banned from newsgroup
Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
> You are now banned from posting in mozilla.test.multimedia.
I'm now the first person to be banned from a mozilla
newsgroup. Where are the guidelines for banning people.
There's nothing on the etiquette page:
http://www.mozilla.org/community/etiquette.html and there is
nothing within the cancellation page that says so:
http://www.mozilla.org/community/cancellation.html
And who gave you the authority to ban people from
newsgroups. I don't think you have that authority to do
that. You only have the authority for the list, not the group.
Is this how things are run in the news.mozilla.org server:
The Lunacy of one person has the power to ban people, and on
a whim? Is this how people are treaded within these
newsgroups? I think this one individual has a problem
himself, and his position within the mozilla news server AND
the mozilla lists should be critically examined. Gerv and
Dave, is this the way people are treated.
cross posted to mozilla.general and mozilla.dev.mozilla-org
with followup to mozilla.general
--
*IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but messages emailed to me will be
disregarded!!!!
Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm
Justin Wood (Callek)
> Chris Ilias wrote:
>> You are now banned from posting in mozilla.test.multimedia.
>
....what were you banned _for_ ?
> You only have the authority
> for the list, not the group.
Of course, the list is the same as the newsgroup in practice. All
newsgroup posts go to the list, and vice-versa.
~Justin Wood (Callek)
Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>> Chris Ilias wrote:
>>> You are now banned from posting in mozilla.test.multimedia.
> ....what were you banned _for_ ?
squaredancer
the Purple Hippo to generate the following:? :
> Justin Wood (Callek) wrote:
>
>> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>>
>>> Chris Ilias wrote:
>>>
>>>> You are now banned from posting in mozilla.test.multimedia.
>>>>
>> ....what were you banned _for_ ?
>>
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.test.multimedia/browse_thread/thread/5a33473cd1858444/dac4f4784f33b169?#dac4f4784f33b169
>
>
let's all take Jay's offer and go back to secnews, where we all came from!
We can leave Chris Illi-ass believing that he is, indeed, not an idiot!
He will be monopolically alone in that belief, but may rally some
moose-type cronies to soothe his overinflated ego!
reg
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T
He was banned supposedly send a live binary copy of a Song "the Lion
Sleeps Tonight" a copyrighted song.
When it actuality the song was linked from a Licensed website that has
license to allow playing of the song.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip M. Jones, CET http://www.vpea.org
If it's "fixed", don't "break it"! mailto:pjo...@kimbanet.com
http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/default.htm
Mac G4-500, OSX.3.9 Mac 17" PowerBook G4-1.67 Gb, OSX.4.10
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T
Wish I could but the latest versions of SeaMonkey, or Thunderbird don't
allow it. (Mac version). I've even tried to set SSL methods in about
Config and still won't allow it.
Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
> Jay Garcia wrote:
>> There's always secnews.
> Yes but it flat doesn't work in modern versions of SeaMonkey or
> Thunderbird. I've tried to get it to work even going to about config and
> turning on all the different security schemes.
>
> So that's just out of the question.
you're wrong on that. It works for me without problems, and
I've tested it in TB and am using it in the latest offical
release of SM. Therefore its a setting on your end. Have
you tried using port 563?
squaredancer
Jones, C.E.T to generate the following:? :
> squaredancer wrote:
>
>> On 04.12.2007 07:11, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused Peter Potamus
>> the Purple Hippo to generate the following:? :
>>
>>> Justin Wood (Callek) wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Chris Ilias wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> You are now banned from posting in mozilla.test.multimedia.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>> ....what were you banned _for_ ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.test.multimedia/browse_thread/thread/5a33473cd1858444/dac4f4784f33b169?#dac4f4784f33b169
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> let's all take Jay's offer and go back to secnews, where we all came from!
>> We can leave Chris Illi-ass believing that he is, indeed, not an idiot!
>> He will be monopolically alone in that belief, but may rally some
>> moose-type cronies to soothe his overinflated ego!
>>
>> reg
>>
>
> Wish I could but the latest versions of SeaMonkey, or Thunderbird don't
> allow it. (Mac version). I've even tried to set SSL methods in about
> Config and still won't allow it.
>
>
PING Jay Garcia - he may know a method for Macs
reg
squaredancer
>
>> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>>
>>> Chris Ilias wrote:
>>>
>>>> You are now banned from posting in mozilla.test.multimedia.
>>>>
>> ....what were you banned _for_ ?
>>
>> > You only have the authority
>>
>>> for the list, not the group.
>>>
>> Of course, the list is the same as the newsgroup in practice. All
>> newsgroup posts go to the list, and vice-versa.
>>
>> ~Justin Wood (Callek)
>>
>
> He was banned supposedly send a live binary copy of a Song "the Lion
> Sleeps Tonight" a copyrighted song.
>
> When it actuality the song was linked from a Licensed website that has
> license to allow playing of the song.
>
>
he was banned because Chris Illi-ass was playing god - and got his
heavenly knickers crossed, so that they squeezed his balls into a knot!
reg
squaredancer
the Purple Hippo to generate the following:? :
> Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T wrote:
>
>> Jay Garcia wrote:
>>
>>> There's always secnews.
>>>
>> Yes but it flat doesn't work in modern versions of SeaMonkey or
>> Thunderbird. I've tried to get it to work even going to about config and
>> turning on all the different security schemes.
>>
>> So that's just out of the question.
>>
>
> you're wrong on that. It works for me without problems, and
> I've tested it in TB and am using it in the latest offical
> release of SM. Therefore its a setting on your end. Have
> you tried using port 563?
>
>
Phillip's on a Mac - but I also doubt that that is a factor.... wait and
see if Jay has a solution!
reg
JoeS
>> On 04.12.2007 07:11, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused Peter
>> Potamus the Purple Hippo to generate the following:? :
>>> Justin Wood (Callek) wrote:
>>>
>>>> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Chris Ilias wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> You are now banned from posting in mozilla.test.multimedia.
>>>>>>
>>>> ....what were you banned _for_ ?
>>>>
>>>
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.test.multimedia/browse_thread/thread/5a33473cd1858444/dac4f4784f33b169?#dac4f4784f33b169
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> let's all take Jay's offer and go back to secnews, where we all came
>> from!
>> We can leave Chris Illi-ass believing that he is, indeed, not an
>> idiot! He will be monopolically alone in that belief, but may rally
>> some moose-type cronies to soothe his overinflated ego!
>>
>> reg
>
> Wish I could but the latest versions of SeaMonkey, or Thunderbird don't
> allow it. (Mac version). I've even tried to set SSL methods in about
> Config and still won't allow it.
>
security.ssl3.rsa_rc2_40_md5
But on more than 1 fresh install, I have had to add this one.
security.enable_ssl2
Or at least toggle that last pref, then put it back.
I don't think it does any harm to leave it true, since all the individual ssl2 prefs are disabled.
Joe
Gervase Markham
> are the guidelines for banning people. There's nothing on the etiquette
> page: http://www.mozilla.org/community/etiquette.html and there is
> nothing within the cancellation page that says so:
> http://www.mozilla.org/community/cancellation.html
I assume that Chris means that he will cancel all further posts from
you, which is equivalent to a ban.
> And who gave you the authority to ban people from newsgroups. I don't
> think you have that authority to do that. You only have the authority
> for the list, not the group.
If I understand correctly, Chris is the moderator for
mozilla.test.multimedia , which means that he has the final say about
what gets posted there, just like any other moderator of a group/mailing
list. This is separate from his role as part of the team looking after
the support newsgroups, to which this policy refers.
http://www.mozilla.org/community/cancellation.html
> Is this how things are run in the news.mozilla.org server: The Lunacy of
> one person has the power to ban people, and on a whim? Is this how
> people are treaded within these newsgroups? I think this one individual
> has a problem himself, and his position within the mozilla news server
> AND the mozilla lists should be critically examined. Gerv and Dave, is
> this the way people are treated.
Get off your high horse. If you want to make a public complaint, you can
have a public smackdown.
The message you are pointing to with such indignation is clearly,
indubitably, totally and completely off-topic for the group to which it
is posted. As, in fact, are all the other messages in the thread. So I
have no idea what makes you think you can point at it and shout "Help!
Help! I'm being oppressed!" As the moderator, Chris has every right to
keep off-topic traffic out of the group. That's what moderators do.
The Mozilla newsgroups are not anyone's personal playground or chatroom.
Their primary use is for getting project-related work done. This
particular group is for binary test posts, not for conversation of any
kind. After the point was firmly made that there needed to be non-work
groups available, mozilla.general was set aside for this. In all groups
other than mozilla.general, off-topic chatter is discouraged. It may be
discouraged using either social or technical pressure.
(Of course, a person's standing in and usefulness to the project has a
strong impact on how much leeway they get. That's right and proper.
Mozilla is a meritocracy.)
Gerv
Terry R.
the keyboard
> squaredancer wrote:
>> On 04.12.2007 07:11, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused Peter Potamus
>> the Purple Hippo to generate the following:? :
>>> Justin Wood (Callek) wrote:
>>>
>>>> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Chris Ilias wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> You are now banned from posting in mozilla.test.multimedia.
>>>>>>
>>>> ....what were you banned _for_ ?
>>>>
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.test.multimedia/browse_thread/thread/5a33473cd1858444/dac4f4784f33b169?#dac4f4784f33b169
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> let's all take Jay's offer and go back to secnews, where we all came from!
>> We can leave Chris Illi-ass believing that he is, indeed, not an idiot!
>> He will be monopolically alone in that belief, but may rally some
>> moose-type cronies to soothe his overinflated ego!
>>
>> reg
>
> Wish I could but the latest versions of SeaMonkey, or Thunderbird don't
> allow it. (Mac version). I've even tried to set SSL methods in about
> Config and still won't allow it.
>
Phillip,
Are you sure you tried this:
In Advanced, Config Editor, enter md5 and in the resulting lines there
are two 40 bit entries, dbl-click both to change from false to "true".
I recently installed Netscape Messenger and that is all I had to do,
other than check SSL & set it for port 563.
--
Terry R.
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.
Leonidas Jones
>> Jay Garcia wrote:
>>> There's always secnews.
>> Yes but it flat doesn't work in modern versions of SeaMonkey or
>> Thunderbird. I've tried to get it to work even going to about config
>> and turning on all the different security schemes.
>>
>> So that's just out of the question.
>
> you're wrong on that. It works for me without problems, and I've tested
> it in TB and am using it in the latest offical release of SM. Therefore
> its a setting on your end. Have you tried using port 563?
>
Secnews uses SSL2, which is no longer supported by mozilla products. It
has to be enabled in about:config, directions here:
Lee
Leonidas Jones
>> On 04.12.2007 07:11, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused Peter
>> Potamus the Purple Hippo to generate the following:? :
>>> Justin Wood (Callek) wrote:
>>>
>>>> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Chris Ilias wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> You are now banned from posting in mozilla.test.multimedia.
