[Freeciv-Dev] Re: FW: Re: spam

["Bob Fredrickson" <erbesserung@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 11 Apr 2002, Adam Theo wrote:
> > i see alot of spam makes its way onto the list. is there anyway to block 
> > non-subscribers from posting?
(MMatson responds)
> Ontology, philogeny, phobogeny... Blocking the opinions of those who do not 
> subscribe to ones own opinions vs which is signal which is noise, which is 
> figure which is ground. Positive vs negative, aether vs ground, and whether 
> aether exists at all. ... further
I think that the only response to such a post (MMatson) is a careful 
examination of the following 100% clean, but non-pc link:
http://www.se7en-x.com/argue/

To answer ATheo, blocking non-subscribers would limit useful comments from 
freeciv players who don't wish to join the list (and consequently, this 
email).

Bob Fredrickson - BS Debunker
"Arguing about semantics is one of the highest forms of mental 
masturbation." - Unknown
-----Original Message-----
From: freeciv-dev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:freeciv-dev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Mark Metson
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 1:13 AM
To: freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: spam



On Thu, 11 Apr 2002, Adam Theo wrote:

> i see alot of spam makes its way onto the list. is there anyway to block 
> non-subscribers from posting?
Ontology, philogeny, phobogeny... Blocking the opinions of those who do
not subscribe to ones own opinions vs which is signal which is noise,
which is figure which is ground. Positive vs negative, aether vs ground,
and whether aether exists at all.

Techlevel affects such matters. Posting agents are sometimes capable of
subscribing to post then unsubscribing.

> btw, hello, everyone. new subscriber as of yesterday. i'm here to checkout 
> how progress of freeciv is going, and see if i can help in other ways 
> besides programming (not a coder, sorry). my experiences are in XML and 
> Jabber, an open instant messaging/groupchat protocol.
So XML and Jabber are not code? Are they, then, a cypher? Distinguishing
representation, heiroglyph, alphabet, code, cypher, phoneme, script,
instruction etc may be key to some of the tech tree but possibly that may
be a rulesets problem rather than a dev problem?

Possibly you may be using a distinction such as that between
instrumentality/effectiveness/accomplishment/practical (making it so) for
code versus academic/hypothetical/theoretical for protocol?

Having discovered that various protocols such as United Nations
conventions are treated as academic rather than having the force of actual
classical or quantum-mechanical conventions I am interested in this
project largely because it seems to be focussed very much on precisely
such problems. Possibly 'coder' would be a unit that actually causes
("forces") things to happen whereas a protocol-er would be more akin to a
"diplomat" unit? Talk about things rather than actually do them?

There is a problem when one has a concept to convey but does not want to
transmit it or have it happen but merely wants to indicate it without
thereby drawing its attention or causing it to happen. For example to say
"nuke" without thereby "nuking". Of the classic one being that the syntax
nasties object vehemently to the use of the word nasties, such that mere
mention of the word nastie is automatic end-of-thread... ;-)

BB
MM

--
Got a website? Get 10,000+ hits a day "FREE"...
http://makemoney.knotwork.com/10000hits/

_________________________________________________________________
Join the world?s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. 
http://www.hotmail.com