Who is responsible for the creating (and recreating and recreating and recreating booster messages) these damned alt.sexzilla.*, alt.www.sexzilla.* and alt.sex.sexzilla.* groups?
>Who is responsible for the creating (and recreating and recreating >and recreating booster messages) these damned alt.sexzilla.*, >alt.www.sexzilla.* and alt.sex.sexzilla.* groups?
>Damned cretins.
The newgroup messages all show:
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.70.214.20
which reverse-DNR's to ojsimpson.net. The upstream provider is MCI.
WHOIS information for ojsimpson.net:
Intel Telecom Corp (OJSIMPSON3-DOM) 26 Roberts Street Suite B109-B5 Fargo, ND 58102 US
Domain Name: OJSIMPSON.NET Domain Status: On Hold
Administrative Contact, Technical Contact, Zone Contact: Gerald, Reynolds W (RWG16) jer...@NETZILLA.NET 701-237-0188 Billing Contact: Gerald, Reynolds W (RWG16) jer...@NETZILLA.NET 701-237-0188
Record last updated on 11-May-97. Record created on 11-Feb-97. Database last updated on 25-May-97 04:56:34 EDT.
Record last updated on 14-May-97. Database last updated on 25-May-97 04:56:34 EDT.
-- +------------ Lee Jackson Beauregard, rchason at bigfoot dot com -+---------+ | Opinions expressed here are mine and not those of SmartNet or | Delenda | | Altopia. And if you don't agree with them, you are racist, | est | | sexist, elitist, imperialist, Baptist, and possibly even right. | Windoze | +------ This sig is five lines long to annoy the four-line-sig purists -----+
On 24 May 1997 13:11:32 GMT, zen...@gatecom.com (Michael Zander) wrote:
>Who is responsible for the creating (and recreating and recreating >and recreating booster messages) these damned alt.sexzilla.*, >alt.www.sexzilla.* and alt.sex.sexzilla.* groups?
I like 'em. Concentrated crap that can be cancelled without all that silly mucking about looking for it, or calculating BIs, or reading it...
>Damned cretins.
CretiN. Singular. His name is Jerry. We're chartering a bus to go and set his pubic hair on fire. Interested? Bring marshmallows.
-- Rick ----------- ** Did I mention the hot-lead-enema? **
Animal Rights Activists and the Elders of Zion forced Lee Jackson Beauregard to say:
# which reverse-DNR's to ojsimpson.net. The upstream provider is MCI.
# WHOIS information for ojsimpson.net:
# Intel Telecom Corp (OJSIMPSON3-DOM) # 26 Roberts Street # Suite B109-B5 # Fargo, ND 58102 # US
Directions:
As you come into town on I-94 from Minnesota, take the University Avenue exit. Go north on University until you get to 13th Avenue South. Turn right and go to 10th Street, at which point you will want to turn left and go north. Get into the right-hand lane. Take a right just after the Main Street underpass, and go down about 3 blocks. Take a left onto Roberts Street, and you will want to go to the first or second building on the....left I believe.
If you come in from the west (read: from inside North Dakota), then get off of I-94 at the West Acres exit and go East on 13th Avenue South until you get to 10th Street, at which point you want to follow the directions as normal.
# Administrative Contact, Technical Contact, Zone Contact: # Gerald, Reynolds W (RWG16) jer...@NETZILLA.NET # 701-237-0188 # Billing Contact: # Gerald, Reynolds W (RWG16) jer...@NETZILLA.NET # 701-237-0188
Ahhh, South Fargo. Gee, I used to live around near there. *goes to check something*
This address looks awfully damn familiar. Yep--West Acres Mall. Right around the side.
Directions: Coming in on I-94, take the West Acres Exit. Get onto 13th Avenue South going west. Take a left onto 42nd Street SW and go about 4 blocks. Should be on the corner of 17th Avenue South and 42nd Street SW, on your right.
--Camille. Always happy to help. More to come.
-- "It's not every day you meet a Legend." -- Mike Stackpole "Good, bad.....I'm the guy with the LART." Ministry of BattleTech URL: http://www.primenet.com/~capella/mob.html Meille, teille, vai seinaa vasten?
Animal Rights Activists and the Elders of Zion forced Lee Jackson Beauregard to say:
# Administrative Contact, Technical Contact, Zone Contact: # Gerald, Reynolds W (RWG16) jer...@NETZILLA.NET # 701-237-0188 # Billing Contact: # Gerald, Reynolds W (RWG16) jer...@NETZILLA.NET # 701-237-0188
This might help some: (701)235-9503 NOTE: I do not condone harrassment, nor is this phone number being placed here for such purposes.