>>>>>>
>>>> ....what were you banned _for_ ?
>>>>
>>>
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.test.multimedia/browse_thread/thread/5a33473cd1858444/dac4f4784f33b169?#dac4f4784f33b169
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> let's all take Jay's offer and go back to secnews, where we all came
>> from!
>> We can leave Chris Illi-ass believing that he is, indeed, not an
>> idiot! He will be monopolically alone in that belief, but may rally
>> some moose-type cronies to soothe his overinflated ego!
>>
>> reg
>
> Wish I could but the latest versions of SeaMonkey, or Thunderbird don't
> allow it. (Mac version). I've even tried to set SSL methods in about
> Config and still won't allow it.
>
Just posted this in another thread here, but what the hecvk, here it again.
Mozilla products no longer support SSL2 as being insecure, but it can be
enabled via about:config:
Lee
Gus Richter
*PLONK*
--
Gus
JoeS
JoeS
Billy Holmes
> Well, so much for "building a community of multimedia testers"
>
I swear, after being in the gentoo lists for so long and seeing how
people treat each other, it amazes me how juvenile some people take
criticism here. It's like a toddler that throws a tantrum when the
parent tells them not to touch the cookie jar.
You can't run around posting random crap in test.multimedia. It has a
specific use, someone was reminded about it, they wanted to argue about
it. They got plonked.
Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>> I'm now the first person to be banned from a mozilla newsgroup. Where
>> are the guidelines for banning people. There's nothing on the etiquette
>> page: http://www.mozilla.org/community/etiquette.html and there is
>> nothing within the cancellation page that says so:
>> http://www.mozilla.org/community/cancellation.html
>
> I assume that Chris means that he will cancel all further posts from
> you, which is equivalent to a ban.
You're only assuming what he meant. I suggest you get your
facts straight. No, I was removed. I received this email:
"You have been unsubscribed from the test-multimedia mailing
list." I didn't unsubscribe myself. He did. And according
to the message that was posted I'm banned also. If I try to
post, they will not show up. Plain and simple. Is that
hard for you to understand? Or are you trying to back-track
and come out smelling like a rose?
> Get off your high horse.
You're getting to be as horrible as Chris is now. Is this
the way you treat people? Is this the way you treat people
within this community? It sure it. Come post within the
Mozilla Newsgroups, and this is the way you'll be treated.
Sounds very nice doesn't it. Geee, lets cancel postings!
Lets prevent someone from posting! Now, lets ban people
from posting! Some community this is turning into be.
Your response is just as I expected -- powers to be
supporting other powers to be. The hell with what users
think. Now with your response, you're trying to back track
and provide support for what he did. He used the words
"banned from posting in mozilla.test.multimedia." And
everyone knows that he means that I cannot post within that
newsgroup.
> As the moderator, Chris has every right to
> keep off-topic traffic out of the group.
It was NOT off-topic traffic and nobody has proven it was.
> That's what moderators do.
not when they abuse the privilege. And that is exactly what
you and Chris are doing and supporting.
> The Mozilla newsgroups are not anyone's personal playground or chatroom.
It wasn't being treated as such. Only you and Chris are
making it out like that.
Your response is just a total cop out.
I am now being punished for posting binary messages in the
multimedia test newsgroup. On these pages:
http://www.mozilla.org/community/developer-forums.html#testing
and https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/test-multimedia, they
say:
For the mozilla.test.multimedia page it says: "For binary
test messages" and thats exactly what I did.' For the other
one I replied: 'then it says here: "This list and newsgroup
is a place to test posting and *reading binaries* with
Mozilla-based clients." Again, thats exactly what I did. I
guess it was my fault because I didn't put in the words: ".
. . can you hear this OK?" I wonder, if I had, would all
this have been avoided?
When I posted what I did, I was told "Please don't use this
newsgroup for binary sharing." First of all, it wasn't
being used as binary sharing. When I question the response,
I was then subjected to being banned.
On this page here:
http://www.mozilla.org/community/developer-forums.html, it
says that "Giganews is sponsoring free access to the Mozilla
Development Forums' Usenet hierarchy 'mozilla.*' Is this
free access. No, not any more. It just became a cold day
within the world of Mozilla. It was bad enough when the
powers to be came up with the idea of removing posts
[http://www.mozilla.org/community/cancellation.html], then
they stopped people's messages from being posted, and now
they're banning people from posting.
I am now the first person to be banned from a Mozilla
newsgroup and the people listed above couldn't careless.
Atleast thats the way I see it.
People have complained about the removal and cancelling of
postings, but they went unheard. People have complained
about individuals not being able to post. Again, unheard.
And now, banning people from the Mozilla news server. Will
this go unheard, too? Yup, it fell on deaf ears.
The Mozilla newsgroups used to be a great place to be, but
now, its gone down in the dumps. Its a cold and unfriendly
place now.
If you're going to start Banning people from posting, then
maybe there should be some guidelines made.
Mozilla tells everyone that the Internet should be free and
open. All I can say is that the Mozilla Community doesn't
practise what it preaches. Its not free and its not open.
The Mozilla Mission says: "And we will, above all, be
flexible and responsive." This isn't so anymore within the
Mozilla Community of Newsgroups. When you outright ban
someone, then thats not being flexible and responsive.
The Mission also says: "An open source community" This is
false. You could have your postings cancelled. You postings
may not show up, and you may be subjected to being banned.
The Mission Statement also says: "How can you participate?
Simply by doing so!" Well, I did and this is the way I was
treated.
The Mozilla-Manifesto says: "The Mozilla project is a global
community of people who believe that openness, innovation,
and opportunity are key to the continued health of the
Internet." Thats not so within the Mozilla Newsgroups.
The Mozilla-Manifesto also says: "the Internet is developed
in a way that benefits everyone." How does cancelling
postings, preventing people from posting, and banning people
from posting, how does that benefit everyone? It doesn't.
It only benefits one person. The one who pushed for these
powers.
The Mozilla-Manifesto also says: "We create communities of
people involved in making the Internet experience better for
all of us." Again, how does cancelling postings, preventing
people from posting, and banning people from posting make
the Mozilla Newsgroup Community a better place for all of us?
The goals for the Manifesto are to: "articulate a vision for
the Internet that Mozilla participants want the Mozilla
Foundation to pursue": Is this what the community wants:
cancelling postings, preventing people from posting, and
banning people from posting?
Another goal of the Manifesto is to "speak to people." When
I received one of those My posting are up for Cancellation
[as per http://www.mozilla.org/community/cancellation.html],
I question it. To date, I'm still waiting for a reply.
That was several months ago. When I was accused of posting
Off Topic messages, I complained saying that I wasn't
contributing to the problem, and asked for an apology. To
date, I'm still waiting. The Manifesto goal of "speaking to
people," is a bunch of crap. Mozilla doesn't practise this.
The Manifesto also says: "We invite others to join us and
make the Internet an ever better place for everyone." This
isn't so within the newsgroups.
The Principles of the Manifesto are:
"The Internet is a global public resource that must remain
open and accessible.
The Internet should enrich the lives of individual human beings.
Individuals must have the ability to shape their own
experiences on the Internet.
Free and open source software promotes the development of
the Internet as a public resource."
This just isn't happening within the Mozilla Newsgroups.
Mozilla Foundation Pledge is to "build and enable
open-source technologies and communities that support the
Manifesto's principles." The cancellation, removal and
banning people does not support this.
I want to draw your attention to these two postings within
the multimedia test newsgroup:
Someone told me to: "Complain at Mozilla.governance and try
to get Gervase Markham's attention. He's the one that gave
him the authority that he has. He's the one that said to let
him know if there are any problems."
Well, after your response, all I can say is you don't care
what happens within the Mozilla Newsgroup Community, do you.
Anyways, someone replied to the above with: "I would do so,
but fear retribution for doing so, and fear such just
writing this blurb."
Is this what its come down to: People being afraid to speak
up? People afraid to say anything? Well, congratulations
Gerv, its now gotten there.
This problem that the Mozilla Newsgroup Community has, has
just hit other Communities and in one of the Communities
that I patronize, this individual said it best: "I
understand that users of Newsgroups are compelled to follow
the rules but personally I prefer an environment in which I
don't have to analyse whether what I have posted falls
within strict guidelines nor fear, heaven forbid, veering
off topic." Please note: don't blame me. Word has gotten
around on other forums and groups, and its not coming from me.
This has got to come to a stop now. This sort of thing is
giving a black-eye to the Mozilla Community. This sort of
thing IS making Mozilla a Laughing Stock Community. People
are laughing at the stupidity of cancelling someones post,
at stopping individuals from posting, and now banning people
from groups. It will get to a point where people will be
afraid to come to these newsgroups. Is this your vision of a
Mozilla Friendly Community? I don't think so.
If you look at what the Community said after Chris' banning
post, then you'd see that the Community is not happy with
what he did. But you don't care about them, do you. As far
as you're concerned, they were all off topic traffic and
shouldn't have been posted there. You just want to make
Chris and yourself come out smelling like a Rose.
Gerv, I suggest you look up the word Community. Does the
Mozilla Support Community fit it. When I first came here in
November 2006, it used to but not any more. In the last
year since I've been here, its gone down hill and into the
trash very quickly. What with the complete removal of and
the complete stopping of an individuals postings, the
cancellation of certain postings, and now the unabridged
banning of individuals from groups.
Here, I'll beat you to the punch bowl. Here are a couple of
definitions. If they came for a visit, I wonder what the
k12's would think about these groups? I think they would
leave. You Gerv should be ashamed.
community: an association of organisms, plant and animal,
each occupying a certain position or ecological niche,
inhabiting a common environment, and interacting with one
another; all the plants and animals in a particular habitat
that are bound together by food chains and other
interrelationships
[http://www.jefferson.k12.ky.us/departments/EnvironmentalEd/blackacre/glossary.html#Anchor-35882]
Community: All the groups of organisms living together in
the same area, usually interacting or depending on each
other for existence.
[http://www.pca.state.mn.us/gloss/glossary.cfm?alpha=C&header=1&glossaryCat=0]
community: a group of plant and animal species living
together in a habitat.
[http://www.baylink.org/fieldtrips/glossary.html]
Community: all of the plants and animals living in a
specific areas (habitat).
[http://www.lakeland.k12.in.us/limabrighton/nctrip07/glossary.html]
Community: A number of populations of plants and animals
that live and interact with one another in a specific area
with similar environmental conditions.
[http://www.orcasisle.com/~elc/outdoorschool/vocab.htm]
Community: A group of individuals organized into a unit, or
manifesting some unifying trait or common interest; loosely,
the locality or catchment area population for which a
service is provided. . . .
