I think I could do help you out with new plugins package for gkrellm 2.
Would you prefer to keep it as it is now, or package every plugin
separately?  The latter would be probably easier to maintain.

from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by phobos.labs.netnoteinc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82A234416A
	for <jm@localhost>; Mon, 26 Aug 2002 10:25:12 -0400 (EDT)
from phobos [127.0.0.1]
	by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
	for jm@localhost (single-drop); Mon, 26 Aug 2002 15:25:12 +0100 (IST)
from xent.com ([64.161.22.236]) by dogma.slashnull.org
    (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7NKJVZ06924 for <jm@jmason.org>;
    Fri, 23 Aug 2002 21:19:32 +0100
from lair.xent.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xent.com (Postfix)
    with ESMTP id C9FFD2940C5; Fri, 23 Aug 2002 13:17:08 -0700 (PDT)
from mail1.panix.com (mail1.panix.com [166.84.1.72]) by xent.com
    (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1972294099 for <fork@xent.com>; Fri,
    23 Aug 2002 13:16:24 -0700 (PDT)
from 159-98.nyc.dsl.access.net (159-98.nyc.dsl.access.net
    [166.84.159.98]) by mail1.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF7E948AD7;
    Fri, 23 Aug 2002 16:18:11 -0400 (EDT)
No, hits=-5.7 required=7.0
	tests=IN_REP_TO,KNOWN_MAILING_LIST,OPT_IN,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,
	      SPAM_PHRASE_03_05,USER_AGENT_PINE
	version=2.40-cvs
From fork-admin@xent.com  Mon Aug 26 15:30:57 2002

me:
> >Spam is *the* tool for dissident news, since the fact that it's unsolicited
> >means that recipients can't be blamed for being on a mailing list.
>
Russell Turpin:
> That depends on how the list is collected, or
> even on what the senders say about how the list
> is collected. Better to just put it on a website,
> and that way it can be surfed anonymously. AND
> it doesn't clutter my inbox.
It doesn't work that way.  A website is opt-in, spam is no-opt.  If you
visit a samizdat site you can get in trouble.  If you get samizdat spam,
the worst that can be said is that you might have read it.  And as long as
the mailers send to individuals who clearly didn't opt-in, like party
officials, then other recipients can't get in trouble for requesting the
mail.
Plus, it's much harder to block spam than web sites.
But this shouldn't come as a surprize.  Spam is speech.  It may be sleazy,
but so what.
- Lucas
http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork