Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

[skquinn at rushpost.com (Shawn K. Quinn)]

On Fri, 2016-10-14 at 11:46 -0600, Mirimir wrote:
> On 10/14/2016 11:09 AM, Shawn K. Quinn wrote:
> > No moderator worth his/her salt would ever have approved your posting.
> > Something to think about.
> > 
> > Reposting email clearly intended to be private is often in poor taste,
> > even if technically legal. Especially if it is explicit in nature, as
> > this one was.
> 
> Well, except that this is a totally unmoderated list. Which is a good
> thing, I believe. So it's all on Razer.

My points with that statement about a moderator were:
1. The original should never have been posted. 
2. An unmoderated list means the participants themselves are supposed to
moderate their postings, and because posts like the original are making
it on to the list anyway, clearly this is failing.

Can we agree that there's crap that never should make it on to the list
to begin with, such as the explicit garbage clearly never intended for
public consumption which I was originally replying to?

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn <skquinn at rushpost.com>