[http://www.merrea.org/glossary%20c.htm]
Community: A group of plants and animals living and
interacting with one another in a specific region under
relatively similar environmental conditions.
{http://www.bartleby.com/61/88/C0518800.html}
--
*IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email help!!!!
Warning: Private emails to me may become public
Posting of this message may get me banned from the Mozilla
Newsgroups
Gervase Markham
If you want me to listen to your point of view, you are going to have to
put it more succinctly than that.
> You're getting to be as horrible as Chris is now. Is this the way
> you treat people? Is this the way you treat people within this
> community? It sure it.
I treat people in the way they ask to be treated. You made a public fuss
about this, and so I provided a straightforward and honest public
response. If you'd emailed me privately, I would have responded
privately. The choice was yours.
I don't think my words were rude. They may not be what you want to hear,
but they weren't rude.
> Come post within the Mozilla Newsgroups, and
> this is the way you'll be treated.
Peter, what is your business in mozilla.test.multimedia anyway? If you
are testing the Mozilla family of newsgroup clients, where are the bugs
you've filed? I've searched bugzilla.mozilla.org and can't find any,
although I'm happy to be corrected as I may have used the wrong Bugzilla
ID. Or is our binary posting support perfect?
The group description, as you point out, is "For binary
test messages". Your message was not a binary message (it had no
attachment), so was offtopic already.
> Your response is just as I expected -- powers to be
> supporting other powers to be.
I think Chris, as moderator of the group, is entirely within his
project-given authority to do what he did. I think that the messages
concerned were undoubtedly off-topic. On a human level, I can see how
your continued pushing of the boundaries in this area may have irritated
him.
The Mozilla newsgroups are for the community of people working on the
Mozilla project. Genuine question (not rhetorical): what have you done
for the project lately?
This is not to say that only people who are working on the project are
welcome, but it seems to me that those who are active contributors in
the community get to make the rules.
Gerv
Christopher Jahn
dnQvdiJxK8Mvan...@mozilla.org:
> You're getting to be as horrible as Chris is now. Is this
> the way you treat people?
These are questions you need to ask yourself. While Ilias can
certainly be a jackass as often as not, you've tended to be
almost entirely a jackass in this group. You behave like a very
spoiled child.
--
}:-) Christopher Jahn
{:-( http://manormaniac.blogspot.com/
IF YOU SUPPORTED BUSH, A YELLOW RIBBON WON'T MAKE UP FOR IT
Christopher Jahn
news:wt6dnXZqt_qhDcva...@mozilla.org:
> This is not to say that only people who are working on the
> project are welcome, but it seems to me that those who are
> active contributors in the community get to make the rules.
GErv, as irritating as "peter" is, the fact is that I've watched
participation in this group fall since Ilias took over. I've
been helping out with peer support since Mozilla got its own
groups, and I was at SecNews before that. He's knocked the
warmth out of the groups. We were better off without his
moderation, and I'm sorry you can't see what is obvious to a lot
of us.
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
>> Come post within the Mozilla Newsgroups, and
>> this is the way you'll be treated.
>
> Peter, what is your business in mozilla.test.multimedia anyway? If you
> are testing the Mozilla family of newsgroup clients, where are the bugs
> you've filed? I've searched bugzilla.mozilla.org and can't find any,
> although I'm happy to be corrected as I may have used the wrong Bugzilla
> ID. Or is our binary posting support perfect?
>
> The group description, as you point out, is "For binary
> test messages". Your message was not a binary message (it had no
> attachment), so was offtopic already.
Gerv, everyone is getting confused about this, so let me pose the
question "what is the problem with posting a LINK to a binary (legal
mp3) as opposed to posting the binary itself?" Peter posted a link, not
the binary itself for Reg to see if he could play it, makes no
difference whether it was posted as a binary or posted as a link does
it? After reading the post and replies it is my opinion that Chris
looked at it as if it was being posted as an illegal file-sharing binary
and that is simply not the case. Peter was in fact providing a service
by trying to help out Reg with a problem, isn't that what MTMM is all about?
Take care ..
--
Jay Garcia - Netscape Champion
Marketing,Staff and Forums Consultant
Netscape Communications Corporation
squaredancer
generate the following:? :
and so much for you being asked to do the moderation of the group - a
task for which Ili-ass is not predestined, due to his absolute lack of
multimedia understanding!
reg
Billy Holmes
> and so much for you being asked to do the moderation of the group - a
> task for which Ili-ass is not predestined, due to his absolute lack of
> multimedia understanding!
actually, I see no difference is posting a binary music file, or
directing you to a site via a link that shares music - it's still
music sharing, no?
Besides, the message was off-topic the moment it was sent - no binary
attachments.
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
The link was to a legally posted mp3 file that was not meant to be
downloaded as such but rather played online. It was NOT file-sharing by
any stretch. And what difference does it make if the testing binary is
downloaded to the group or a link to it posted. A "test" is a "test" and
THAT is what Peter was asking Reg to do, TEST it. Please direct me to
the text in the guidelines that says test files *must* be attached
rather than posted as a link.
Terry R.
So, most of us considered it a "test", which is what Chris & Gerv said
it wasn't.
And did Chris follow what we were told about OT material? It seems the
timeline was so short between "DON'T" and "BANNED" (44 minutes), there
could have hardly been a notification and reply via email warning of the
consequences of continued wrong behavior.
squaredancer
1) gerv's post, as to what a "binary test post" is: (quote)
The group description, as you point out, is "For binary
test messages". Your message was not a binary message (it had no
attachment), so was offtopic already.
NOTE: Your message was not a binary message (it had no
attachment)
2) Chris Ili-ass BANNED Peter for *posting a binary* - a post that (see
gerv) DIDN'T HAVE AN ATTACHMENT... oh dear! we are getting contradictive
here...
3) gerve "understands" that Ili-ass is MTMM moderator ?? sorry folks,
but he asked JoeS to take over that position - one decision that Ili-ass
made well, JoeS being capable of actually KNOWING what multi-media under
Gecko means!
3) again, gerv's posts: (quote)
The Mozilla newsgroups are not anyone's personal playground or chatroom.
NOW - NOTE THIS ONE!!
Their primary use is for *getting project-related work* done.
AND THIS ONE
Peter, *what is your business in mozilla.test.multimedia anyway* ? If you
are testing the Mozilla family of newsgroup clients, where are the bugs
you've filed?
AND THIS ONE TOPS ALL OTHERS:
The Mozilla newsgroups are for the community of people working on the
Mozilla project.
so, dear friend and helper---
WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING HERE ?? or do you actually WORK on the
Mozilla project?
Please note carefully, before you reply - the quoted comments are from
and by gerv.... in this thread.
reg
squaredancer
generate the following:? :
more crucial is the discrepance between gerv and Ili-ass.... WHAT is a
binary??
gerv says it is a post WITH an attachment (which Peter's post lacked)
Chris banned Peter for posting a binary WITHOUT an attachment...
hmmmm! question "What is a binary post" !??
reg
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T
Look the original post was a Test post for Reg to see if he could hear.
The music was obviously copyrighted music, "linked from a Licensed site
allowed to play copyrighted music" Yet the person that banned the poster
accused him of posting copyrighted music directly. (not directly but it
was obvious what was meant.)
Anyway this is what the problem is about. While Peter is offbeat and an
little off-base occasionally, he is a reasonably good guy most of the
time. It was clear and obvious from all the users of the Multimedia test
group that Pete (or Grant) was obviously conducting a Test.
The Powers that be at Mozilla have never liked nor desired to have such
a Groups. Because the all detest HTML Mail. And they are trying
everything in their power to cause everybody to leave so they can shut
it down as a failed experiment.
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T
>> Jay Garcia wrote:
>>> There's always secnews.
>> Yes but it flat doesn't work in modern versions of SeaMonkey or
>> Thunderbird. I've tried to get it to work even going to about config
>> and turning on all the different security schemes.
>>
>> So that's just out of the question.
>
> you're wrong on that. It works for me without problems, and I've tested
> it in TB and am using it in the latest offical release of SM. Therefore
> its a setting on your end. Have you tried using port 563?
>
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T
Have that set to true.
Terry R.
the keyboard
Do you have SSL checked? You have to complete ALL the suggestions.
Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>> Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T wrote:
>>> Jay Garcia wrote:
>>>> There's always secnews.
>>> Yes but it flat doesn't work in modern versions of SeaMonkey or
>>> Thunderbird. I've tried to get it to work even going to about config
>>> and turning on all the different security schemes.
>>>
>>> So that's just out of the question.
>> you're wrong on that. It works for me without problems, and I've tested
>> it in TB and am using it in the latest offical release of SM. Therefore
>> its a setting on your end. Have you tried using port 563?
>>
> Yes I have 563 set and all the md5 security items set to true.
>
what happens if you create a test profile?
Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
> <a very long message>.
>
> If you want me to listen to your point of view, you are going to have to
> put it more succinctly than that.
I was. I'm sorry that I'm not up to your standards. But
then I guess everything in that posting went way over your head.
>> You're getting to be as horrible as Chris is now. Is this the way
>> you treat people? Is this the way you treat people within this
>> community? It sure it.
>
> I treat people in the way they ask to be treated. You made a public fuss
> about this, and so I provided a straightforward and honest public
> response. If you'd emailed me privately, I would have responded
> privately. The choice was yours.
>
> I don't think my words were rude. They may not be what you want to hear,
> but they weren't rude.
I never said you were. I was meaning that your explanations
are getting to be a horrible Chris
>> Come post within the Mozilla Newsgroups, and
>> this is the way you'll be treated.
>
> Peter, what is your business in mozilla.test.multimedia anyway? If you
> are testing the Mozilla family of newsgroup clients, where are the bugs
> you've filed? I've searched bugzilla.mozilla.org and can't find any,
> although I'm happy to be corrected as I may have used the wrong Bugzilla
> ID. Or is our binary posting support perfect?
are you just making all this up as you go along? You must
be. Where does it say that? I must have missed a page.
Lets see: https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo says "A place
to test posting and reading binaries with Mozilla-based
clients." Nope, can't be there
Lets see, how about this:
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/test-multimedia "This
list and newsgroup is a place to test posting and reading
binaries with Mozilla-based clients." Nope, can't be there
either.
Maybe its here:
http://www.mozilla.org/community/developer-forums.html#testing
"For binary test messages." Nope, it's not there either.
Maybe here: http://www.mozilla.org/support/#newsgroups.
Nope, no mention of it there either.
About the Etiquette page:
http://www.mozilla.org/community/etiquette.html. Nope, I'm
sorry, I can't find it there either.