# Coordinator: # Kirk, Douglas (DK62) dk...@CORPCOMM.NET # 701-277-0011
101 23rd Av N #308 Fargo,ND 58102-2026 (701)280-9603
NOTE: I do not condone harrassment, nor have I placed this information here for this purpose. This information is verified to the best of my ability, and I assume no responsibility for errors.
# ITC (NETBLK-CORP-INTELCOMM) # PO Box 954 # Moorhead, MN 56561 # USA
The closest I found was a Rick Haider in Mandan, ND. I am assuming that that information is old, and that this bloke moved east to Moorhead. I have people checking on this.
--Camille.
-- "It's not every day you meet a Legend." -- Mike Stackpole "Good, bad.....I'm the guy with the LART." Ministry of BattleTech URL: http://www.primenet.com/~capella/mob.html Meille, teille, vai seinaa vasten?
>A cabal of self-appointed, blacklist wielding, anti-business-advertising techno/edu-nerds has apparently decided for all >the rest of us Usenet participants[...] >Name calling, however, is abusive everywhere but the Usenet, it seems, where advertisers are called "spammers," >"losers," and other assorted negative labels, as though they are evil scum[...] >Without advertising, you wouldn't own 9/10's of everything you have. And there are forms of free >advertising in every community (real estate "for sale" signs, posters, flyers, etc.), which cost only for the raw materials and >distribution, and not for renting space on a temporary basis in any particular media that is owned by someone else.[...] >Room must also be made for free real advertising on Usenet, since no one person, group, institution or organization has >the right to monopolize or control this media that we all own individually.[...] >The techno/edu-nerds have been screaming, crying and throwing temper-tantrums when they should have acted maturely[...] >[antispammers should have] worked on creating a tool by which all Usenet participants can automatically recognize and remove ads from >their own personal newsgroup lists or menus, if they so desire.[...] >[Advertisers] are a mostly unheard from, silent majority of the truly oppressed (economically, socially and even physically) >whose health and families suffer because they have failed to pierce the thick shells of suspicion, resistance and cynicism[...] >Legitimate advertising, yes even the seemingly hyped-up variety, is far better than some of the content found on the >Internet for many years now[...] >Advertising is the eyes and ears of a society. Without it we are mostly blind and dumb, misperceiving and reacting >inappropriately to our environment. It comes in many subtle forms, usually mistaken for editorial or news content[...] >In fact, since available storage space seems to be the hue and cry and the most standard form of objection against >advertising in newsgroups, rather than duplicate ads being left in each individual newsgroup server, each should contain a >pointer, set to on as a default--unless modified according to category, type or preference, or deactivated, by the >individual newsgroup participant--which automatically accesses a central free-net advertisers database, maintained by >one or several public spirited administrators, who could set a cancel-bot to automatically delete expired ads.[...] >Programmers are to blame for the present impasse. Those who are able and so inclined should get busy and solve this >problem in a sane, rational way to everyone's benefit[...] >Whoever believes that such access to advertisers must not be free, open and available to all, are ignorant of the fact that >most netvertisers are also already paying to advertise in many other media[...] >Netvertizers will continue to post ads to newsgroups on Usenet simply because they are the only real form of public >advertising available on the Internet outside of expensive, limited exposure Worldwide Web Malls, highly regulated online >services, and a few other resources that are even more expensive or limited in much needed exposure. And also because, >though the critics of netvertising on Usenet are loathe to admit it, this form of advertising is actually an effective and >productive source of much needed business for both the advertisers and also for their clients or customers[...] >Usenet netvertising is better than mass "junk" Email postings, though even these can be a beneficial and effective means of >netvertising. Again, this should be regulated individually with the help of a similar netvertizing option for Email[...] >It should only be considered "bad netiquette" for netvertisers who ignore or try to bypass this proper means of >distributing their netvertisements. Such postings or mailings are only "junk" if the recipient doesn't want or need them [but] >so-called "junk" Email may be necessary and useful >to many who receive it as well. Their rights to receive such notices or mail postings should not be infringed or abandoned >to suit the whims of those who don't wish to receive them, or vice versa.
(Sorry for the lengthy and duplicative quoting, but I just couldn't resist bringing out some of the real gems from this bozo's screed. The whole thing is below.)
