Jules Verne Forum

<jvf@Gilead.org.il>

JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec 199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010

Re: I am sorry to state that the forum has become a target for scammers

From: WILLIAM JONES <wbj514~at~sbcglobal.net>
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 20:18:34 -0700 (PDT)
To: Jules Verne Forum <jvf~at~gilead.org.il>

Sorry, I misconstrued the intent behind the original message as exclusionary.
Thanks to Garmt for (a) explaining distinctions in Internet terminology for the
benefit of one who still tends to consider the computer a glorified typewriter
and (b) articulating so eloquently my concerns about the free flow of forum
communication. Thanks as well to Harry for clarifying his position on the
matter. All's well aboard the Albatross.




________________________________
From: Harry Hayfield <harryhayfield~at~googlemail.com>
To: Jules Verne Forum <jvf~at~Gilead.org.il>
Sent: Sat, August 14, 2010 8:55:25 AM
Subject: Re: I am sorry to state that the forum has become a target for scammers


That is precisely what I meant. Apolgies if it came over as the former
-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-jvf~at~Gilead.org.il [mailto:owner-jvf~at~Gilead.org.il]On Behalf Of
>Alex Kirstukas
>Sent: 14 August 2010 1:20 pm
>To: Jules Verne Forum
>Subject: Re: I am sorry to state that the forum has become a target for
>scammers
>
>
>I completely agree with Garmt on the matter of forum availability -
>however, I think what Harry meant (correct me if I'm wrong, Harry) was
>that only the list of e-mail addresses (not the actual postings
>themselves) would be restricted to long-term active members. If so, it
>doesn't sound particularly over-the-top to me - worth considering, at
>least.
>
>Alex
>
>--- On Sat, 8/14/10, Garmt de Vries-Uiterweerd <garmtdevries~at~gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>
>>From: Garmt de Vries-Uiterweerd <garmtdevries~at~gmail.com>
>>Subject: Re: I am sorry to state that the forum has become a target
>>for scammers
>>To: "Jules Verne Forum" <jvf~at~Gilead.org.il>
>>Date: Saturday, August 14, 2010, 2:39 AM
>>
>>
>>William, there's a difference between sPammers (those who post mass
>>mailings to sell pharmaceuticals and whatnot) and sCammers (those
>who
>>fool people into paying a lot of money for something they're never
>>going to get).
>>
>>That said, I have never had any problem with either spammers or
>>scammers through the JV Forum. I had a look in my spam folder, but
>>nothing there either... I believe there is a rather efficient spam
>>filter on the server end of the forum, but you can't exclude the
>>occasional spam/scam slipping through. Restricting the posting of
>>messages to long-term active members goes against the whole idea of
>>free communication between Verne fans.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Garmt.
>>
>>On 14 August 2010 06:11, WILLIAM JONES <wbj514~at~sbcglobal.net>
>>wrote:
>>> This proposal seems, with all due respect, a bit over the top.
>>>Although I
>>> can speak only for myself, I've never had any trouble with spammers
>>>-- the
>>> U.S. term for the breed -- in my Jules Verne Forum email. I enjoy
>>>keeping up
>>> with the various postings on issues of current interest in the
>>>international
>>> Vernian community without feeling compelled to weigh in on any of
>>>them.
>>> Imposing publish-or-perish or use-it-or-lose-it criteria would
>>>amount to
>>> overkill.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Received on Sun 15 Aug 2010 - 06:18:43 IDT

JV.Gilead.org.il
Copyright © Zvi Har’El
$Date: 2010/08/15 20:00:03 $$