Open List!!"  posting.  If they realy want to post to the list, they will have to do their homework. 

If it were to become a very simple universal rule, we could all adopt the habit of signing with a reference to our beloved bricks and the vast majority of the vile cybernetic luncheon meat (the canned type is fine), would be out in never never cyberspace where it belongs. It might be a hasstle for list members at first, but I'd rather get used to a simple rule than to endure the #/£~¢%¤* (expletive) were getting so much of these days.

I vote OPEN with simple inclusion rule.  


JGS


> Conversely, It would also be interesting to only allow posts that did
> contain a certain word someplace in the message..so if I had a list about
> flowers, I would only allow posts that contain the word "flower" to be
> distributed. That way, I could proactively help the list stay on topic. :)
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm.. so my 5-paragraph posting regarding blossoms, chrysthantemums, dahlias,
blooms, and petals would be rejected?
> 
> 
> 
> Anyhow - the nature of the filter would become common knowledge very quickly,
and anybody who wanted to post an off-topic message regarding "purple pigs"
would simply make them "purple pigs with a gratuitous flower reference
crammed into an anatomically improbable orifice".
> 
> 
> Good generals pick their battles.  This is one you can't win, so avoid
having it if you can....

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Tom Carrington 
  To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM 
  Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 11:53 AM
  Subject: Re: >> WET TEEN (you know the rest)


  Jean,
   
  It's a good idea, but is not possible to filter messages by keywords using ListServ. It's one of the methods I had thought that would be effective to combat SPAM. I was thinking of filtering out all the "four-letter" words, and requiring all posts to include the word "vanagon". On March 27th, I posted this question to ListServ...see this link:
   
  http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind0103&L=lstsrv-l&F=&S=&P=12613
   
  And I followed it up with a product request to Lsoft.
   
  TomC
  tcarrington@relitech.com
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Jean-Guy Savoie [mailto:jgsavoie@NBNET.NB.CA]
    Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 9:55 AM
    To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
    Subject: Re: >> WET TEEN P U S S Y HARDCORE << . . .. .... . ..... . . 3763


    Ric and all,

    Wouldn't a simple, not too restrictive filter be that the word vanagon must appear at least once in the body of the text, otherwise simply discarded by the list server?

    Now, I know that the vanagon is a pretty sexy vehicle and all, but a very noble kind of sexy and the spammers are too busy to notice, so I doubt they would include it in the vulgarities of their message.
     
    Hmmm... come to think of it, sexy vehicle and all, maybe we could change our orientation and spam others:  Hot vanagon action... Hard thrusting piston rods... Hot wet front carpets... Come and Pop your Top... Swivel and rotate...  The site for the straight or the transaxle... .  {;~) 

    And seriously, I think this stuff is offensive and  CLEARLY OFF TOPIC, so let's filter, not limit to members only.

    JGS


      ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: Richard Golen 
      To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM 
      Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 7:44 AM
      Subject: Re: >> WET TEEN P U S S Y HARDCORE << . . .. .... . ..... . . 3763



      Great! Now I know what a Vanagon Slut looks like!! Perhaps the young lady is the infamous LiMBO Bimbo!

      Seriously, how many more reasons does one need to put a filter on this list???


      Ric


      At 04:35 AM 4/18/01 -0500, ekzawuzowrvtu@HOTMAIL.COM wrote:


[text/html]