GNU FUD

0 views
Skip to first unread message

rjack

unread,
May 25, 2007, 7:50:51 PM5/25/07
to
The holding in Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components,
Inc., 387 F.3d 522 (6th Cir. 2004) unequivocally demonstrates that a
copyright license may not control source code that implements a step in
a process patent under U.S. law.

The above result may not be true in non-U.S. jurisdictions but the
obvious deception by the vocal supporters of the Free Software
Foundation concerning the GPL3 and U.S. patents destroys any credibility
they might have when complaining about Microsoft's hegemony.

GPL supporters and not Microsoft are truly the culprits in the FUD wars
concerning patents and computer programming. Their efforts amount to
nothing more than one great SPAM conspiracy in the open source world.
Sadly, it amazing how many people like Bruce Perens spew GPL3 nonsense
concerning patents.

rjack

David Kastrup

unread,
May 26, 2007, 3:58:44 AM5/26/07
to
rjack <rjack@com> writes:

> The holding in Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control
> Components, Inc., 387 F.3d 522 (6th Cir. 2004) unequivocally
> demonstrates that a copyright license may not control source code
> that implements a step in a process patent under U.S. law.

You mean that this is a Supreme Court decision based solely on the
Berne convention and thus forms an unequivocal standard of both
national and international law?

Did not think so.

> The above result may not be true in non-U.S. jurisdictions but the

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Not that it would be true to a sufficiently reliable degree in
U.S. jurisdictions...

> obvious deception by the vocal supporters of the Free Software
> Foundation concerning the GPL3 and U.S. patents destroys any
> credibility they might have when complaining about Microsoft's
> hegemony.

Wow. Now you are losing it. It has always been stated that the GPLv2
would already imply a patent license under U.S. law, but that it is
something which needs to be made explicit for the sake of both clarity
and international law.

Anyway, the obvious befuddlement you have about the license destroys
any credibility you might have when handing in your tax return
statements. You don't see the connection? Then we are already two.

> GPL supporters and not Microsoft are truly the culprits in the FUD
> wars concerning patents and computer programming. Their efforts
> amount to nothing more than one great SPAM conspiracy in the open
> source world. Sadly, it amazing how many people like Bruce Perens
> spew GPL3 nonsense concerning patents.

You should wipe the foam off your mouth. You don't even manage to
form complete sentences right now.

--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Rui Miguel Silva Seabra

unread,
May 26, 2007, 5:41:46 AM5/26/07
to gnu-misc...@gnu.org
Your credibility was ruined long ago, and is only gone even deeper by
faking your email in order to get spam-bots onto my mail server.

STOP FAKING YOUR FROM ADDRESS

You DO NOT come from com.1407.org

Rui

--
+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi
+ So let's do it...?

signature.asc

David Kastrup

unread,
May 26, 2007, 6:07:06 AM5/26/07
to
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra <r...@1407.org> writes:

> Your credibility was ruined long ago, and is only gone even deeper by
> faking your email in order to get spam-bots onto my mail server.
>
> STOP FAKING YOUR FROM ADDRESS
>
> You DO NOT come from com.1407.org

While I agree that the original poster is rather incoherent, I am
afraid that this particular complaint is nonsense. His faked from
address is just "rjack@com", namely a host named "com" with no
specified domain. Any "1407.org" domain you might have been seeing
has been added by your own software or your interpretation of its
output. His posting contains nothing of the sort.

rjack

unread,
May 26, 2007, 6:51:49 AM5/26/07
to
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> Your credibility was ruined long ago, and is only gone even deeper by
> faking your email in order to get spam-bots onto my mail server.
>
> STOP FAKING YOUR FROM ADDRESS
>
> You DO NOT come from com.1407.org
>
> Rui
>

The address "rjack@com" is faked to prevent GNU disciples and SPAMMERS
from overwhelming my true email address. There are so many crackpot
zealots practicing the GNU relgion that I even receive crank phone calls
from Europe in the middle of the night. Many serious observers of
Intellectual Property law like Alexander Terekov know my true email
address.

David Kastrup

unread,
May 26, 2007, 8:23:40 AM5/26/07
to
rjack <rjack@com> writes:

Does that mean that our local trolls coordinate their ramblings in
private communication? Anyway, you should try spelling your hero
correctly.

By the way: I agree with your assessment of Alexander being an avid
observer of what you call "Intellectual Property law" (there is
actually no such thing, as there are disparate laws about the items
grouped under this term). The problem is that he is completely unable
to draw any reasonable conclusions from his observations: his
predictions are consistently utterly wrong, and he blames this on
"drunk judges" and similar excuses.

