Hi,
Free 51 Book Summaries.... Offer only valid till 1st April 2011.
http://51nuts.com/summaries.html
Hurrryyy... 51Nuts.com
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 4:05 PM, Navin Dhanuka information.architect.007@gmail.com wrote:
Free 51 Book Summaries.... Offer only valid till 1st April 2011.
How does this qualify at ILUG-BOM list?
How does this qualify at ILUG-BOM list?
FOSS apps do need better UI, UX & IA/.
On Thursday 10 March 2011 17:51:00 Navin Dhanuka wrote:
How does this qualify at ILUG-BOM list?
Twisted Commercial.
FOSS apps do need better UI, UX & IA/.
A printed index and preview of books could have been published on the net itself. Why the hell do they require my email id other than to spam.
FOSS apps do need better UI, UX & IA/.
A printed index and preview of books could have been published on the net itself. Why the hell do they require my email id other than to spam.
-- Rgds JTD
Because this is a limited offer...
After 1st April any one who wants access has to pay for it,
Regards, Navin Dhanuka
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 7:40 PM, Navin Dhanuka information.architect.007@gmail.com wrote:
A printed index and preview of books could have been published on the net itself. Why the hell do they require my email id other than to spam.
Because this is a limited offer... After 1st April any one who wants access has to pay for it,
FOSS has nothing to do with 'hurry, limited edition'. Please don't twist and post commercial stuffs. I've noticed that you did cross post also and what is reaction of other group admin.
List admin - can we please note of this?
kthxbye.
On Thursday 10 March 2011 19:40:05 Navin Dhanuka wrote:
FOSS apps do need better UI, UX & IA/.
A printed index and preview of books could have been published on the net itself. Why the hell do they require my email id other than to spam.
-- Rgds JTD
Because this is a limited offer...
After 1st April any one who wants access has to pay for it,
So how does that change anything about requring my email? Pay to get a review of books, which you then pay to buy from amazon. Give us a break.
On Mar 10, 2011, at 8:04 PM, jtd wrote:
So how does that change anything about requring my email? Pay to get a review of books, which you then pay to buy from amazon. Give us a break.
Jude, ditto! Navin, bad move. Totally.
Also, instead of him giving us a break; I'd suggest the list admin give us a break - from him. If my memory serves me right, this is not the first instance.
Amol Hatwar
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 8:16 PM, Amol Hatwár amol.hatwar@exceed.co.in wrote:
Also, instead of him giving us a break; I'd suggest the list admin give us a break - from him. If my memory serves me right, this is not the first instance.
+1.
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 8:28 PM, Kartik Mistry kartik.mistry@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 8:16 PM, Amol Hatwár amol.hatwar@exceed.co.in wrote:
Also, instead of him giving us a break; I'd suggest the list admin give us a break - from him. If my memory serves me right, this is not the first instance.
+1.
I am not unsubscribing him just as yet. But, I have put him on moderation. If he keeps repeating such offences then I will unsubscribe him from the mailing list.
On Fri, 2011-03-11 at 11:16 +0530, Mehul Ved wrote:
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 8:28 PM, Kartik Mistry kartik.mistry@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 8:16 PM, Amol Hatwár
amol.hatwar@exceed.co.in wrote:
Also, instead of him giving us a break; I'd suggest the list admin
give us
a break - from him. If my memory serves me right, this is not the
first
instance.
+1.
I am not unsubscribing him just as yet. But, I have put him on moderation. If he keeps repeating such offences then I will unsubscribe him from the mailing list.
Moderation is evil. who exactly is going to decide what is good behaviour or bad? Or are you going to sit with him and counsel him? Put him on a couch and reform him? Such big brother attitude does not belong in a LUG. Either keep the person - or ban him. Moderation is also not good for the soul of the moderator - sooner or later it goes to his head and he becomes a tyrant. As far as I know this list has been governed by peer pressure so far - please keep it that way.
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 12:02 PM, Kenneth Gonsalves lawgon@thenilgiris.comwrote:
Moderation is evil. who exactly is going to decide what is good behaviour or bad?
Can we just vote up and unsubscribe instead of moderating +1 to unsubscribe
-- regards KG http://lawgon.livejournal.com Coimbatore LUG rox http://ilugcbe.techstud.org/
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Mukesh Yadav mak.gnu@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 12:02 PM, Kenneth Gonsalves lawgon@thenilgiris.comwrote:
Moderation is evil. who exactly is going to decide what is good behaviour or bad?