So, you tell me. Where does it say that the only ones who
can post there must be filing bug reports? I guess that the
vast majority of people who post in that group, shouldn't be
there, because they're not contributing to filing bug
reports. Furthermore, there are also a lot of Off-Topic
Trffice there, aswell. So, why am I the only one singled
out and banned. Maybe there should be others there too.
You're just making this up as you go along, aren't you?
> The group description, as you point out, is "For binary
> test messages". Your message was not a binary message (it had no
> attachment), so was offtopic already.
boy, sure lot of contradiction going on. You say one thing,
Chris says something else, the info about the groups says
something entirely different.
>> Your response is just as I expected -- powers to be
>> supporting other powers to be.
>
> I think Chris, as moderator of the group, is entirely within his
> project-given authority to do what he did. I think that the messages
> concerned were undoubtedly off-topic. On a human level, I can see how
> your continued pushing of the boundaries in this area may have irritated
> him.
>
> The Mozilla newsgroups are for the community of people working on the
> Mozilla project. Genuine question (not rhetorical): what have you done
> for the project lately?
where does it say that?
I swear, you must be making all this up as you go along,
aren't you? You're just making my laugh at each response
you give. You know absolutely nothing, do you?
By your definition, then why are there support groups? The
support groups doesn't "contain people working on the
Mozilla project." All it contains are other users helping
other users how to work a program.
You know absolutely nothing do you? I think if you had your
own way, there wouldn't be support groups for end users.
According to your statement "what have you done for the
project lately?" I guess that me providing support in the
support groups doesn't count because I'm still not "working
on the Mozilla project." Maybe you should ban all those
helpful volunteer supporters who are providing peer support,
but they're not filing but reports, or working on the
Mozilla project.
Why don't you get your facts straight about me first before
you post garbage.
> This is not to say that only people who are working on the project are
> welcome,
no, but you're making it out to be that way. The only ones
posting here are "people working on the Mozilla project."
> but it seems to me that those who are active contributors in
> the community get to make the rules.
So, I guess that because I provide help assistance in the
support groups, I can't contribute to making the rules,
because I'm not someone "working on the Mozilla project."
Thats another Powers to be supporting other powers to be
typical dumb-ass response. You really don't care about the
users. Why don't you just get rid of the support groups all
together.
What a cop out response you have given. Chris has dug
himself and Mozilla into a pit, you know it, I know it, and
so does everyone else, and now you're trying to dig him out,
and to save his butt. You're trying very hard to make him
and you come out smelling like a rose, but you're not doing
such a great job at it, are you?
Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
> AND THIS ONE TOPS ALL OTHERS:
> The Mozilla newsgroups are for the community of people working on the
> Mozilla project.
>
> so, dear friend and helper---
> WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING HERE ?? or do you actually WORK on the
> Mozilla project?
>
> Please note carefully, before you reply - the quoted comments are from
> and by gerv.... in this thread.
so, by what he said, I'm not the only one that should be
banned. All those other helps should get the axe too.
Like I said, he must be making all this up as he goes along.
He knows crap all. They've dug themselves into a big hole,
and now they're back-tracking, trying ever so very hard to
get out.
Rinaldi J. Montessi
> Peter, what is your business in mozilla.test.multimedia anyway? If you
> are testing the Mozilla family of newsgroup clients, where are the bugs
> you've filed? I've searched bugzilla.mozilla.org and can't find any,
> although I'm happy to be corrected as I may have used the wrong Bugzilla
> ID. Or is our binary posting support perfect?
I think you're a little off base here, Gerv. The *TMM groups were
primarily used for the implementation of code that was probably never
going to be included in the core Moz products, that is, embedding
multimedia in mail and news.
Rinaldi
--
Don't let your mind wander -- it's too little to be let out alone.
Leonidas Jones
> Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T wrote:
>> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>>> Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T wrote:
>>>> Jay Garcia wrote:
>> Yes I have 563 set and all the md5 security items set to true.
>>
>
> what happens if you create a test profile?
>
Do that Phillip. I have ssl enabled and am able to access it without
problems in SeaMonkey 1.1.7, TB 2.0.0.9, and the Netscape Messenger
alpha. We should be able to get it to work for you.
Lee
squaredancer
the Purple Hippo to generate the following:? :
> squaredancer wrote:
>
>> AND THIS ONE TOPS ALL OTHERS:
>> The Mozilla newsgroups are for the community of people working on the
>> Mozilla project.
>>
>> so, dear friend and helper---
>> WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING HERE ?? or do you actually WORK on the
>> Mozilla project?
>>
>> Please note carefully, before you reply - the quoted comments are from
>> and by gerv.... in this thread.
>>
>
> so, by what he said, I'm not the only one that should be
> banned. All those other helps should get the axe too.
>
> Like I said, he must be making all this up as he goes along.
> He knows crap all. They've dug themselves into a big hole,
> and now they're back-tracking, trying ever so very hard to
> get out.
>
>
And by the way, Peter! Your "claim to fame" as the first poster to be
actually BANNED belongs to me... I was banned from MTMM auto posting
years ago for posting - wait for it - a binary attachment! (and what's
more, I actually attached it *lol* )
JoeS put me back on the list, as my posts were all moderated by Ili-ass,
several of them going missing in the process. But - seeing as gerv
reckons that *ONLY* moz workers belong on the Groups, they will soon be
dead!
Hmmmm - I wonder if Ili-ass is a Moz employee??
reg
Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
> And by the way, Peter! Your "claim to fame" as the first poster to be
> actually BANNED belongs to me... I was banned from MTMM auto posting
> years ago for posting - wait for it - a binary attachment! (and what's
> more, I actually attached it *lol* )
but, was it in a manner accessible to or observable by the
public? Openly mentioned like mine was?
Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
> 3) again, gerv's posts: (quote)
> The Mozilla newsgroups are not anyone's personal playground or chatroom.
> NOW - NOTE THIS ONE!!
> Their primary use is for *getting project-related work* done.
>
> AND THIS ONE
> Peter, *what is your business in mozilla.test.multimedia anyway* ? If you
> are testing the Mozilla family of newsgroup clients, where are the bugs
> you've filed?
>
> AND THIS ONE TOPS ALL OTHERS:
> The Mozilla newsgroups are for the community of people working on the
> Mozilla project.
>
> so, dear friend and helper---
> WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING HERE ?? or do you actually WORK on the
> Mozilla project?
>
> Please note carefully, before you reply - the quoted comments are from
> and by gerv.... in this thread.
maybe you'll like my new sig line
--
*IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email help!!!!
Warning: Private emails to me may become public
Posting of this message may get me banned from the Mozilla
Newsgroups, as its not contributing to the developement of
the Mozilla Project
squaredancer
>
>
>> And by the way, Peter! Your "claim to fame" as the first poster to be
>> actually BANNED belongs to me... I was banned from MTMM auto posting
>> years ago for posting - wait for it - a binary attachment! (and what's
>> more, I actually attached it *lol* )
>>
>
> but, was it in a manner accessible to or observable by the
> public? Openly mentioned like mine was?
>
>
hmmmm - tricky question - I'll have to ask chris....
to be honest, I can't remember the exact method, but I did have an eMail
from "that person" saved for quite a while, which I pushed to the groups
now and again... so it may well have been a "private" thing!
reg
Daniel
>> 3) again, gerv's posts: (quote)
>> The Mozilla newsgroups are not anyone's personal playground or chatroom.
>> NOW - NOTE THIS ONE!!
>> Their primary use is for *getting project-related work* done.
>>
>> AND THIS ONE
>> Peter, *what is your business in mozilla.test.multimedia anyway* ? If
>> you
>> are testing the Mozilla family of newsgroup clients, where are the bugs
>> you've filed?
>>
>> AND THIS ONE TOPS ALL OTHERS:
>> The Mozilla newsgroups are for the community of people working on the
>> Mozilla project.
>>
>> so, dear friend and helper---
>> WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING HERE ?? or do you actually WORK on the
>> Mozilla project?
>>
>> Please note carefully, before you reply - the quoted comments are from
>> and by gerv.... in this thread.
>
> maybe you'll like my new sig line
>
Oh, come on now, Peter, surely you are aware that sig files should only
be four to six lines long!! Nine line...what a scandle!!
(at least that used to be the limit...haven't seen it mentioned for a
while.)
Daniel
Christopher Jahn
news:PLWdnchbBIqiV8va...@mozilla.org:
My understanding it that the multimedia group is to test the HTML
composition and rendering abilities of Mozilla products, and beyond
ANY dispute, that is EXACTLY what Peter was doing.
Ilias was WAY off base - AGAIN. And Gerv is jumping in to support
him without bothering to grasp the facts.
VERY disappointing behavior from Mozilla.org et al.
And a note for Ilias and Gerv; I am one who finds Peter to be a
pompous jackass, and here I am defending him.
Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
>> The group description, as you point out, is "For binary
>> test messages". Your message was not a binary message (it had no
>> attachment), so was offtopic already.
>
> boy, sure lot of contradiction going on. You say one thing,
> Chris says something else, the info about the groups says
> something entirely different.
Oh, I did find this:
http://www.mozilla.org/community/etiquette.html "Do not send
binary attachments"
--
*IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email help!!!!
Warning: Private emails to me may become public
Posting of this message may get me banned from the Mozilla
Newsgroups, as its not "contributing to the developement of
the Mozilla Project"
Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm
Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
Oh, come on now, Daniel, surely you are aware of what my
next response will be: where does it say that on the
etiquette page?:
http://www.mozilla.org/community/etiquette.html. Maybe we
need some guidelines on that, too.
Chris Ilias
> You're getting to be as horrible as Chris is now. Is this the way you
> treat people? Is this the way you treat people
> Mozilla Newsgroups, and this is the way you'll be treated.
> Lets prevent someone from posting! Now, lets ban people
> from posting! Some community this is turning into be.
I hope no-one is stupid enough to believe it's that simple. And
generally speaking most people don't believe it is.
DISCLAIMER: When you receive a lack of response from me, and I've told
you this before [1], it's because when you want to argue, your intent is
to win the argument, not resolve the argument. In other words, you
defend your opinion to the death. It's a waste of time to argue with
you. Any responses you have received from me, have been to clear up
misunderstandings for everyone else.
If a person is close-minded enough to only see message removal as a bad
thing, that person is ignorant. We've received a number of complaints
about your behaviour. Remember this[2]:
"Please get this idiot off the group or all of the rest of us will quit
wasting our time and leave!"
Given the request above, members of the community are asking for posts
to be removed, and people to be banned; and remember you cited a
document saying we should be responsive to the community. Obviously,
it's not that simple. There are judgement calls to be made, and each
case is different. Community building includes getting rid of posts from
spammers, trolls, and other people abusing the server. Whoring ourselves
to everyone who posts is not productive.
A combination of factors resulted in your banishment from
mozilla.test.multimedia (not the entire news server). It had nothing to
do with copyright, or the difference between embedding a file vs.
embedding a link. You have a history of using MTMM for file sharing [3].