Nevertheless, quite a few of the quotations he digs up _are_
interesting.

Alexander Terekhov

unread,
May 26, 2007, 8:45:14 AM5/26/07
to

David Kastrup wrote:
[...]

> By the way: I agree with your assessment of Alexander being an avid
> observer of what you call "Intellectual Property law" (there is

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Intellectual_property_law

> actually no such thing, as there are disparate laws about the items
> grouped under this term). The problem is that he is completely unable
> to draw any reasonable conclusions from his observations: his
> predictions are consistently utterly wrong, and he blames this on
> "drunk judges" and similar excuses.

Do you really want to me post Easterbrook's summary of the GPL (his
"quick look" on Wallace's claim aside for a moment) once again?

I seem to recall that you *agreed* that Easterbrook was indeed
"drunken" at least regarding his ability to comprehend the GPL.

No?

regards,
alexander.

David Kastrup

unread,
May 26, 2007, 9:02:17 AM5/26/07
to
Alexander Terekhov <tere...@web.de> writes:

Your recollections are rather colorful. I am rather certain that I
said no such thing. I might have differed in details with his
assessment and reasoning which is not all too surprising. The bottom
line, however, seems to match pretty much what I would have expected.

Alexander Terekhov

unread,
May 26, 2007, 9:16:19 AM5/26/07
to

David Kastrup wrote:
>
> Alexander Terekhov <tere...@web.de> writes:
>
> > David Kastrup wrote:
> > [...]
> >> By the way: I agree with your assessment of Alexander being an avid
> >> observer of what you call "Intellectual Property law" (there is
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Intellectual_property_law
> >
> >> actually no such thing, as there are disparate laws about the items
> >> grouped under this term). The problem is that he is completely unable
> >> to draw any reasonable conclusions from his observations: his
> >> predictions are consistently utterly wrong, and he blames this on
> >> "drunk judges" and similar excuses.
> >
> > Do you really want to me post Easterbrook's summary of the GPL (his
> > "quick look" on Wallace's claim aside for a moment) once again?
> >
> > I seem to recall that you *agreed* that Easterbrook was indeed
> > "drunken" at least regarding his ability to comprehend the GPL.
>
> Your recollections are rather colorful. I am rather certain that I
> said no such thing. I might have differed in details with his
> assessment and reasoning which is not all too surprising.

I wrote:

|| And, BTW, according to EASTERBROOK, "the GPL propagates from user to
|| user and revision to revision: neither the original author, nor any
|| creator of a revised or improved version, may charge for the
|| software or allow any successor to charge."
||
|| Got it?

You replied:

| Well, I hope not. The above sounds a bit confused, or at least
| sloppily worded.

regards,
alexander.

Rui Miguel Silva Seabra

unread,
May 26, 2007, 12:02:53 PM5/26/07
to rjack, gnu-misc...@gnu.org
Sáb, 2007-05-26 às 05:51 -0500, rjack escreveu:
> Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> > Your credibility was ruined long ago, and is only gone even deeper by
> > faking your email in order to get spam-bots onto my mail server.
> >
> > STOP FAKING YOUR FROM ADDRESS
> >
> > You DO NOT come from com.1407.org
> >
> > Rui
> >
>
> The address "rjack@com" is faked to prevent GNU disciples and SPAMMERS

Fuck you. In your email's headers one can read:

Date: Sat, 26 May 2007 05:51:49 -0500
From: rjack <rj...@com.1407.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Windows/20070326)

> from overwhelming my true email address. There are so many crackpot
> zealots practicing the GNU relgion that I even receive crank phone calls
> from Europe in the middle of the night. Many serious observers of
> Intellectual Property law like Alexander Terekov know my true email
> address.

So fuck you, asshole. Get out of this newsgroup, you lunatic drug
induced spammer.

signature.asc

Rui Miguel Silva Seabra

unread,
May 26, 2007, 12:07:15 PM5/26/07
to David Kastrup, gnu-misc...@gnu.org

Sorry but no way:

Date: Sat, 26 May 2007 05:51:49 -0500
From: rjack <rj...@com.1407.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Windows/20070326)

Rui

signature.asc

Alexander Terekhov

unread,
May 26, 2007, 12:19:39 PM5/26/07
to

Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
>
> Sรกb, 2007-05-26 ร s 05:51 -0500, rjack escreveu:
> > Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> > > Your credibility was ruined long ago, and is only gone even deeper by
> > > faking your email in order to get spam-bots onto my mail server.
> > >
> > > STOP FAKING YOUR FROM ADDRESS
> > >
> > > You DO NOT come from com.1407.org
> > >
> > > Rui
> > >
> >
> > The address "rjack@com" is faked to prevent GNU disciples and SPAMMERS
>
> Fuck you. In your email's headers one can read:

Hey mini-RMS, you're also quite talented!

http://groups.google.com/group/gnu.misc.discuss/msg/71da364161ef34db?dmode=source

"From: rjack <rjack@com>"

regards,
alexander.