>A cabal of self-appointed, blacklist wielding, anti-business-advertising techno/edu-nerds has apparently decided for all >the rest of us Usenet participants that advertising--getting a message out in such a way that it reaches people who were >not already aware of or specifically seeking out that advertiser or his product or service--is so-called "net abuse" or "bad >netiquette."
>They've resorted to what should be thought of as bad manners and offensive conduct in any group or community. They >assume evil intent of all or most would-be Usenet advertisers, and name call (i.e. "make money fast losers"), concerning >things they don't, or evidently won't, understand (such as blindly assuming that all multi-level or network marketing >programs are dishonest "pyramid schemes," even though our courts have judged otherwise), that all businesses are big >evil corporate giants trying to squash everyone under a burden of debt and unwanted, unneeded products or services >(paranoia and rumor-mongering), and all advertising for services, products or whatever, to anyone not already interested >or aware of them--especially without cost on Usenet--is supposedly "off topic," "evil," "bad" behavior that must be >ridiculed, attacked, harassed and stopped.
>They don't realize that their ridicule, harassment and other forms of real abuse--such as canceling all ads, before many >can notice them, blacklisting advertisers, and campaigning and haranguing to get them kicked off the Internet, are very >real forms of rotten behavior that shouldn't be tolerated by anyone at any time.
>Sure, many Usenet participants "support" these self-appointed "guardians" of the Internet, simply because until now theirs >has been the predominant voice on the subject, and because they've managed to convince enough newbies that they are >the only or best "authorities" on what should and shouldn't exist on Usenet, about how it must be run and what all the rest >of us should think about all this.
>Name calling, however, is abusive everywhere but the Usenet, it seems, where advertisers are called "spammers," >"losers," and other assorted negative labels, as though they are evil scum invading our homes and mercilessly torturing us >with unwanted and unneeded garbage.
>Who says so? Without advertising, you wouldn't own 9/10's of everything you have. And there are forms of free >advertising in every community (real estate "for sale" signs, posters, flyers, etc.), which cost only for the raw materials and >distribution, and not for renting space on a temporary basis in any particular media that is owned by someone else.
>Room must also be made for free real advertising on Usenet, since no one person, group, institution or organization has >the right to monopolize or control this media that we all own individually.
>An Alternative Solution
>The techno/edu-nerds have been screaming, crying and throwing temper-tantrums when they should have acted maturely >and realized that instead of trying to disinherit, restrict or control an important and growing segment of Internet users, they >need instead to see to it that their access does not infringe unnecessarily on those who, for their own reasons, don't want >to be bombarded with advertising, while leaving ads and advertising free, open and available for the vast majority of the >rest of us.
>Instead of "cancel-bots" (programs that cancel so-called "objectionable" advertising on newsgroups) or cancel-bot >operators taking it upon themselves to go gunning, in Old West fashion, for any and all advertising, shooting them down >mercilessly and then informing on the "culprits" to various watchdog boards interested mainly in limiting or eliminating the >free speech of all advertisers on Usenet, someone should have gotten a little attack of intelligence, put on their thinking >caps, and worked on creating a tool by which all Usenet participants can automatically recognize and remove ads from >their own personal newsgroup lists or menus, if they so desire.
>This might be a plug-in or a standard feature on popular Internet access programs such as Netscape Navigator, that >should have a category for advertising purposes which sets a flag so that others can recognize and delete ads (even >without seeing them first), while leaving the ads available for a limited time (such as a week, fortnight, or month) on its >host server, which could use the same flag to automatically delete all expired ads each day.
>Who are Advertisers, Really?
>Not all businesses are corporate conglomerates. Most are small operations and many are being run out of homes by >enterprising people whose creative sources of commerce have kept our communities vital, growing and productive.
>When starting out especially, most of these businesses are cash poor, with little or no financing other than their own >personal savings or loans from family members, and desperately need access to effective, free advertising sources in
In article <338c4ade.17510...@204.127.4.20>, JeffLea...@WorldNet.att.net says...
> You won't like this, certainly. Under http://www.netzilla.net/ there > is an entry labeled 'New" that says:
> > Attention "Anti-Spammers" > > Click here to learn why Usenet > > advertising is necessary.
There's something about being falsely accused that, in this case, is taking me from lurking mode to a more active participation in this group. Since the "businessmen" running Netzilla.net seem so offended by modest namecalling -- such as identifying purveyors of UCE and the like as "spammers -- I'll avoid such terms.