I saw the thread in mozilla.general that caused you to post in MTMM [4];
and you didn't start using the "It was a test" argument, until I said
that I assumed your other posts were tests. Because you went as far as
trying to pawn off your post as a test, I was not confident that you
weren't going to continue using MTMM for file sharing. Trying to discuss
it in detail with you would have been a waste of time (explained in the
disclaimer). Given your history of stubbornness [5][6], and quest to
find loopholes in newsgroup policy, I just can't trust you on MTMM.
I do apologize for not banning you in private, and not making my reasons
clear.
[1]<http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.general/msg/1a6ae6429959dbeb>
[2]<http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.general/msg/95546b4222daf904>
[3]<http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.test.multimedia/msg/3897fb7e481a90f9>
[4]<http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.general/browse_frm/thread/5149ba0747fd93ca>
[5]<http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.general/browse_frm/thread/c092ad3f402f01ea>
[6]<http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.general/browse_frm/thread/c962ace1497747f0>
--
Chris Ilias <http://ilias.ca>
List-owner: support-firefox, support-thunderbird, test-multimedia
Christopher Jahn
MGdnVy57s9yr8ra...@mozilla.org:
> I just can't trust you on MTMM.
>
The problem, Chris, is that increasingly WE can't trust YOU.
I've followed this issue; you are clearly in the wrong on this
issue. He did not misuse the group, his post was not off-topic.
his post on MTMM is consistent with its use since its creation.
Yes, Peter can be a jackass. But increasingly, you are worse,
and what's more, you are now impeding peer support. You are
clearly abusing the position you have, and it's past time you
were removed from it.
--
}:-) Christopher Jahn
{:-( http://manormaniac.blogspot.com/
Nothing quite like the feel of something new...
Chris Ilias
> Chris Ilias <n...@ilias.ca> wrote in news:-
> MGdnVy57s9yr8ra...@mozilla.org:
>
>> I just can't trust you on MTMM.
>>
>
> The problem, Chris, is that increasingly WE can't trust YOU.
>
> I've followed this issue; you are clearly in the wrong on this
> issue. He did not misuse the group, his post was not off-topic.
> his post on MTMM is consistent with its use since its creation.
There's where I disagree. He admitted that he uses MTMM for file sharing
[1]; so there's no clear way to determine the intent of his posts.
[1]<http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.test.multimedia/msg/3897fb7e481a90f9>
clay
> On 12/5/07 6:50 PM, _Christopher Jahn_ spoke thusly:
>> Chris Ilias <n...@ilias.ca> wrote in news:-
>> MGdnVy57s9yr8ra...@mozilla.org:
>>
>>> I just can't trust you on MTMM.
>>>
>>
>> The problem, Chris, is that increasingly WE can't trust YOU.
>>
>> I've followed this issue; you are clearly in the wrong on this issue.
>> He did not misuse the group, his post was not off-topic. his post on
>> MTMM is consistent with its use since its creation.
>
> There's where I disagree. He admitted that he uses MTMM for file sharing
> [1]; so there's no clear way to determine the intent of his posts.
>
> [1]<http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.test.multimedia/msg/3897fb7e481a90f9>
>
>
"Please don't use this newsgroup for binary sharing. The reason why
Giganews wanted this newsgroup moderated was because they feared it
would be used as a dump group"
[PPtPH]
"And why are you complaining about it now? I've been doing it
for some time, and you [or JoeS] should have murmured then.
Not a myriad of postings later."
Nicely spun!
If you ever look to change careers you'd fit right in as a politician or
attorney.
With your logic, everyone who posts to the list is "sharing" and should
be banned...
--
100% money back guarantee!
If at any time you are dissatisfied with the performance of your Mozilla
product, feel free to return it for a complete refund of your full
purchase price...
Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
> On 12/5/07 6:50 PM, _Christopher Jahn_ spoke thusly:
>> Chris Ilias <n...@ilias.ca> wrote in news:-
>> MGdnVy57s9yr8ra...@mozilla.org:
>>
>>> I just can't trust you on MTMM.
>>>
>> The problem, Chris, is that increasingly WE can't trust YOU.
>>
>> I've followed this issue; you are clearly in the wrong on this
>> issue. He did not misuse the group, his post was not off-topic.
>> his post on MTMM is consistent with its use since its creation.
>
> There's where I disagree. He admitted that he uses MTMM for file sharing
> [1]; so there's no clear way to determine the intent of his posts.
>
> [1]<http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.test.multimedia/msg/3897fb7e481a90f9>
>
there you go again. Misinterpreting and twisting things
around to suit you. Thats not what I said. Read it again
and this time, comprehend what was said. You clain you're
not an idiot
[news://news.mozilla.org:119/mailman.470.1196732879...@lists.mozilla.org],
so prove it.
Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
> On 12/5/07 4:27 AM, _Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo_ spoke thusly:
>> You're getting to be as horrible as Chris is now. Is this the way you
>> treat people? Is this the way you treat people
>> within this community? It sure it. Come post within the
>> Mozilla Newsgroups, and this is the way you'll be treated.
>> Sounds very nice doesn't it. Geee, lets cancel postings!
>> Lets prevent someone from posting! Now, lets ban people
>> from posting! Some community this is turning into be.
>
> I hope no-one is stupid enough to believe it's that simple. And
> generally speaking most people don't believe it is.
>
> DISCLAIMER: When you receive a lack of response from me, and I've told
> you this before [1], it's because when you want to argue, your intent is
> to win the argument, not resolve the argument. In other words, you
> defend your opinion to the death. It's a waste of time to argue with
> you. Any responses you have received from me, have been to clear up
> misunderstandings for everyone else.
you just keep digging yourself into a hole and you know it.
Thats why YOU don't want to resolve anything. When
someone questions things you do, you tend to ignore them
until they go away. You don't reply. Note in the
newsgroups, and not privately in email.
> If a person is close-minded enough to only see message removal as a bad
> thing, that person is ignorant.
the only one closed minded is you. You don't want to
discuss problems. Thats why you don't reply.
> We've received a number of complaints
> about your behaviour. Remember this[2]:
> "Please get this idiot off the group or all of the rest of us will quit
> wasting our time and leave!"
excuse me, but that was said in the general newsgroup, where
off topic discussion are permitted.
> Given the request above, members of the community are asking for posts
> to be removed, and people to be banned;
again, it was said in the general newsgroup. When has Chris
J ever called me a jackass: only in the general groups.
Maybe I was a jackass, but it was only in the general
groups. And so have all the other arguements. And now,
because one person has requested that my postings be
removed, you have assumed that everyone, even in the support
groups, want me removed. So, all the volunteer help that I
have provided mean crap all. According to Gerv, it does.
So show me one post, from the support groups, that has
requested that I be banned or removed.
> and remember you cited a
> document saying we should be responsive to the community. Obviously,
> it's not that simple. There are judgement calls to be made, and each
> case is different. Community building includes getting rid of posts from
> spammers, trolls, and other people abusing the server. Whoring ourselves
> to everyone who posts is not productive.
then why don't you ban other people. For instance Chris J
and Irwin G for their abusiveness and gang banging toward
other people. Especially when those other people don't see
it their way. They have been far worse then me. Or how
about Andrew DF for his foul language. No you don't. Only
I was the target.
> A combination of factors resulted in your banishment from
> mozilla.test.multimedia (not the entire news server). It had nothing to
> do with copyright, or the difference between embedding a file vs.
> embedding a link. You have a history of using MTMM for file sharing [3].
only you're the one saying that. Not me, and I'm not
sharing anything with anyone.
> I saw the thread in mozilla.general that caused you to post in MTMM [4];
> and you didn't start using the "It was a test" argument, until I said
> that I assumed your other posts were tests. Because you went as far as
> trying to pawn off your post as a test, I was not confident that you
> weren't going to continue using MTMM for file sharing. Trying to discuss
> it in detail with you would have been a waste of time (explained in the
> disclaimer). Given your history of stubbornness [5][6], and quest to
> find loopholes in newsgroup policy, I just can't trust you on MTMM.
>
> I do apologize for not banning you in private, and not making my reasons
> clear.
I'm sorry, but an apology can't be accepted. Its far too
late for that.
Lets see. You managed to come up with all the above for
excuses, from the moment I posted in the multimedia test
group, until you banned me, all within the short 66 minutes.
I think not. You've dug yourself into a hole, and how
you're trying to back-track and dig yourself out. All you
could come up with from the original ban was "I saw the
thread in mozilla.general that caused you to post your
original message here." See:
news://news.mozilla.org:119/mailman.470.1196732879...@lists.mozilla.org
And that was your excuse. Not all the excuses as
outlined above. You're just coming up with all that
afterwards. You've had time to think about it. Thats why
it took you so long to reply here. You've had time to
discuss your problem with Gerv and probably the other Spam
Mooses. Now, you're trying to come out smelling like a
rose. You didn't think about it at the time you banned me.
And by the way, in the above excuses, you never did mention
anything about "Please don't use this newsgroup for binary
sharing" See:
news://news.mozilla.org:119/mailman.461.1196730228...@lists.mozilla.org.
That was your original problem. Everything listed above
is just icing on the cake. The above only came after your
horrible deed. Thats another reason it took you so long to
reply here. You had to think about it. You had to come up
with excuses to get out of your hole. None of the above was
ever mentioned in the banning posting; nor in the removal
email message. You're just grasping at straws.
Irwin Greenwald
> On 12/5/07 6:50 PM, _Christopher Jahn_ spoke thusly:
>> Chris Ilias <n...@ilias.ca> wrote in news:-
>> MGdnVy57s9yr8ra...@mozilla.org:
>>
>>> I just can't trust you on MTMM.
>>>
>>
>> The problem, Chris, is that increasingly WE can't trust YOU.
>>
>> I've followed this issue; you are clearly in the wrong on this issue.
>> He did not misuse the group, his post was not off-topic. his post on
>> MTMM is consistent with its use since its creation.
>
> There's where I disagree. He admitted that he uses MTMM for file sharing
> [1]; so there's no clear way to determine the intent of his posts.
>
> [1]<http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.test.multimedia/msg/3897fb7e481a90f9>
>
>
this discussion: Just what files can be shared via the links PP
supplied? I went thru both pages and found a snippet on wikipedia and
free MP3s of the Star Spangled Banner and God Bless America on the
Tokens' site. Everything else was "Click here to buy...".
--
Irwin
Please do not use my email address to make requests for help.
Knowledge Base: http://kb.mozillazine.org/Main_Page
Chris Ilias
> Chris Ilias wrote:
>
>> There's where I disagree. He admitted that he uses MTMM for file
>> sharing [1]; so there's no clear way to determine the intent of his
>> posts.