Alfred M. Szmidt

unread,
May 26, 2007, 12:11:28 PM5/26/07
to Rui Miguel Silva Seabra, gnu-misc...@gnu.org, rj...@com.1407.org
Please stop spamming the list with profanity, it isn't useful.


David Kastrup

unread,
May 26, 2007, 12:24:55 PM5/26/07
to Rui Miguel Silva Seabra, gnu-misc...@gnu.org
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra <r...@1407.org> writes:

> Sáb, 2007-05-26 às 12:07 +0200, David Kastrup escreveu:

> Sorry but no way:
>
> Date: Sat, 26 May 2007 05:51:49 -0500
> From: rjack <rj...@com.1407.org>
> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Windows/20070326)

Your mail server has added the domain in order to create a complete
mailing address. If you had been reading this posting from a
Newsserver instead of by mail, like you can see with all original
headers at
<URL:http://groups.google.de/group/gnu.misc.discuss/msg/e68e7d970b543ef2>,
you'd not have seen your domain added.

Again: in this respect you are mistaken about the original poster, and
it might be smart to stop this before you are giving him ideas.

His choice of a fake mail domain _is_, by the way, idiotic, but it
does not single you out. He should pick something ending in
".invalid" if he is really out to have an invalid address.

John Hasler

unread,
May 26, 2007, 12:27:53 PM5/26/07
to
rjack writes:
> The address "rjack@com" is faked to prevent GNU disciples and SPAMMERS

The proper way to obfuscate your email is to use something like
"rj...@example.com" or "rjack@anything,invalid". These domains are
reserved.

Rui writes:
> In your email's headers one can read:

> From: rjack <rj...@com.1407.org>

Only you see that.

I see "From: rjack <rjack@com>" reading via Usenet. If I was receiving the
mailing list I would see "From: <rj...@com.dhh.gt.org>" but I would not be
disturbed because I know how my email software works.
--
John Hasler
jo...@dhh.gt.org
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI USA

Rui Miguel Silva Seabra

unread,
May 26, 2007, 12:34:42 PM5/26/07
to David Kastrup, gnu-misc...@gnu.org
Sáb, 2007-05-26 às 18:24 +0200, David Kastrup escreveu:
> Rui Miguel Silva Seabra <r...@1407.org> writes:
>
> > Sáb, 2007-05-26 às 12:07 +0200, David Kastrup escreveu:
> > Sorry but no way:
> >
> > Date: Sat, 26 May 2007 05:51:49 -0500
> > From: rjack <rj...@com.1407.org>
> > User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Windows/20070326)
>
> Your mail server has added the domain in order to create a complete
> mailing address. If you had been reading this posting from a
> Newsserver instead of by mail, like you can see with all original
> headers at
> <URL:http://groups.google.de/group/gnu.misc.discuss/msg/e68e7d970b543ef2>,
> you'd not have seen your domain added.
>
> Again: in this respect you are mistaken about the original poster, and
> it might be smart to stop this before you are giving him ideas.

No I am not:

helo xxxx
250 mail.1407.org
mail from: rjack@com
250 Ok
rcpt to: r...@1407.org
504 <rjack@com>: Sender address rejected: need fully-qualified address

While:

helo xxxx
250 mail.1407.org
mail from: rj...@com.1407.org
250 Ok
rcpt to: r...@1407.org
250 Ok
DATA
354 End data with <CR><LF>.<CR><LF>
...
.
250 Ok: queued as ECF4C2015D

See the difference?

signature.asc

Alfred M. Szmidt

unread,
May 26, 2007, 12:40:15 PM5/26/07
to Rui Miguel Silva Seabra, d...@gnu.org, gnu-misc...@gnu.org
David is correct, it is your setup that is b0rked. Here is the full
message with header and all. You can even look at ftp://lists.gnu.org
and see how it is handled for the mailing lists.

