On Tue, 20 Jul 1993 23:33:51 -0400 F. Scott Ophof said:
>Tasos says the following item apparently didn't make it to LSTSRV-L.
>I haven't seen it there either.  In the interest of the whole MLM
>community, I felt it to be a good idea to forward this item with
>announcements from Tasos to some MLM-related lists.
>
>Please see this as FYI.  I hope to make this my last posting on
>the subject.
Sorry.
 
>
>
>Regards.
>$$\
>
>--------------------(fwd)---------------------
>On Sat, 17 Jul 1993 18:49:58 -0400 Anastasios Kotsikonas said:
>>I would like to address the threats that appeared recently on lstsrv-l and
>>forwarded to this list, and make some announcements. My reply of last Thursday
>>on this issue to this list seems to have gone to /dev/null due to local mail
>>configuration problems. Also a separate message had been sent from
>>[log in to unmask] (where mail does go out) on late Thursday night (after
>>discovering the local problems) to lstsrv-l, but apparently never got posted!!
>>I wonder why.
>
>>Briefly, Mr. Thomas' claims about our help files are plain false. You only
>>need to look in your copies of the help files to see that the wording he is
>>complaining about was long changed. We sure all now know we had changed the
>>name of the system as well -- Mr. Thomas refuses to recognize even that. In
>>addition, the comments in the original help file were placed there after HIS
>>request to clarify things, he did not agree with them, we changed them but he
>>never cared to review the new ones; then he gets on the net making the false
>>claims we have seen.
After the last go around about this in April, I decided to do a little
personal investigation.  First, I've tried to compile a list of
of listserv-pretenders.  I'll forward that list here shortly.
The completely difference in handling such simple commands as 'help'
or 'release' has made this a nightmare.  Second, I wanted to understand
Tasos statements, and look at his claim on the help file differientiating
his code from Eric's.  I would strongly dispute his claim that he has
done this.  Sending the command 'help' gives no such explanation.
Only by sending the command 'help listserv' is such an explanation
sent buried in some other text.  A situation that is highly unlikely.
 
Also, the number of back level Unix-pretenders is high given that
6.0 has been available since at least early April.
 
 
 
>
>>At this point I will let you be the judge. As far as I am concerned it is
>>my duty to protect myself and you from anybody's menacing threats, however
>>unfounded as they may seem. For the time being you should not feel uneasy
>>about the system raising confusion: the X-Listserver-Version: and Version:
>>header lines adequately protect you as identifiers of the system. Users
>>who get confused simply have not simply looked at them, and they place
>>themselves in the same situation as "- But officer I did not see the No
>Parking
>>sign. - It is there and is your duty to look for it."
>
/ahw