>>
>> [1]<http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.test.multimedia/msg/3897fb7e481a90f9>
>
> [CI]
> "Please don't use this newsgroup for binary sharing. The reason why
> Giganews wanted this newsgroup moderated was because they feared it
> would be used as a dump group"
> [PPtPH]
> "And why are you complaining about it now? I've been doing it
> for some time, and you [or JoeS] should have murmured then.
> Not a myriad of postings later."
>
> Nicely spun!
> If you ever look to change careers you'd fit right in as a politician or
> attorney.
>
> With your logic, everyone who posts to the list is "sharing" and should
> be banned...
But that's not *why* they post them (ie. "don't use this newsgroup for...").
If someone says not to use a binary testing group for file sharing, one
would have try very hard to take it as "don't post any binaries at all".
And if one does take it that way, they would have to be very stupid,
because it's an extremely illogical interpretation.
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T
Back when Mozilla was just the project name of Netscape and was not a
Company.
If you want to read and write to Netscape Test Multimedia and other
support groups you had no choice but the secure server. Or be eat up
with spam.
Moz Champion (Dan)
> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>> Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T wrote:
>>> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>>>> Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T wrote:
>>>>> Jay Garcia wrote:
> /snip/
>>> Yes I have 563 set and all the md5 security items set to true.
>>>
>>
>> what happens if you create a test profile?
>>
>
> Do that Phillip. I have ssl enabled and am able to access it without
> problems in SeaMonkey 1.1.7, TB 2.0.0.9, and the Netscape Messenger
> alpha. We should be able to get it to work for you.
>
> Lee
Works fine here, have forgotten how I set it tho, probably by following
Lee's advice about SSL tho
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T
How about my sig File.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip M. Jones, CET http://www.vpea.org
If it's "fixed", don't "break it"! mailto:pjo...@kimbanet.com
http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/default.htm
Mac G4-500, OSX.3.9 Mac 17" PowerBook G4-1.67 Gb, OSX.4.11
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T
Tried two test post.
I set to every ssl and md5 to true.
then and only thin was I able to post.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip M. Jones, CET http://www.vpea.org
If it's "fixed", don't "break it"! mailto:pjo...@kimbanet.com
http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/default.htm
Mac G4-500, OSX.3.9 Mac 17" PowerBook G4-1.67 Gb, OSX.4.10
------------------------------------------------------------------------
»Q«
> I swear, after being in the gentoo lists for so long and seeing how
> people treat each other, it amazes me how juvenile some people take
> criticism here.
Aww, now, c'mon, it was so bad on gentoo-dev that they added new lists
to try to divert the juvenile noise.
Moz Champion (Dan)
> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>> Leonidas Jones wrote:
>>> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>>>> Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T wrote:
>>>>> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>>>>>> Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T wrote:
>>>>>>> Jay Garcia wrote:
>>> /snip/
>>>>> Yes I have 563 set and all the md5 security items set to true.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> what happens if you create a test profile?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Do that Phillip. I have ssl enabled and am able to access it without
>>> problems in SeaMonkey 1.1.7, TB 2.0.0.9, and the Netscape Messenger
>>> alpha. We should be able to get it to work for you.
>>>
>>> Lee
>>
>>
>> Works fine here, have forgotten how I set it tho, probably by
>> following Lee's advice about SSL tho.
>
> Tried two test post.
>
> I set to every ssl and md5 to true.
> then and only thin was I able to post.
>
Like I said, works fine here, just follow Lee's instructions
I must have set mine that way ages ago
Leonidas Jones
> Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T wrote:
>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>> Leonidas Jones wrote:
>>>> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>>>>> Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T wrote:
>>>>>> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>>>>>>> Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T wrote:
>>>>>>>> Jay Garcia wrote:
>>>> /snip/
>>
>> Tried two test post.
>>
>> I set to every ssl and md5 to true.
>> then and only thin was I able to post.
>>
>
>
> Like I said, works fine here, just follow Lee's instructions
> I must have set mine that way ages ago
Great to saee you back Dan!
Lee
Leonidas Jones
> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>> Leonidas Jones wrote:
>>> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>>>> Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T wrote:
>>>>> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>>>>>> Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T wrote:
>>>>>>> Jay Garcia wrote:
>>> /snip/
>
> Tried two test post.
>
> I set to every ssl and md5 to true.
> then and only thin was I able to post.
>
You were able to post at secnews? What group, I'm not seeing it yet.
Lee
Leonidas Jones
>> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>>> squaredancer wrote:
>>> maybe you'll like my new sig line
>>>
>>
>> Oh, come on now, Peter, surely you are aware that sig files should
>> only be four to six lines long!! Nine line...what a scandle!!
>>
>> (at least that used to be the limit...haven't seen it mentioned for a
>> while.)
>>
>> Daniel
>
> How about my sig File.
>
There is no hard and fast rule, some say four lines, some 6, some 8.
FGrom my standpoint, yours looks fine.
Lee
Leonidas Jones
> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>> Leonidas Jones wrote:
>>> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>>>> Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T wrote:
>>>>> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>>>>>> Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T wrote:
>>>>>>> Jay Garcia wrote:
>>> /snip/
> Tried two test post.
>
> I set to every ssl and md5 to true.
> then and only thin was I able to post.
>
Never mind I see it in NTMM. You should be good to go!
Lee
clay
Well, thanks for sharing that with me.
One would find it equally hard to take posting a link as posting
binaries or file sharing. Certainly not 'binary sharing' since no
binaries were posted.
An extremely illogical interpretation.
But this has all been said before, and you ignored it then too. so...
--
100% money back guarantee!
If at any time you are dissatisfied with the performance of your Mozilla
product, feel free to return it for a complete refund of your full
purchase price...
Chris Ilias
> Chris Ilias wrote:
>
>> But that's not *why* they post them (ie. "don't use this newsgroup
>> for...").
>> If someone says not to use a binary testing group for file sharing,
>> one would have try very hard to take it as "don't post any binaries at
>> all".
>> And if one does take it that way, they would have to be very stupid,
>> because it's an extremely illogical interpretation.
>
> Well, thanks for sharing that with me.
> One would find it equally hard to take posting a link as posting
> binaries or file sharing. Certainly not 'binary sharing' since no
> binaries were posted.
> An extremely illogical interpretation.
Which is why I assumed his other posts were tests. :-) This time, I saw
the thread which caused him to post. Regardless if the file is hosted on
the newsgroup, he is still using the newsgroup for file sharing.
Ed Mullen
> Gervase Markham <ge...@mozilla.org> wrote in
> news:wt6dnXZqt_qhDcva...@mozilla.org:
>
>> This is not to say that only people who are working on the
>> project are welcome, but it seems to me that those who are
>> active contributors in the community get to make the rules.
>
> GErv, as irritating as "peter" is, the fact is that I've watched
> participation in this group fall since Ilias took over. I've
> been helping out with peer support since Mozilla got its own
> groups, and I was at SecNews before that. He's knocked the
> warmth out of the groups. We were better off without his
> moderation, and I'm sorry you can't see what is obvious to a lot
> of us.
>
AMEN!
--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net
http://mozilla.edmullen.net
http://abington.edmullen.net
When you do a good deed, get a receipt - In case heaven is like the IRS.
Ed Mullen
> On 12/5/07 6:50 PM, _Christopher Jahn_ spoke thusly:
>> Chris Ilias <n...@ilias.ca> wrote in news:-
>> MGdnVy57s9yr8ra...@mozilla.org:
>>
>>> I just can't trust you on MTMM.
>>>
>>
>> The problem, Chris, is that increasingly WE can't trust YOU.
>>
>> I've followed this issue; you are clearly in the wrong on this issue.
>> He did not misuse the group, his post was not off-topic. his post on
>> MTMM is consistent with its use since its creation.
>
> There's where I disagree. He admitted that he uses MTMM for file sharing
> [1]; so there's no clear way to determine the intent of his posts.
>
> [1]<http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.test.multimedia/msg/3897fb7e481a90f9>
>
>
He didn't share a file. He posted a link to a file. Your
interpretation notwithstanding, he didn't "admit" anything in the post
you cited. You over-reacted. Again. You are the problem.
This entire ugly thread is why ... oh, fuck it. Why do I bother. After
years of participating in these and the secnews groups I finally have
had it. This is not only ignorant, not only illogical, not only
unsupportable, it is silly and self-destructive to the Mozilla
community. Which you can all have to yourself now. I hope Gerv and
Chris are happy now. Goodbye.
Don't be accommodating, be honest. I honestly don't have much more time
for anything else.
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
> On 12/5/07 9:27 PM, _clay_ spoke thusly:
>> Chris Ilias wrote:
>>
>>> But that's not *why* they post them (ie. "don't use this newsgroup
>>> for...").
>>> If someone says not to use a binary testing group for file sharing,
>>> one would have try very hard to take it as "don't post any binaries at
>>> all".
>>> And if one does take it that way, they would have to be very stupid,
>>> because it's an extremely illogical interpretation.
>>
>> Well, thanks for sharing that with me.
>> One would find it equally hard to take posting a link as posting
>> binaries or file sharing. Certainly not 'binary sharing' since no
>> binaries were posted.
>> An extremely illogical interpretation.
>
> Which is why I assumed his other posts were tests. :-) This time, I saw
> the thread which caused him to post. Regardless if the file is hosted on
> the newsgroup, he is still using the newsgroup for file sharing.
>
File Sharing:
File sharing usually follows the peer-to-peer (P2P) model, where the
files are stored on and served by personal computers of the users. Most
people who engage in file sharing on the Internet both provide (upload)
files and receive files (download).
P2P file sharing is distinct from file trading in that downloading files
from a P2P network does not require uploading, although some networks
either provide incentives for uploading such as credits or forcing the
sharing of files being currently downloaded.
Peter did not and has not engaged in "file sharing". He provided a link
to an mp3 file for Reg to test out and report back to the group for
further support.
For further clarification so that all users may benefit, please post all
the specific instances and names of files that Peter shared, by
definition, in MTMM .. thanks.
--
Jay Garcia - Netscape Champion
Marketing,Staff and Forums Consultant
Netscape Communications Corporation
Chris Ilias
> Chris Ilias wrote:
>
>> There's where I disagree. He admitted that he uses MTMM for file
>> sharing [1]; so there's no clear way to determine the intent of his
>> posts.
>>
>> [1]<http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.test.multimedia/msg/3897fb7e481a90f9>
>
> He didn't share a file. He posted a link to a file.
If I want to share a file with you, I can either post a link to it, or
attach it to my message. Either way, I'm sharing it.
> Your
> interpretation notwithstanding, he didn't "admit" anything in the post
> you cited.
So you're saying he misinterpreted what I said?
Billy Holmes
> Aww, now, c'mon, it was so bad on gentoo-dev that they added new lists
> to try to divert the juvenile noise.