X-Coding-System: iso-8859-1-unix
Mail-from: From rjack@com Sat May 26 18:01:19 2007
Received: from lgh163a.kemisten.nu (a...@localhost.my.domain [IPv6:::1])
by lgh163a.kemisten.nu (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id l4QBaJUZ027723
for <ams@localhost>; Sat, 26 May 2007 13:36:19 +0200 (CEST)
Envelope-to: a...@gnu.org
Delivery-date: Sat, 26 May 2007 07:41:45 -0400
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org [199.232.76.164]
by lgh163a.kemisten.nu with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.2)
for <ams@localhost> (single-drop); Sat, 26 May 2007 13:36:19 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173])
by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
(envelope-from <gnu-misc-discuss-bounces+ams=gnu...@gnu.org>)
id 1HrueX-0006bm-3c
for a...@gnu.org; Sat, 26 May 2007 07:41:45 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60)
(envelope-from <gnu-misc-discuss-bounces+ams=gnu...@gnu.org>)
id 1Hruef-0004Mc-Tp
for a...@gnu.org; Sat, 26 May 2007 07:41:54 -0400
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.0 (2005-09-13) on monty-python
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed
version=3.1.0
Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165])
by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
(envelope-from <gnu-misc-discuss-bounces+ams=gnu...@gnu.org>)
id 1Hruef-0004MY-PM
for a...@gnu.org; Sat, 26 May 2007 07:41:53 -0400
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org)
by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1Hruef-00046H-P4
for a...@gnu.org; Sat, 26 May 2007 07:41:53 -0400
Path: shelby.stanford.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews.google.com!news2.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local01.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.insightbb.com!news.insightbb.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 26 May 2007 05:51:58 -0500


Date: Sat, 26 May 2007 05:51:49 -0500

From: rjack <rjack@com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Windows/20070326)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss
References: <T_6dndfXzvr_68rb...@insightbb.com>
<mailman.1267.1180172642...@gnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <mailman.1267.1180172642...@gnu.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <0cGdnQ9G09DTjMXb...@insightbb.com>
Lines: 17
NNTP-Posting-Host: 74.142.17.209
X-Trace: sv3-QNFwQ5t1WWqf2VXprO85KleL7je1bMy7pe/LONxnsdEr5RYvFa+3bjltPJ7HrTrTNPMAXFKpXxKfhcW!a79VT+jUvSoaat4Cejr1I9omrZG7zPRYYDxdn3L+5POiz+pRrgAuFCh0c2xhi+tmS0y9EMBuXIny!qbp/UXzwD4SStGRgJQ==
X-Complaints-To: ab...@insightbb.com
X-DMCA-Complaints-To: ab...@insightbb.com
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint
properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.34
Xref: shelby.stanford.edu gnu.misc.discuss:93598
To: gnu-misc...@gnu.org
Subject: Re: GNU FUD
X-BeenThere: gnu-misc...@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: General GNU project and free software discussions
<gnu-misc-discuss.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss>,
<mailto:gnu-misc-dis...@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/gnu-misc-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:gnu-misc...@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gnu-misc-dis...@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss>,
<mailto:gnu-misc-dis...@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: gnu-misc-discuss-bounces+ams=gnu...@gnu.org
Errors-To: gnu-misc-discuss-bounces+ams=gnu...@gnu.org
X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4)
X-UIDL: kn-!!GS(#!2F)#!Sb1!!

Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:

> Your credibility was ruined long ago, and is only gone even deeper by
> faking your email in order to get spam-bots onto my mail server.
>
> STOP FAKING YOUR FROM ADDRESS
>
> You DO NOT come from com.1407.org
>

> Rui
>

The address "rjack@com" is faked to prevent GNU disciples and SPAMMERS

from overwhelming my true email address. There are so many crackpot
zealots practicing the GNU relgion that I even receive crank phone calls
from Europe in the middle of the night. Many serious observers of
Intellectual Property law like Alexander Terekov know my true email
address.

_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc...@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss


Rui Miguel Silva Seabra

unread,
May 26, 2007, 12:44:57 PM5/26/07
to a...@gnu.org, d...@gnu.org, gnu-misc...@gnu.org
Sáb, 2007-05-26 às 18:40 +0200, Alfred M. Szmidt escreveu:
> David is correct, it is your setup that is b0rked. Here is the full
> message with header and all. You can even look at ftp://lists.gnu.org
> and see how it is handled for the mailing lists.

Explain how come my MTA *rejects* rjack@com then? Is it magic, perhaps?

signature.asc

Rui Miguel Silva Seabra

unread,
May 26, 2007, 12:45:29 PM5/26/07
to John Hasler, gnu-misc...@gnu.org
Sáb, 2007-05-26 às 11:27 -0500, John Hasler escreveu:
> I see "From: rjack <rjack@com>" reading via Usenet. If I was receiving the
> mailing list I would see "From: <rj...@com.dhh.gt.org>" but I would not be
> disturbed because I know how my email software works.

