[svlug] Fwd: Ripping DVDs ... and MythTV

Tom Pilot hman_120 at yahoo.com
Fri Nov 30 22:42:09 PST 2007

The way I see it, if Paul decided to take the time to
manually make an exception to the email limit rule,
for a message that is not that big - all the power to
him. After all, the 40KB limit is there as an
"averaging" rule for the admin who cannot take the
time to sift thru each message one by one and make
exceptions. Id say this would be the case for most

Anyway, Rick why dont you take upon you to run (And
admin) the list. You probably are best at it anyway,
and also, it would alleviate the feelings of being
ruled by a "cryptofascist" as you claim. 

Tom D. Pilot

--- Rick Moen <rick at linuxmafia.com> wrote:

> Quoting Paul Reiber (reiber at gmail.com):
> > Regarding this particular posting: a helpful
> volunteer posted a
> > somewhat larger-than-usual posting, and as SVLUG's
> President, I
> > personally decided I was OK with the post reaching
> the list... 
> > so I'm wondering what your problem is.
> My problem is:  The 40kB limit -- and the text
> carefully explaining it
> on our policy Web pages, which you've either not
> bothered to read or
> decided El Presidente can simply disregard at a whim
> -- exists for the
> obvious reason of discouraging people from annoying
> hundreds of
> subscribers with huge attachments that maybe one
> recipient on a good day
> might care to get.  It exists for the reason that
> there are dozens of
> webspace facilities where someone like Kristian can
> park files he wants
> to refer to by URL and be fetchable with a single
> click by anyone
> actually wanting them.
> It gets applied to everyone for the reason that the
> SAME RULES apply to
> everyone, and they're the documented ones.  Or
> rather, they _were_:  See
> below.
> > You never bothered to ask me - "Hey, Paul - As
> SVLUG's President, did
> > you approve that posting?  Were you OK with it
> going out to the list?"
> Actually, what I did was spend TWO YEARS
> rehabilitating the wretched
> reputation of SVLUG's list administration, by
> _actually following_ our 
> documented guidelines, insisting that the same rules
> apply to absolutely
> everyone including myself, that I'd be 100%
> accountable to any member
> upon request for what I did and didn't do, and that
> _nobody_ would ever 
> again get slagged by a "rule" that some kneejerk
> cryptofascist pulled
> strictly out of /dev/ass.
> And you recently managed to destroy that progress in
> about five seconds
> with your stunt about gagging a member -- who broke
> no posted rule, and, 
> ironically, was merely calling into question some of
> your bad decisions
> -- and then villifying her while she's prevented
> from speaking in her
> own defence.
> So, that's when I gave up and pretty much walked
> away, because I'm tired
> of having my work wrecked by you, and cannot afford
> association with
> that level of malfeasance.
> By the way, I noticed that you were logged in last
> week, probably
> mucking around with the machine again in some wacky
> fashion, and
> seemingly never noticed that _somehow_ -- gee, I
> wonder how this
> happened? -- the MTA had gotten stopped.  Despite
> having decided to no
> longer help prop up your administration, I fixed the
> problem.
> But don't thank me.  I did it for the members, and
> NOT for you.
> There's a large number of other essential checks and
> tasks I've handled
> until recently, but I guess you'll need to figure
> those out the hard
> way.
> This is the same sort of thing that cost you the
> support and involvement
> of all the other people who've recently walked on
> you, of course.
> > I find your "clueless" comment particularly
> disturbing....
> I find your comment particularly risible.  And
> cheeky.
> _______________________________________________
> svlug mailing list
> svlug at lists.svlug.org
> http://lists.svlug.org/lists/listinfo/svlug

Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 

More information about the svlug mailing list