[this message is auto-posted to Alt.Seduction.Fast weekly]
Alt.Seduction.Fast is an unmoderated usenet group and is commonly referred to as "uASF". Moderated ASF is referred to as "mASF". Most people, now, who use the shorthand "ASF" are primarily referring to mASF, not uASF.
IMPORTANT, IF YOU DO NOTHING ELSE:
*** DON'T FEED THE TROLLS, IT'S REALLY NOT WORTH IT *** *** LURK FOR A FEW DAYS BEFORE POSTING OR REPLYING *** *** READ THE MATERIALS BEFORE POSTING (SEE BELOW) *** *** WHEN IN DOUBT, DO A SEARCH FIRST, POST SECOND ***
- Read the FAQ before asking newbie questions. - Lurk for at least a few days before making your first post. - If you want to post a question, check the FAQ first to make sure it isn't already answered there.
After you're done reading the FAQ, here are some other resources:
USE THE KILL-FILTER LIST!!!! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
However, that will leave you with almost no useful postings to peruse so it's highly recommended that you, instead, access mASF. Postings on how to access mASF are made available here weekly.
The owner of the website mentioned in the previous posting receives advertising income from the products being discussed on his "moderated" (that's another word for CENSORED, of course) forum.
One cannot equate a commercial website with USENET, for their structures are entirely different.
> The owner of the website mentioned in the previous posting receives > advertising income from the products being discussed on his "moderated" > (that's another word for CENSORED, of course) forum.
> One cannot equate a commercial website with USENET, for their structures > are entirely different.
Gordon needs to learn the difference between "exclusion" and "censorship." Letting everyone but Gordon post there is called "exclusion," while Gordon's trying to stiffle anything negative about him is called "censorship." On that note, when can we expect RICO 3 for repeating what Gordon nuked off the Google archive?
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:24:33 +0000, Ray Gordon wrote: > One cannot equate a commercial website with USENET, for their structures are > entirely different.
Thanks for pointing this out.
You're right. Fastseduction.com is not EQUAL to this USENET group. The quality and level of on topic discussion is much GREATER than that found here.
>Nevertheless, a commercial website has little in common with USENET.
grp-ie is just pissed that his own actions has caused him to be 'denied' axxess to that website. I guess they don't want child molesting hate mongers involved..
Can't say I blame them..
JJT
(to the tune of "Less then Zero, by Elvis C < Dallas Version > )
'Hellen' sucks da kennel off in succession, While Ray (grp-ie/Gordon Roy Parker) threatens minors in mommie's heaven.. Dreams his widdle dreams as 'hellen' looks up from giving head. Wet's his Under-Roos, grp-ie re-write his spew again Just to teach him he's a lie, and that he's loony in the head..
---
Chorus:
He brags about his Herpes. So the ladies don't reflect, truth is, his dollies don't respect him, U'all sure his mommie don't know... You'd think that grp-ie would learn, but His whole life is one big fat zero. Hey, ray... Hey, oo Ray-ey.
---
Calling "cunts" n "whores", calling anyone at the scene, If you were in the Twin Towers, your death grp-ie believes will pay for all his failures, every dollar he was denied. 'Hellen' wipes her mouth off & she swallows it with pride.. She moans, "47 poodles, earns us $24.95! ." NO TIP !
--- He brags about his Herpes. So the ladies don't reflect, truth is, his dollies don't respect him, U'all sure his mommie don't know... You'd think that grp-ie would learn, but His whole life is one big fat zero. Hey, ray... Hey, oo Ray-ey. ---
Under-Roos still steaming, grp-ie's 'fetal' on the floor. Mommie Parker thought her b/f beat grp-ie's ass into a ball . mom looks into the mirror, 'Hellen' turns and looks away. The dollies just don't give a shit as long as they get paid... 'Hellen' spits on grp-ie, as his fantasy fades away..
--- He brags about his Herpes. So the ladies don't reflect, truth is, his dollies don't respect him, U'all sure his mommie don't know... You'd think that grp-ie would learn, but His whole life is one big fat zero. Hey, ray... Hey, oo Ray-ey. ---
>> One cannot equate a commercial website with USENET, for their structures >> are entirely different.
> Gordon needs to learn the difference between "exclusion" and "censorship." > Letting everyone but Gordon post there is called "exclusion," while > Gordon's trying to stiffle anything negative about him is called > "censorship."
First let's address the part he snipped: "USENET has no moderator getting a cut of sales from the commercial products discussed on its boards."
Businesses that disparage their competition to market their wares generally wind up with Lanham Act lawsuits (this is why you almost never see it done in other businesses). It's one thing to "exclude" someone -- anyone has a right to do that -- quite another to make a public stink about it in the course of one's marketing.
There's no reason a site that didn't want me there could simply "exclude" me (or anyone else) and not bother mentioning it. You also would have no way of knowing if I'm the only one "excluded" or the only post that has ever been "moderated." Oh, and exclusion is a form of censorship.
>>> One cannot equate a commercial website with USENET, for their structures >>> are entirely different.
>> Gordon needs to learn the difference between "exclusion" and >> "censorship." Letting everyone but Gordon post there is called >> "exclusion," while Gordon's trying to stiffle anything negative about him >> is called "censorship."
> First let's address the part he snipped: "USENET has no moderator getting > a cut of sales from the commercial products discussed on its boards."
> Businesses that disparage their competition to market their wares > generally wind up with Lanham Act lawsuits (this is why you almost never > see it done in other businesses). It's one thing to "exclude" someone -- > anyone has a right to do that -- quite another to make a public stink > about it in the course of one's marketing.