Can we just vote up and unsubscribe instead of moderating +1 to unsubscribe
Or maybe we can just trust the list admins to block anything that is spam from this user and pass all legitimate posts through. If you can't trust your list admin to distinguish between spam and ham, maybe you should be looking for a new list admin?
Regards,
-- Raj
On Fri, 2011-03-11 at 12:41 +0530, Raj Mathur wrote:
Can we just vote up and unsubscribe instead of moderating +1 to unsubscribe
Or maybe we can just trust the list admins to block anything that is spam from this user and pass all legitimate posts through.
and how does he do this without putting the member 'on moderation' or 'in jail' as the India's most notorious moderator would put it?
On Fri, 2011-03-11 at 12:29 +0530, Mukesh Yadav wrote:
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 12:02 PM, Kenneth Gonsalves lawgon@thenilgiris.comwrote:
Moderation is evil. who exactly is going to decide what is good behaviour or bad?
Can we just vote up and unsubscribe instead of moderating +1 to unsubscribe
-1 to unsubscribe - I do not think he is a wanton troll, nor has he sold his address book to some social networking site. If he does not get suitably cooked by all the flames, then we can reconsider.
On Friday 11 March 2011 12:02 PM, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
Moderation is evil. who exactly is going to decide what is good behaviour or bad? Or are you going to sit with him and counsel him? Put him on a couch and reform him? Such big brother attitude does not belong in a LUG. Either keep the person - or ban him. Moderation is also not good for the soul of the moderator - sooner or later it goes to his head and he becomes a tyrant. As far as I know this list has been governed by peer pressure so far - please keep it that way.
This is strange. To protect the freedom of the member in question we should throw him out instead of giving him a chance to improve. Moderation is only a temporary measure to ensure that inappropriate mails do not reach the list and trouble everyone. Who decides that the mail is inappropriate; well some already want to throw the member out, what more proof?
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 9:40 PM, Rony gnulinuxist@gmail.com wrote:
This is strange. To protect the freedom of the member in question we should throw him out instead of giving him a chance to improve. Moderation is only a temporary measure to ensure that inappropriate mails do not reach the list and trouble everyone. Who decides that the mail is inappropriate; well some already want to throw the member out, what more proof?
Look for archive and other mailing list for proof. (Don't be amused)
On Fri, 2011-03-11 at 21:40 +0530, Rony wrote:
On Friday 11 March 2011 12:02 PM, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
Moderation is evil. who exactly is going to decide what is good behaviour or bad? Or are you going to sit with him and counsel him?
Put
him on a couch and reform him? Such big brother attitude does not
belong
in a LUG. Either keep the person - or ban him. Moderation is also
not
good for the soul of the moderator - sooner or later it goes to his
head
and he becomes a tyrant. As far as I know this list has been
governed by
peer pressure so far - please keep it that way.
This is strange. To protect the freedom of the member in question we should throw him out instead of giving him a chance to improve. Moderation is only a temporary measure to ensure that inappropriate mails do not reach the list and trouble everyone.
please get a Phd in psychiatry and apply for the post of moderator.
On Saturday 12 March 2011 10:57 AM, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
On Fri, 2011-03-11 at 21:40 +0530, Rony wrote:
This is strange. To protect the freedom of the member in question we should throw him out instead of giving him a chance to improve. Moderation is only a temporary measure to ensure that inappropriate mails do not reach the list and trouble everyone.
please get a Phd in psychiatry and apply for the post of moderator.
I am already a moderator on another (non-technical) list.
On Sat, 2011-03-12 at 20:07 +0530, Rony wrote:
On Saturday 12 March 2011 10:57 AM, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
On Fri, 2011-03-11 at 21:40 +0530, Rony wrote:
This is strange. To protect the freedom of the member in question
we
should throw him out instead of giving him a chance to improve. Moderation is only a temporary measure to ensure that inappropriate mails do not reach the list and trouble everyone.
please get a Phd in psychiatry and apply for the post of moderator.
I am already a moderator on another (non-technical) list.
and currently how many people are in preventive detention on that list?