The insinuation of the Netzilla Manifesto (so to speak) is that anyone opposed to Usenet and e-mail advertising is anti-business, which is a politically correct way of calling us communists, socialists, left-wing radicals or some other nonsense.
Look again and you'll find (as I have in following this group) that the interests, tactics and politics of the various participants appear to be quite varied -- about a diverse as you'll find in the general population. The so-called "cabal" does not seem to be interested in destroying the Constitution of the United State or trampling upon the rights of businesses, legitimate or otherwise, to conduct their commercial endeavors. The exception, and what brings these people together, is a concern (boy, that's a mild term!) that THEIR rights are being held hostage by a relatively small group of "business people" who frequently disreguard establish rules of conduct and Netiquette, ignore legal restrictions, invade the rights of privacy, often engage in outright harrassment, and in general engage in practices most "legitimate" businesses avoid.
That's not to say that all MLM's are pyramid schemes -- though most are. Many, or even most of us, aren't personally opposed to porn. Hell, I'm enough of a cival libertarian to believe that caveat emptor is the second step in business regulation, coming after self-imposed ethics by the businesses themselves.
Unfortunately, whether these businesses are "legitimate" or not, their ethical standards fall woefully short when presented with the technological capabilities of Usenet and e-mail. Though most newsgroups specifically prohibit advertising and off-topic postings, these businesses seem to feel that Usenet is private domain. Though it is illegal to send UCE to .gov, .mil and .edu domains, these businesses apparently have no sense of legality when posting thousands of messages to these addresses. Though ALL of us pay some portion of our monthly access fees for email and Usenet postings we don't want, they force our service providers and all other links between their computers and ours to provide additional bandwidth for their postings, and MAKE US pay for it! And now, with the volume of UCE what it is these days, every legitimate (no quotation marks needed here) business with email addresses is paying employees to delete these unwanted solicitations.
I wonder how much of the Silicon Valley payroll goes for hitting "delete" in mail readers? At GM? Ford? Citibank? Awfully "pink" of them to avoid your messages by paying an IT staffer to write and update a procmail script shipping your UCE to /dev/null, isn't it?
I'm reminded of a standup comedian who said that when asked "Mind if I smoke?" would reply "No. Mind if I fart?"
That's the way we feel about what is commonly referred to as "spam."
I don't mind you advertising in the appropriate places with appropriate messages. Usenet, and especially my e-mailbox don't qualify for either.
Since I'm not in Fargo, stick you heads up your asses and sniff *really* hard.
In article <338c4ade.17510...@204.127.4.20>, JeffLea...@WorldNet.att.net says...
> You won't like this, certainly. Under http://www.netzilla.net/ there > is an entry labeled 'New" that says:
> > Attention "Anti-Spammers" > > Click here to learn why Usenet > > advertising is necessary.
> If you click there you get the diatribe whioch I've included below > (seen here and there in various forms before). Some high points:
<huge, rending gash>
> >A cabal of self-appointed, blacklist wielding, anti-business-advertising techno/edu-nerds has apparently decided for all > >the rest of us Usenet participants[...]
Uh, I think he means us.
> >Name calling, however, is abusive everywhere but the Usenet, it seems, where advertisers are called "spammers,"
So you won't be calling us 'self-appointed, blacklist wielding, anti- business-advertising techno/edu-nerds' anymore?
> >Newsgroups, newsgroup moderators or founders, and system or server administrators need to quit acting like offended > >capitalists themselves, whose monopoly has been invaded by mom and pop competitors, and learn to let their > >marketplace decide what it does and doesn't want, instead of trying to squash advertisers like the little annoying "evil > >bugs" they falsely perceive them to be.
'Evil Bugs' I kinda like the sound of that.
All this ranting, and I didn't even learn why 'Usenet advertising is necessary'.
Damn. I was curious too.
Wouf! Doug --
Remove 'REMOVE_ME' from address below to reply mailto: spamless@REMOVE_MEpacbell.net
JeffLea...@WorldNet.att.net (Jeffery J. Leader) wrote:
>You won't like this, certainly. Under http://www.netzilla.net/ there >is an entry labeled 'New" that says:
[whitespace removed to trim the columns]
>>Attention "Anti-Spammers" >>Click here to learn why Usenet >>advertising is necessary.
>If you click there you get the diatribe whioch I've included below >(seen here and there in various forms before). Some high points:
[crap flushed]
These assholes are just like the companies that clear-cut and strip-mine and then get their panties in a wad when the hunters, fishermen, campers, and tourists have the audacity to complain.