> There's no reason a site that didn't want me there could simply "exclude" > me (or anyone else) and not bother mentioning it. You also would have no > way of knowing if I'm the only one "excluded" or the only post that has > ever been "moderated." Oh, and exclusion is a form of censorship.
> USENET is not censored.
Gordon is being disengenuous again. I did not snip any part of his post. Gordon's post is as read:
Path: be1.columbus.rr.com!news-server.columbus.rr.com!odin.oar.net!malgudi.oar.ne t!news.glorb.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!spamkiller2.gnilink.net!gnilink.net!t rndny08.POSTED!8db99605!not-for-mail Reply-To: "Ray Gordon" <r...@cybersheet.com> From: "Ray Gordon" <r...@cybersheet.com> Newsgroups: alt.seduction.fast References: <fh.1102968300_d2b195f5f54a40371e132b4b@fastseduction.com> Subject: Re: ASF Lines: 9 Organization: www.cybersheet.com X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original Message-ID: <5YAvd.5370$eO5.3026@trndny08> Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:24:33 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.236.29.19 X-Complaints-To: ab...@verizon.net X-Trace: trndny08 1103027073 68.236.29.19 (Tue, 14 Dec 2004 07:24:33 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 07:24:33 EST Xref: be1.columbus.rr.com alt.seduction.fast:259567
The owner of the website mentioned in the previous posting receives advertising income from the products being discussed on his "moderated" (that's another word for CENSORED, of course) forum.
One cannot equate a commercial website with USENET, for their structures are entirely different. -------------------------------------------------------- My reply was as read:
Path: be1.columbus.rr.com!news-server.columbus.rr.com!fe2.columbus.rr.com.POSTED! not-for-mail From: "HeeroYuy" <h...@h.h> Newsgroups: alt.seduction.fast References: <fh.1102968300_d2b195f5f54a40371e132...@fastseduction.com> <5YAvd.5370$eO5.3026@trndny08> Subject: Re: ASF Lines: 17 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 Message-ID: <_eDvd.39158$CG4.28...@fe2.columbus.rr.com> Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:01:14 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.24.235.91 X-Complaints-To: ab...@rr.com X-Trace: fe2.columbus.rr.com 1103036474 65.24.235.91 (Tue, 14 Dec 2004 10:01:14 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 10:01:14 EST Organization: Road Runner High Speed Online http://www.rr.com Xref: be1.columbus.rr.com alt.seduction.fast:259574
"Ray Gordon" <r...@cybersheet.com> wrote in message
> The owner of the website mentioned in the previous posting receives > advertising income from the products being discussed on his "moderated" > (that's another word for CENSORED, of course) forum.
> One cannot equate a commercial website with USENET, for their structures > are entirely different.
Gordon needs to learn the difference between "exclusion" and "censorship." Letting everyone but Gordon post there is called "exclusion," while Gordon's trying to stiffle anything negative about him is called "censorship." On that note, when can we expect RICO 3 for repeating what Gordon nuked off the Google archive? -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Now that that's settled... who's doing the snipping to futher his short term agenda? Gordon. It took him a full day and a half to come up with a lie.
>>> Nevertheless, a commercial website has little in common with USENET.
>>> USENET has no moderator getting a cut of sales of the products being >>> discussed on its message boards.
>> Moderators are sometimes necessary to
> Prevent certain speech from reaching the public? How un-American.
Gordon says at the same time he's accusing others of snipping posts to change their meanings. Yet another good lesson in the hypocrisy of Gordon Roy Parker.
>>> One cannot equate a commercial website with USENET, for their >>> structures are entirely different.
>> Gordon needs to learn the difference between "exclusion" and >> "censorship." Letting everyone but Gordon post there is called >> "exclusion," while Gordon's trying to stiffle anything negative about >> him is called "censorship."
> First let's address the part he snipped: "USENET has no moderator > getting a cut of sales from the commercial products discussed on its > boards."
Having you complain about snipping seems rather odd, really.
> Businesses that disparage their competition to market their wares > generally wind up with Lanham Act lawsuits (this is why you almost > never see it done in other businesses). It's one thing to "exclude" > someone -- anyone has a right to do that -- quite another to make a > public stink about it in the course of one's marketing.
Considering that most of the people who visit this newsgroup become quite disgusted with you very quickly I can see how pointing out that you are prevented from posting to a web forum is valid.
> There's no reason a site that didn't want me there could simply > "exclude" me (or anyone else) and not bother mentioning it.
Yes there is - pointed out above.
> You also > would have no way of knowing if I'm the only one "excluded" or the > only post that has ever been "moderated." Oh, and exclusion is a form > of censorship.
Not really but I doubt that you have any inclination to be objective about this.
> USENET is not censored.
True enough.
-- KTO
------------------ Everything I post is my opinion. If you don't like my opinions then killfile me, if you have the balls.
Ray Gordon wrote: >>> One cannot equate a commercial website with USENET, for their structures >>> are entirely different.
>> Gordon needs to learn the difference between "exclusion" and >> "censorship." Letting everyone but Gordon post there is called >> "exclusion," while Gordon's trying to stiffle anything negative about him >> is called "censorship."
> First let's address the part he snipped: "USENET has no moderator getting > a cut of sales from the commercial products discussed on its boards."
> Businesses that disparage their competition to market their wares > generally wind up with Lanham Act lawsuits (this is why you almost never > see it done > in other businesses). It's one thing to "exclude" someone -- anyone has a > right to do that -- quite another to make a public stink about it in the > course of one's marketing.
> There's no reason a site that didn't want me there could simply "exclude" > me > (or anyone else) and not bother mentioning it. You also would have no way > of knowing if I'm the only one "excluded" or the only post that has ever > been "moderated." Oh, and exclusion is a form of censorship.
> USENET is not censored.
what about folks who just think you're full of it?