On Monday 14 March 2011 10:31 AM, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
On Sat, 2011-03-12 at 20:07 +0530, Rony wrote:
On Saturday 12 March 2011 10:57 AM, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
On Fri, 2011-03-11 at 21:40 +0530, Rony wrote:
This is strange. To protect the freedom of the member in question
we
should throw him out instead of giving him a chance to improve. Moderation is only a temporary measure to ensure that inappropriate mails do not reach the list and trouble everyone.
please get a Phd in psychiatry and apply for the post of moderator.
I am already a moderator on another (non-technical) list.
and currently how many people are in preventive detention on that list?
None as yet. Preventive detention would be a wrong term, as detention isolates the person from the mainstream activity. In moderation there is no isolation. There is just an additional manual filter added for incoming messages from that member to prevent any repeat mistakes of sending disturbing messages to the list. His list compliant messages get sent to the list. He keeps receiving list messages as before.
On Mon, 2011-03-14 at 13:45 +0530, Rony wrote:
should throw him out instead of giving him a chance to improve. Moderation is only a temporary measure to ensure that
inappropriate
mails do not reach the list and trouble everyone.
please get a Phd in psychiatry and apply for the post of
moderator.
I am already a moderator on another (non-technical) list.
and currently how many people are in preventive detention on that
list?
None as yet. Preventive detention would be a wrong term, as detention isolates the person from the mainstream activity. In moderation there is no isolation. There is just an additional manual filter added for incoming messages from that member to prevent any repeat mistakes of sending disturbing messages to the list. His list compliant messages get sent to the list. He keeps receiving list messages as before.
would censorship be the correct term?
On Monday 14 March 2011 02:22 PM, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
On Mon, 2011-03-14 at 13:45 +0530, Rony wrote:
should throw him out instead of giving him a chance to improve. Moderation is only a temporary measure to ensure that
inappropriate
mails do not reach the list and trouble everyone.
please get a Phd in psychiatry and apply for the post of
moderator.
I am already a moderator on another (non-technical) list.
and currently how many people are in preventive detention on that
list?
None as yet. Preventive detention would be a wrong term, as detention isolates the person from the mainstream activity. In moderation there is no isolation. There is just an additional manual filter added for incoming messages from that member to prevent any repeat mistakes of sending disturbing messages to the list. His list compliant messages get sent to the list. He keeps receiving list messages as before.
would censorship be the correct term?
To some extent, only to ensure that disturbing messages do not make it to everyone's inbox again.
On Mon, 2011-03-14 at 21:00 +0530, Rony wrote:
would censorship be the correct term?
To some extent, only to ensure that disturbing messages do not make it to everyone's inbox again.
and who will censor the censor? we do not know which messages he is rejecting - suppose he errs in his judgment?
On Tuesday 15 Mar 2011, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
On Mon, 2011-03-14 at 21:00 +0530, Rony wrote:
would censorship be the correct term?
To some extent, only to ensure that disturbing messages do not make it to everyone's inbox again.
and who will censor the censor? we do not know which messages he is rejecting - suppose he errs in his judgment?
Just go to another list -- no one is forcing you to remain here if you don't trust the list administrators. Or start your own list with your own rules. No one's stopping you from doing that either.
Now let's have another 50 meaningful messages about some inconsequential response to some inconsequential spam. Just because it's done that way the world over doesn't mean it's good enough for our list members -- oh no, we have to dissect each atom and examine each quark until we can extract the last amount of meaning and entertainment from it. Otherwise how do we get our money's worth from the list?
Request to list moderator goose-stepping nazi banana republic cannibalistic dictator types: please put everyone who's contributed to this thread (including me) immediately on moderation.
Regards,
-- Raj
On Tue, 2011-03-15 at 07:54 +0530, Raj Mathur (राज माथुर) wrote:
and who will censor the censor? we do not know which messages he is rejecting - suppose he errs in his judgment?
Just go to another list -- no one is forcing you to remain here if you don't trust the list administrators. Or start your own list with your own rules. No one's stopping you from doing that either.
it doesn't work like that. I like this list and I do not want it to become like some lists I used to be a member of - with a bunch of egoistic admins who spend their time being heavy-handed with members. Most of those lists are dead or dying. It is the duty of every member to make sure this one does not head down that slippery slope. And kicking people from the list is not death sentence. They can always rejoin under another id. It is not like the old days when email ids were difficult to obtain and expensive.