I haven't subscribed to gentoo-dev, but being on gentoo-server,
gentoo-amd64, and gentoo-user, everyone is pretty cordial and actually
takes the criticism well.
Billy Holmes
> File Sharing:
>
[snip]
that's just silly.
how did you share files before there was P2P? I guess you didn't?
Oh wait.. we emailed them, or sent links to people via email or via web
forums..
oh.. and via news groups!
in both binary and link form.
Chris Ilias
> On 05.12.2007 20:39, Chris Ilias wrote:
>> Which is why I assumed his other posts were tests. :-) This time, I saw
>> the thread which caused him to post. Regardless if the file is hosted on
>> the newsgroup, he is still using the newsgroup for file sharing.
>
> File Sharing:
>
> File sharing usually follows the peer-to-peer (P2P) model, where the
> files are stored on and served by personal computers of the users. Most
> people who engage in file sharing on the Internet both provide (upload)
> files and receive files (download).
>
> P2P file sharing is distinct from file trading in that downloading files
> from a P2P network does not require uploading, although some networks
> either provide incentives for uploading such as credits or forcing the
> sharing of files being currently downloaded.
>
> Peter did not and has not engaged in "file sharing". He provided a link
> to an mp3 file for Reg to test out and report back to the group for
> further support.
There was nothing to indicate that was a test. In the discussion leading
up to his post in MTMM, they were talking about finding songs, not how
to post/read messages. He simply wanted reg to hear the tune.
> For further clarification so that all users may benefit, please post all
> the specific instances and names of files that Peter shared, by
> definition, in MTMM .. thanks.
You'll have to ask Peter/Grant/etc. that. He's the one that stated "I've
been doing it for some time", when I told him not to "use this newsgroup
for binary sharing".
--
Leonidas Jones
> On 12/5/07 9:51 PM, _Ed Mullen_ spoke thusly:
>> Chris Ilias wrote:
>>
>>> There's where I disagree. He admitted that he uses MTMM for file
>>> sharing [1]; so there's no clear way to determine the intent of his
>>> posts.
>>>
>>> [1]<http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.test.multimedia/msg/3897fb7e481a90f9>
>>
>>
>> He didn't share a file. He posted a link to a file.
>
> If I want to share a file with you, I can either post a link to it, or
> attach it to my message. Either way, I'm sharing it.
>
>> Your interpretation notwithstanding, he didn't "admit" anything in
>> the post you cited.
>
> So you're saying he misinterpreted what I said?
Oh come on Chris, this is just getting stupid!!! You are wrong here,
just plain and simply wrong. You can't defend it. You made a mistake,
we all have. Just admit and lets move on.
Lee
Chris Ilias
> Chris Ilias wrote:
>> On 12/5/07 9:51 PM, _Ed Mullen_ spoke thusly:
>>
>>
>> If I want to share a file with you, I can either post a link to it, or
>> attach it to my message. Either way, I'm sharing it.
>>
>>> Your interpretation notwithstanding, he didn't "admit" anything in
>>> the post you cited.
>>
>> So you're saying he misinterpreted what I said?
>
> Oh come on Chris, this is just getting stupid!!! You are wrong here,
> just plain and simply wrong. You can't defend it. You made a mistake,
> we all have. Just admit and lets move on.
I don't know how else to respond to you, because you didn't indicate
why. All I can say is that I disagree.
Moz Champion (Dan)
May I ask a question at this point?
What is the value of a 'Multimedia' newsgroup if one is not allowed to
post multimedia?
You could just as well have focused on images, rather than mp3s, as a
'reason' for your actions. If someone posts an image that is copyrighted
by someone (whether or not the poster was aware of such or not), they
were doing no more (or less) than what the person here did with an mp3 file.
So by some interpretation, calling posting an mp3 file as 'file sharing'
means that you will have to additionally call posting image files as
'file sharing'.
As far as I can see, current actions will lead to the absolute DEMISE of
multimedia via/on Mozilla, lest everyone be termed 'file sharing' simply
for posting a link.
For example, below here is a link, that leads directly to a copyrighted
image
http://stuff.mit.edu/afs/athena/activity/a/american/progress/FAP-Copyrighted.gif
Does that make me guilty of 'file sharing'?
Twas no more than what someone else did except with an mp3 instead of a
.gif file
Chris Ilias
> May I ask a question at this point?
>
> What is the value of a 'Multimedia' newsgroup if one is not allowed to
> post multimedia?
Posting multimedia per se is not what is disallowed. It's the reason for
posting it. Is one testing the MM capabilities of the Mozilla-based news
client, or is the intent simply to post something one thinks others
would like to see/hear? It's a question of intent.
Moz Champion (Dan)
> On 12/5/07 10:11 PM, _Leonidas Jones_ spoke thusly:
>> Chris Ilias wrote:
>>> On 12/5/07 9:51 PM, _Ed Mullen_ spoke thusly:
>>>
>>>> He didn't share a file. He posted a link to a file.
>>>
>>> If I want to share a file with you, I can either post a link to it,
>>> or attach it to my message. Either way, I'm sharing it.
>>>
>>>> Your interpretation notwithstanding, he didn't "admit" anything in
>>>> the post you cited.
>>>
>>> So you're saying he misinterpreted what I said?
>>
>> Oh come on Chris, this is just getting stupid!!! You are wrong here,
>> just plain and simply wrong. You can't defend it. You made a mistake,
>> we all have. Just admit and lets move on.
>
> I don't know how else to respond to you, because you didn't indicate
> why. All I can say is that I disagree.
Tell me Chris, are you gong to ban images in the newsgroup as well?
They are absolutely the same as mp3s, except they are visual instead of
audio based.
http://stuff.mit.edu/afs/athena/activity/a/american/progress/FAP-Copyrighted.gif
There! the above is a copyrighted image (I plead fair use doctrine)
posted exactly as the other person posted an mp3. Am I to be banned now
because I am using this newsgroup as a 'file sharing' utility?
While posting of 'copyrighted' images/sounds/files is certainly to be
avoided in a multimedia newsgroup, and there should be concern expressed
over the use of such, calling such use a 'file ahsring' is inapropriate.
I guess you will ban me now, after all I 'posted' an image link in a
NON-IMAGE newsgroup! And it was COPYRIGHTED as well! OMG, no everyone
can go follow the link and the file is SHARED!
Whereas the other person posted an audio link in a MULTIMEDIA newsgroup.
Said file may or may not have been copyrighted.
So tell me why I am not banned for this post?
»Q«
> I've been helping out with peer support since Mozilla got its own
> groups, and I was at SecNews before that. He's knocked the
> warmth out of the groups. We were better off without his
> moderation, and I'm sorry you can't see what is obvious to a lot
> of us.
IMO, it's unfortunate that the piles of OT drivel that were posted in
the support groups[1] by a very few posters couldn't be gotten rid of in
some way that didn't have a chilling effect on the much less voluminous
chit-chat that most posters engaged in from time to time. I agree with
you that the "warmth" of the support groups has decreased, but it's
obvious (to a lot of us? ;) that it's been worth it.
As it is, I'd much rather the friendly OT chit-chat continue here in
m.general; IMO, continuing the old comraderie here is the next best
thing to having it in the support groups themselves. Unfortunately,
having that here is difficult because m.general is now the place where
the couple of posters with hate-ons[2] for any kind of controls in the
groups vent, so there's a lot of flamage here.
[1] I don't mean the multimedia test group; I don't deal with that
group, so I don't want to say anything about it.
[2] And here I don't mean posters such as you who post thoughtful
opinions about the health of the groups; I mean the very few who start
the name-calling at every perceived opportunity.
»Q«
The user lists are good, I agree.
The dev list goes in cycles, calm for a while then massive flamewars.
I unsubscribed a little while after drobbins rejoined then re-resigned.
ISTM the devs who are getting things done mostly avoid the list, so
it's not a good way to keep tabs on what's going on.
Leonidas Jones
> On 12/5/07 10:11 PM, _Leonidas Jones_ spoke thusly:
>> Chris Ilias wrote:
>>> On 12/5/07 9:51 PM, _Ed Mullen_ spoke thusly:
>>
>> Oh come on Chris, this is just getting stupid!!! You are wrong here,
>> just plain and simply wrong. You can't defend it. You made a mistake,
>> we all have. Just admit and lets move on.
>
> I don't know how else to respond to you, because you didn't indicate
> why. All I can say is that I disagree.
Chris,
I kept telling myself not to respond on this, several times, but it just
got to be too much.
I'll take a bit of a break, and send you an email on the matter this
weekend. I am very concerned about the direction these groups have
taken, but I should not have posted it so publicly and for that I do
apologize.
Lee
Christopher Jahn
> On 12/5/07 6:50 PM, _Christopher Jahn_ spoke thusly:
>> Chris Ilias <n...@ilias.ca> wrote in news:-
>> MGdnVy57s9yr8ra...@mozilla.org:
>>
>>> I just can't trust you on MTMM.
>>>
>>
>> The problem, Chris, is that increasingly WE can't trust YOU.
>>
>> I've followed this issue; you are clearly in the wrong on
>> this issue. He did not misuse the group, his post was not
>> off-topic. his post on MTMM is consistent with its use since
>> its creation.
>
> There's where I disagree. He admitted that he uses MTMM for
> file sharing [1]; so there's no clear way to determine the
> intent of his posts.
>
Well, Ilias, that's a complete and utter lie. We can add lying
to your growing list of failings.
He wasn't "file sharing." He was helping a user suss out a
problem with HTML rendering - links weren't opening. A lot of us
refer people to MTMM to test out HTML and embedded code, because
that's what that group was originally created for.
You tasked him for using the group to test the link, he protested
that he's been using the group for this purpose for years, and
you've twisted it into an admission of file sharing. What a
pr**k!
Now I've lost all respect for you. You have GOT to go.
--
}:-) Christopher Jahn
{:-( http://manormaniac.blogspot.com/
Prudence is a rich, ugly old maid courted by incapacity.
Christopher Jahn
MranZ2dnU...@mozilla.org:
>
> So you're saying he misinterpreted what I said?
No, YOU misinterpreted pretty much everything.
Gerv, dump this idiot now!!
--
}:-) Christopher Jahn
{:-( http://manormaniac.blogspot.com/
All in all it's just another brick in the wall...
Christopher Jahn
> I don't know how else to respond to you, because you didn't
> indicate why. All I can say is that I disagree.
The fact is you don't have your facts straight, and this isn't
the first time.
Making mistakes is one thing: failing to acknowledge them is
another.
You have GOT to go.
--
}:-) Christopher Jahn
{:-( http://manormaniac.blogspot.com/
"I think that's how Chicago got started. A bunch of people in New
York
said,'Gee, I'm enjoying the crime and the poverty, but it just
isn't cold
enough.Let's go west.'" - Richard Jeni
Chris Ilias
> He wasn't "file sharing." He was helping a user suss out a
> problem with HTML rendering - links weren't opening.