My MTA rejects rjack@com

signature.asc

David Kastrup

unread,
May 26, 2007, 12:54:09 PM5/26/07
to
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra <r...@1407.org> writes:

> Sáb, 2007-05-26 às 11:27 -0500, John Hasler escreveu:
>> I see "From: rjack <rjack@com>" reading via Usenet. If I was receiving the
>> mailing list I would see "From: <rj...@com.dhh.gt.org>" but I would not be
>> disturbed because I know how my email software works.
>
> My MTA rejects rjack@com

The verified address would be the mailing list address. That one is
valid.

Really, at the moment there seems to be some sort of competition who
can get the most egg on one's face.

David Kastrup

unread,
May 26, 2007, 12:58:41 PM5/26/07
to
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra <r...@1407.org> writes:

> Sáb, 2007-05-26 às 18:40 +0200, Alfred M. Szmidt escreveu:
>> David is correct, it is your setup that is b0rked. Here is the full
>> message with header and all. You can even look at ftp://lists.gnu.org
>> and see how it is handled for the mailing lists.
>
> Explain how come my MTA *rejects* rjack@com then? Is it magic, perhaps?

It does not reject gnu-misc...@gnu.org, presumably. I recommend
that you learn the difference between the "From: " header in a mail
and the "From " line in an mbox file usually (but not necessarily)
derived from the SMTP greeting.

I would not go as far as to claim that your setup is broken (putting a
default mail domain into some headers is not uncommon in order to make
them replyable), but it would seem that you don't understand what your
system is doing here.

Alfred M. Szmidt

unread,
May 26, 2007, 12:53:48 PM5/26/07
to John Hasler, gnu-misc...@gnu.org
I see "From: rjack <rjack@com>" reading via Usenet. If I was
receiving the mailing list I would see "From:
<rj...@com.dhh.gt.org>" but I would not be disturbed because I know
how my email software works.

Depends on who is on the receiving end, my messages come through as
addressed to rjack@com.


rjack

unread,
May 26, 2007, 1:16:42 PM5/26/07
to
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> Sáb, 2007-05-26 às 11:27 -0500, John Hasler escreveu:
>> I see "From: rjack <rjack@com>" reading via Usenet. If I was receiving the
>> mailing list I would see "From: <rj...@com.dhh.gt.org>" but I would not be
>> disturbed because I know how my email software works.
>
> My MTA rejects rjack@com
>
> Rui
>

Sigh.

I am unsure what triggered the paranoid reaction to a fake email address
but I have created a real live account (guaranteed to work) at
<robjack.insightbb.com> with 100 megabytes of cyclical redundancy. You
are welcome to post all the vituperative messages that it requires to
vent your anger. The servers are located offshore, but I am fairly
certain the island will not sink irrespective of the number of hate
messages you manage to send. The account will cost me $7.00 a month but
it's certainly worth it if it alleviates your obvious mental anguish.

Now I'm not such a bad guy after all am I?

rjack

Miles Bader

unread,
May 26, 2007, 4:40:31 PM5/26/07
to
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra <r...@1407.org> writes:
> Date: Sat, 26 May 2007 05:51:49 -0500
> From: rjack <rj...@com.1407.org>
> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Windows/20070326)

Er, David's right -- I only see "<rjack@com>"; apparently either some
software on your end appends your domain name to "apparently local"
addresses.

-miles

--
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.

Rui Miguel Silva Seabra

unread,
May 26, 2007, 7:26:46 PM5/26/07
to rjack, gnu-misc...@gnu.org
Sáb, 2007-05-26 às 12:16 -0500, rjack escreveu:
> Now I'm not such a bad guy after all am I?

You're a complete dimwit second personality of Alexander Terekhov.

signature.asc

Richard Tobin

unread,
May 26, 2007, 8:22:01 PM5/26/07
to
In article <mailman.1282.1180195510...@gnu.org>,

Rui Miguel Silva Seabra <r...@1407.org> wrote:

>In your email's headers one can read:

He's not sending email. He's posting an article to the gnu.misc.discuss
newsgroup. If you are seeing it as email, it's because you are using
a usenet-to-email gateway, and that's what's adding your domain. No-one
else sees that address.

-- Richard
--
"Consideration shall be given to the need for as many as 32 characters
in some alphabets" - X3.4, 1963.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages