Re: DIS: Pseudo-judgement of CFJ 1718

2007-08-09 Thread Geoffrey Spear
On 8/9/07, Peekee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Surely it is best to resolve the issue in the safety of the discussion > forum rather than with messages that would effect the game state. Surely it would be best to have your ISP block all traffic on port 25 from your unsecured resender? -- Geoff

Re: DIS: Pseudo-judgement of CFJ 1718

2007-08-09 Thread Peekee
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Pseudo-judgement of CFJ 1718: The message in question has no substantive effect, regardless of the identity of its submitter. I recommend a CFJ regarding the proposal "Support Ordinary" (or purported proposal, if submitted by a non-player). I recommend reading up on

DIS: Pseudo-judgement of CFJ 1718

2007-08-09 Thread emurphy42
Pseudo-judgement of CFJ 1718: The message in question has no substantive effect, regardless of the identity of its submitter. I recommend a CFJ regarding the proposal "Support Ordinary" (or purported proposal, if submitted by a non-player). I recommend reading up on Steve's Spam Scam, then runni