Here's the original thread:
<http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.general/msg/ed40befb309d1559>
Here's his post in MTMM:
<http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.test.multimedia/msg/dac4f4784f33b169>
Where is there anything in those posts having to do with HTML rendering
problems?
Billy Holmes
> The dev list goes in cycles, calm for a while then massive flamewars.
> I unsubscribed a little while after drobbins rejoined then re-resigned.
>
I guess if I get bored of the name calling here, I can always join
gentoo-dev to get another fix of it.
Christopher Jahn
> On 12/6/07 1:06 AM, _Christopher Jahn_ spoke thusly:
>> He wasn't "file sharing." He was helping a user suss out a
>> problem with HTML rendering - links weren't opening.
>
>
> Where is there anything in those posts having to do with HTML
> rendering problems?
For that matter, where is he actually doing any file sharing?
Ilias, you are worthless, and it's time for you to step down.
Buh-bye.
--
}:-) Christopher Jahn
{:-( http://manormaniac.blogspot.com/
What a useless scroll, all it says is "Hastur Hastur Hastur"
over and over again.
Chris Ilias
> Chris Ilias <n...@ilias.ca> wrote in
> news:NISdnW1IP6X9Ccra...@mozilla.org:
>
>> On 12/6/07 1:06 AM, _Christopher Jahn_ spoke thusly:
>>> He wasn't "file sharing." He was helping a user suss out a
>>> problem with HTML rendering - links weren't opening.
>>
>> Where is there anything in those posts having to do with HTML
>> rendering problems?
>
> For that matter, where is he actually doing any file sharing?
<http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.test.multimedia/msg/dac4f4784f33b169>
As I said, it doesn't matter if it's a link or attached to the message.
The point is that he was testing anything. He just wanted reg to hear
the tune.
So where is there anything in those posts I linked to earlier, about
HTML rendering problems? :-)
Chris Ilias
> The point is that he was testing anything.
Um..er.. *wasn't* testing anything... :-)
Lester Caine
> On 12/6/07 1:06 AM, _Christopher Jahn_ spoke thusly:
>> He wasn't "file sharing." He was helping a user suss out a problem
>> with HTML rendering - links weren't opening.
>
> Here's the original thread:
> <http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.general/msg/ed40befb309d1559>
Reading further in that thread - a link was posted to the music under
discussion which was not working and then the discussion drifted to WHY NOT.
> Here's his post in MTMM:
> <http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.test.multimedia/msg/dac4f4784f33b169>
The discussion is moved TO the multimedia list where the link SHOULD work in
order to prove a point.
> Where is there anything in those posts having to do with HTML rendering
> problems?
The discussion may have been a little 'general' on the general list, but the
reason for moving to multimedia was BECAUSE of a problem that needed checking
out.
Quoting single messages out of context does not help your case, and referring
us to the GOOGLE crap should be a bannable offence !!!
--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-----------------------------
Contact - http://home.lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://home.lsces.co.uk
MEDW - http://home.lsces.co.uk/ModelEngineersDigitalWorkshop/
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php
Chris Ilias
> Chris Ilias wrote:
>> On 12/6/07 1:06 AM, _Christopher Jahn_ spoke thusly:
>>> He wasn't "file sharing." He was helping a user suss out a problem
>>> with HTML rendering - links weren't opening.
>>
>> Here's the original thread:
>> <http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.general/msg/ed40befb309d1559>
>
> Reading further in that thread - a link was posted to the music under
> discussion which was not working and then the discussion drifted to WHY
> NOT.
Could you please point me to the post in which someone said the link was
not working? The only technical issue I see discussed is at
<http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.general/msg/ad31b84846663e95>
and its subsequent replies. Is that what you are referring to?
Lester Caine
> On 12/6/07 2:57 AM, _Lester Caine_ spoke thusly:
>> Chris Ilias wrote:
>>> On 12/6/07 1:06 AM, _Christopher Jahn_ spoke thusly:
>>>> He wasn't "file sharing." He was helping a user suss out a problem
>>>> with HTML rendering - links weren't opening.
>>>
>>> Here's the original thread:
>>> <http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.general/msg/ed40befb309d1559>
>>
>> Reading further in that thread - a link was posted to the music under
>> discussion which was not working and then the discussion drifted to
>> WHY NOT.
>
> Could you please point me to the post in which someone said the link was
> not working? The only technical issue I see discussed is at
> <http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.general/msg/ad31b84846663e95>
> and its subsequent replies. Is that what you are referring to?
Pass - not seeing it now - but I only subscribed *TO* the multimedia list
because of the problem with the original post!
The ORIGINAL post on my local archive still does not work for me and Peter
posted an alternative link - as far as I am concerned as a test - on the
multimedia list so we could check it out. The test link works fine, but I
still can't see what is wrong with the original. GIVEN the increasing problems
with new versions of SeaMonkey being ABLE to test things is important and if
we can't do that on test lists then why the **** bother providing them.
Chris Ilias
> Chris Ilias wrote:
>
>> Could you please point me to the post in which someone said the link
>> was not working? The only technical issue I see discussed is at
>> <http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.general/msg/ad31b84846663e95>
>> and its subsequent replies. Is that what you are referring to?
>
> Pass - not seeing it now - but I only subscribed *TO* the multimedia
> list because of the problem with the original post!
> The ORIGINAL post on my local archive still does not work for me and
> Peter posted an alternative link - as far as I am concerned as a test -
> on the multimedia list so we could check it out. The test link works
> fine, but I still can't see what is wrong with the original. GIVEN the
> increasing problems with new versions of SeaMonkey being ABLE to test
> things is important and if we can't do that on test lists then why the
> **** bother providing them.
Testing is fine. I don't see any evidence at all, that his post in MTMM
was meant as a test.
Lester Caine
And as *I* said the only reason *I* went there was because of the problem with
the original link. And I can't remember now why but it was certainly related
to the original discussions on problems with plugins and prior to the 'banned
debate'.
I try and AVOID google like the plague cloaning of any list there should be
blocked !!! The original posts are on my local seamonkey archive, and refer to
moving it to MTMM as we WERE not supposed to post those types of link on MG
and while I did not contribute to the discussion I had no reason to subscribe
TO MTMM other than following it as the problem with these type of links has
happened in seamonkey before.
I don't dispute that the original content may have been off topic, but when a
non-working link pops up and the reason why it's not working is not obvious,
working to solve that problem - in my view - is perfectly reasonable since it
may be a real bug that needs reporting? Posting links TO multimedia content on
a multimedia test list does not seem unreasonable. The unreasonable bit is
saying that posting those links is not allowed - when clearly the rules say
that the move to MTMM was required to comply with the rules on the MG list.
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
Napster ring a bell?
--
Jay Garcia - Netscape Champion
Marketing,Staff and Forums Consultant
Netscape Communications Corporation
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
Chris, you made a huge point in NTMM on the secnews server that the
server and groups were being "abandoned" to use your terminology and
that they, the NTMM'ers, should now find their new home on the moz
server. Those users didn't even break stride in traveling to their new
home, songs, tests, wallpaper, stationary and all. What's coming to
light now is that they can't do here what they were doing there. There
were lots of things done there, posted there that for some reason is not
acceptable here in MTMM or at least it seems so. There were lots of
"songs" (legally posted) in NTMM, so what's the problem with it in MTMM?
When you wooed over those users from NTMM, they brought with them their
friendly nature, posting habits, sharing of ideas and so on. Now they
are being told that, hey you can't do that and Peter is the whipping
post example. What's the deal?
Why don't you post the guidelines again here so that everyone
understands why MTMM was created here and what is acceptable and what
isn't after which the users can make up their own minds and not live in
fear that they "may" have done something wrong that were doing correctly
in NTMM. I fought "tooth and nail" for the creation of MTMM and I would
really hate to see it become the ball-and-chain of the news server here.
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
> On 12/5/07 11:46 PM, _Moz Champion (Dan)_ spoke thusly:
>> May I ask a question at this point?
>>
>> What is the value of a 'Multimedia' newsgroup if one is not allowed to
>> post multimedia?
>
> Posting multimedia per se is not what is disallowed. It's the reason for
> posting it. Is one testing the MM capabilities of the Mozilla-based news
> client, or is the intent simply to post something one thinks others
> would like to see/hear? It's a question of intent.
>
Simply ludicrous to say the least. The MTMM group consists of a
community of long-time friends and peers in the multimedia community. So
what if someone posts a link to "hey, you oughta hear this one" or "Hey,
I found the song you were looking for, here's the link". That is what a
community is all about. What IF someone posted those same links to those
same songs but instead said, "my media player refuses to play that song,
what's up with that ... HELP!!!!". That would be ok wouldn't it? So what
IF they were using that as an excuse to direct a user(s) to the song
which is not really for testing purposes.
Moz never wanted the MTMM created in the first place and they don't
really care to host it now, that's the bottom line. How you can base
judgements on "intent" rather than "actions" is beyond me.
My "intent" may be to post a link to a popular song but my "action" is
to classify it as a test stating that it doesn't work and I need help.
How can you distinguish between the two??? And even IF my intent is
somehow discovered, then how does that link damage the purpose of the
MTMM group?
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
>> He didn't share a file. He posted a link to a file.
>
> If I want to share a file with you, I can either post a link to it, or
> attach it to my message. Either way, I'm sharing it.
Ok, lets put aside the internet definition of "file sharing", how is
that link counterproductive to the function of the MTMM "community"?
Would you also say that providing a link to a site hosting dozens of
stationary images is by your definition "sharing" and not acceptable?
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
> On 12/6/07 1:46 AM, _Christopher Jahn_ spoke thusly:
>> Chris Ilias <n...@ilias.ca> wrote in
>> news:NISdnW1IP6X9Ccra...@mozilla.org:
>>
>>> On 12/6/07 1:06 AM, _Christopher Jahn_ spoke thusly:
>>>> He wasn't "file sharing." He was helping a user suss out a
>>>> problem with HTML rendering - links weren't opening.
>>>
>>> Where is there anything in those posts having to do with HTML
>>> rendering problems?
>>
>> For that matter, where is he actually doing any file sharing?
>
> <http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.test.multimedia/msg/dac4f4784f33b169>
> As I said, it doesn't matter if it's a link or attached to the message.
> The point is that he was testing anything. He just wanted reg to hear
> the tune.
>
> So where is there anything in those posts I linked to earlier, about
> HTML rendering problems? :-)
So, only HTML rendering problems are acceptable? So why isn't the group
named m.t.html instead of Multimedia?
And so what IF his intent was for reg to hear a song, why is that
counter productive?