[Full-disclosure] LOL HY

[Matt Burnett]

You really think this would be hard to design. Think about how most  
spam solutions work, if you get 25 posts in hour with 100k  
attachments from a new user, do you think they are talking about  
security or are they posting porn. Anything a spam filter would  
consider suspicous could be flaged for moderator approval. Its not  
100% fool proof but do you really think some 16 year old kid whos  
posting porn here would take the time to try to defeat it, in order  
just to post crappy porn?

If implemented properly it would not limit the free exchange of  
SECURITY RELATED information, but would limit the exchange of porn on  
FD. You dont think a couple thousand security people, most of whom  
are strong supporters of privacy rights/civil rights/etc couldnt  
devise a proper system that would not impead the exchange of security  
related information?
Anyways what legal issues are you talking about, be specific. For one  
i know that it is against nearly all American corporate internet use  
policies to look at porn. So some 16 year old kid could potentialy  
get someone fired for sending porn on FD. Hows that for a legal issue.

You never read what i said. You claimed that the link at the bottom  
would remove me, i said it went to the charter. Go re-read that email.

What are you talking about, the charter never says "along with an  
open forum for discussion comes some undesirable..." Would you mind  
not making up quotes of FD> If you dont belive me then here is the  
google link verifing my claim:
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=%22along+with+an 
+open+forum+for+discussion+comes+some+undesirable%22 
+site:lists.grok.org.uk&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

Ive been around FD and BQ for several years, and no im not interested  
in a lite version of FD, just one that includes only security related  
information.

Would you please stop fabricating quotes and actually answer a couple  
of the questions instead of changing the subject? Thanks!