>... for their own protection. What do we need protection from?
s -- Dogs are tough. I've been interrogating this one for hours and he still won't tell me who's a good boy. simon@klunky / .co.uk / .org jonathonb <jonny.ch.b...@gmail.com> wrote: >Hi All, > >Some interesting responses already. Michael is correct the ethics board >of >my university generally prefer us to keep contributors anonymous, for >their >own protection. However should anybody wished to be named and/or >officially >acknowledged then I will be more than happy to do so. However the >community >itself 'spam assassin' will have to be under a pseudonym to protect any >contributors who have not 'opted in' to being named. > >Michael has very kindly offered to be interviewed. Are their any other >takers? > >If a skype interview is a little too much, how about a quick Email >survey? > >Jonathon Bell > > > >-- >View this message in context: >http://spamassassin.1065346.n5.nabble.com/Academic-interested-in-interviewing-you-for-research-paper-tp101241p101262.html >Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