-- +------------ Lee Jackson Beauregard, rchason at bigfoot dot com -+---------+ | Opinions expressed here are mine and not those of SmartNet or | Delenda | | Altopia. And if you don't agree with them, you are racist, | est | | sexist, elitist, imperialist, Baptist, and possibly even right. | Windoze | +------ This sig is five lines long to annoy the four-line-sig purists -----+
In article <338c4ade.17510...@204.127.4.20>, JeffLea...@WorldNet.att.net
(Jeffery J. Leader) wrote:
: You won't like this, certainly. Under http://www.netzilla.net/ there : is an entry labeled 'New" that says: <...> : > The Case For Advertising on Usenet : > : > : > : > : > : > By Richard Scott <...>
On Wed, 28 May 1997, Lee Jackson Beauregard wrote: > >You won't like this, certainly. Under http://www.netzilla.net/ there > >is an entry labeled 'New" that says:
> [whitespace removed to trim the columns]
> >>Attention "Anti-Spammers" > >>Click here to learn why Usenet > >>advertising is necessary.
> >If you click there you get the diatribe whioch I've included below > >(seen here and there in various forms before). Some high points:
> [crap flushed]
> These assholes are just like the companies that clear-cut and strip-mine and > then get their panties in a wad when the hunters, fishermen, campers, and > tourists have the audacity to complain.
Or residents (although, sadly, having been driven in large part into economic wanness, their voice is muffled)--fortunately, spammers do not destroy as many lives as strip-miners/clear-cutters...
Stan, Evil Cabal (*) member who spent one of the three weeks he has spent working on low-income housing in Southern Appalachia in an area of Kentucky that had been ruined by strip-mining
* There is no Cabal, Sexzilla kids--the fact that you seriously believe so shows what a bunch of idiots you are, and how easily the people you attribute to this "Cabal" could, with their superior intelligence, drive you off of Usenet in a heartbeat if they actually chose to be unfair.
On Tue, 27 May 1997, Phoenix wrote: > > >A cabal of self-appointed, blacklist wielding, anti-business-advertising > > >techno/edu-nerds has apparently decided for all the rest of us Usenet > > >participants[...]
> Isn't there a better insult a spammer can come up with than "nerd"?
Not really--what else do you accuse someone whom you can't beat in an argument of being? It's necessary for them, especially if they pathologically believe in their crappy logic, to come up with some kind of scheme under which the stupider can be right. "The 'Nerd'" is the only stereotype under which that concept can successfully exist (unless Sexzilla wants to try something like racism, instead).
<...>
> Marketplace seems to really dislike newsgroup spamming in my experience, > so I guess I had better take your direction to heart, shouldn't I?
Something like that. I'm still trying to figure out why they think they're my, among others', competitor. If capitalism applies here, where's this money I was supposedly making from this market they supposedly invaded?
They're just so *stupid*--those of you concerned about them should, thus, worry less, because such stupid people are easily thwarted--they just haven't been *completely* thwarted yet because of policy problems, if anything.
<...>
> It appears we're making some progress if they feel the need to rant this > much. I like the sound of that.
"Me too." I pretty much like it any time they have anything to say. I'm serious. They reestablish my faith that they're a bunch of idiots waiting to self-destruct.
>* There is no Cabal, Sexzilla kids--the fact that you seriously believe so >shows what a bunch of idiots you are, and how easily the people you >attribute to this "Cabal" could, with their superior intelligence,
### emphasis ###
>drive >you off of Usenet in a heartbeat if they actually chose to be unfair.
### emphasis ###
Works for me.... -- +------------ Lee Jackson Beauregard, rchason at bigfoot dot com -+---------+ | Opinions expressed here are mine and not those of SmartNet or | Delenda | | Altopia. And if you don't agree with them, you are racist, | est | | sexist, elitist, imperialist, Baptist, and possibly even right. | Windoze | +------ This sig is five lines long to annoy the four-line-sig purists -----+
>>* There is no Cabal, Sexzilla kids--the fact that you seriously believe so >>shows what a bunch of idiots you are, and how easily the people you >>attribute to this "Cabal" could, with their superior intelligence,
>### emphasis ### >>drive >>you off of Usenet in a heartbeat if they actually chose to be unfair. >### emphasis ###
>Works for me....
Um, yeah, me too. I didn't know we could do that, but if we can, well, screw "fair".
-- Jeremy | jer...@exit109.com The customer is always right, until he tries to say something.
|
