[Imc] Fwd: Re: posting at the U-C IMC

[Paul Riismandel]

Since Mr. Larrabee did respond to us as we asked I would like us to at 
least consider his response.

My position on this is that we should respond asking him to keep his posts 
to one a week or less, and omit any links to a page which offers things for 
sale and allow him to either accept or reject this.  If he accepts it 
explicitly then we'll see if he complies.  If he fails to respond, fails to 
respond directly (meaning, he responds with lots of flim-flam double-talk) 
or explicitly refuses then we should hide him in perpetuity.

My guess is that he won't comply, but I could be wrong.  I was surprised 
that he responded at all, though his response does seem to indicate his 
failure to really understand what's going on.  Nonetheless, we owe it to 
ourselves to take this dialogue to its logical end, before deciding to hide 
all his posts.

--Paul

At 09:06 AM 12/10/2001 -0600, Mike Lehman wrote:
>Just for the record, it was blatant advertising TWICE. He ALWAYS posts
>the weblink to his homepage, which has the pitch for the book on it in
>about four different places (not to mention the aggressive organ music
>downloads.) And the postings are nearly daily. And while Paul
>specifically addresses the spamming issue, he practically ignores it,
>saying that we all should be glad to be spammed by him.
>
>I hid this morning's post from him.
>Mike