On Tuesday 15 March 2011 10:40 AM, Kenneth Gonsalves wrote:
On Tue, 2011-03-15 at 07:54 +0530, Raj Mathur (राज माथुर) wrote:
and who will censor the censor? we do not know which messages he is rejecting - suppose he errs in his judgment?
Just go to another list -- no one is forcing you to remain here if you don't trust the list administrators. Or start your own list with your own rules. No one's stopping you from doing that either.
it doesn't work like that. I like this list and I do not want it to become like some lists I used to be a member of - with a bunch of egoistic admins who spend their time being heavy-handed with members.
Loosen up at little. If we have survived for many years on this list then rest assured that the admins are quite liberal.
And kicking people from the list is not death sentence. They can always rejoin under another id. It is not like the old days when email ids were difficult to obtain and expensive.
Kicking a member out is insulting and demeaning and should be used only as a last resort when everything else fails. An email ID is not just a group of text characters, it is an individual's identity, it represents his/her self.
On Tue, 2011-03-15 at 21:43 +0530, Rony wrote:
own rules. No one's stopping you from doing that either.
it doesn't work like that. I like this list and I do not want it to become like some lists I used to be a member of - with a bunch of egoistic admins who spend their time being heavy-handed with
members.
Loosen up at little. If we have survived for many years on this list then rest assured that the admins are quite liberal.
you have totally missed the point. It is not a question of 'not trusting the admins' or that 'the admins are liberal'. I have known the current admins of this list for several years and worked with them on many occasions. Do I trust them? Yes, for example I know if they commit to attend a workshop or a conference, I need not worry. They will be there. Yes, if the list goes down they will not rest till it comes up. But censorship and moderation is something different. I would not trust Mother Theresa or Mahatma Gandhi or even myself in this matter. In these matters it is only peer pressure out in the open that keeps a list self-moderated. This is my opinion, and from what I can see of the successful mailing lists in India, it is followed. The lists that have followed the path of moderation are mostly dead or dying.
On Tuesday 15 March 2011 07:54 AM, Raj Mathur (राज माथुर) wrote:
Request to list moderator goose-stepping nazi banana republic cannibalistic dictator types:
LOL!
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 12:02 PM, Kenneth Gonsalves lawgon@thenilgiris.comwrote:
Moderation is evil. who exactly is going to decide what is good behaviour or bad? Or are you going to sit with him and counsel him? Put him on a couch and reform him? Such big brother attitude does not belong in a LUG. Either keep the person - or ban him. Moderation is also not good for the soul of the moderator - sooner or later it goes to his head and he becomes a tyrant. As far as I know this list has been governed by peer pressure so far - please keep it that way.
+1
On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 16:05 +0530, Navin Dhanuka wrote:
Free 51 Book Summaries.... Offer only valid till 1st April 2011.
looks like you have a virus - please reformat your hard disk (or upgrade to linux)
Hello Everyone, I am new user of fedora 13. I want to run internet in fedora 13 but i am not able to run can anyone tell me which driver is require to run it and from where i can get it (sen me link) i will be very thanksfull to all
On 03/12/2011 09:45 AM, dharmendra pal wrote:
Hello Everyone, I am new user of fedora 13. I want to run internet in fedora 13 but i am not able to run can anyone tell me which driver is require to run it and from where i can get it (sen me link) i will be very thanksfull to all
If you need help, first thing you should do is start a new thread with clear subject line. What you just did is called hijacking. So, please start a new thread with a subject line 'Help Needed in installing Fedora 13'.
Welcome to Fedora. Swapnil Muktware.com
On Saturday 12 March 2011 02:15 PM, dharmendra pal wrote:
Hello Everyone, I am new user of fedora 13. I want to run internet in fedora 13 but i am not able to run can anyone tell me which driver is require to run it and from where i can get it (sen me link) i will be very thanksfull to all
The question is vague. You need to give more details of type of internet service, connection, and till what stage did you reach and where do you get stuck etc.
-
Amol Hatwár -
Aniket Suryavanshi -
dharmendra pal -
jtd -
Kartik Mistry -
Kenneth Gonsalves -
Mehul Ved -
Mukesh Yadav -
Navin Dhanuka -
Raj Mathur -
Raj Mathur (राज माथुर)
-
Rony -
Swapnil -
Yohan Pereira