On Tue, 27 Jun 2006, Chad Walstrom wrote: > To be clear, Mike, there is no vote. If you wish to propose an official > community vote to re-enable Yahoo! accounts to the list, then do so. So the poll that someone started on the TCLUG home page the other day is not going to be used? > Besides, "Denied." isn't so rude, it's simply a statement. Perhaps he > should have put a smiley face behind it; they're apparently necessary in > email today. How about this one: :-P That's nice but it's a little too late for that kind of thing, isn't it? You've already had to wade through about 50 emails on this thread. >> I don't have time to read the rest of your aimless message with all the >> exclamation points and one-word sentences, but it doesn't look any more >> productive than some of the other messages you've sent today. > > Actually, it was a relatively succinct account of the process that led > to the community-driven decision to ban Yahoo! accounts from the list. My mistake. It started out with what he called "flamebait" about MUAs and the rest of the message looked like a horrible mess in pine for some reason. I just found it here... http://archives.mn-linux.org/pipermail/tclug-list/2006-June/050067.html ...and read it fully (and it doesn't look messed up there, so I guess pine had a problem with it). Here is my summary of what happened: (1) a message from a yahoo.com email account sent malware to the list (2) people let themselves be infected by this malware (3) newly infected people sent more spam to the list (4) TCLUG members decided to blame yahoo.com for this (5) after a vote, yahoo.com was then banned from TCLUG list In other words, there was no good reason to ban yahoo.com in the first place. In case I am misunderstood, I should point out that I am not using Yahoo.com. I use Pine on Solaris, so I don't really care about the yahoo issue but I think it is unfair and unhelpful to single out one mail source based on a single email from 5 years ago. Mike