[MODERATOR NOTICE] Google/Gmail filter off
David Iain Greig
Give it a week and let's see. The damn thing's not that complex,
if it's really Google we shall see.
Hopefully it is the script, at least I can fix that.
JennyB
You might try looking for fnord only in the subject line.
Glenn
There seems to have been a handful of googlegroups posts from those
that have not fnorded. They have taken a day or more to show as have
the ones that have fnorded. So it appears that at least some aspect of
your news handling software was not functioning as advertised.
Ron O
My posts are getting through nearly instantly at this time.
Even if I don't like the fnording, you have a pretty much thankless
job, and I appreciate what you are trying to do.
Ron Okimoto
Chris Thompson
slrnh4af8r....@darwin.ediacara.org:
Thanks for your attention to this, David.
Chris
Tom McDonald
Ray will be so pleased and grateful.
Well, pleased anyhoo.
Friar Broccoli
Thanks very much.
It is nice to be able to get through again.
Boikat
In that case,... Testing. Testing. Is this thing on?
Boikat
Robert Carnegie: Fnord
If I'm reading this right, Google lets me change my "nickname" to
contain fnord, just for this group. Which I'm trying now. Not an
ideal answer, though.
Boikat
Seems to be working now.
Boikat
Nashton
Nashton
I haven't been able to post for months now, neither from aioe nor a
couple of other news servers nor google.
There is something fundamentally amiss in the setup and it's very
annoying. This is the only group I am unable to post to. It's simply a PITA.
Nashton
I think the fact that you turned the filter off has once again, made it
possible for me to post.
Even though I can see what you're trying to do and I appreciate anybody
who gives their time for the benefit of others, could you please just
leave well enough alone and stop frigging with it?
Thanks
Nashton
In so doing, who knows how many posters are unable to post. Legitimate,
non Xposting posters are blocked as well, along with the Xposters.
Why not just stop any filtering instead of this mess?
Because a mess it is, if the filter(s) is blocking off people it wasn't
intended to block.
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <h24qnm$l1f$1...@aioe.org>):
Gee, nasty, I've seen several of your posts in the recent past. Replied to a
few of them, in fact.
--
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.
Frank J
Same here, I hope that DIG understands that I feel his pain despite
the occasional "dig", like the one about TO becoming
"talk.madman." (sorry, had to fnord it again) :-)
The few posts
Frank J
Anything that will give him an excuse not to finish his magnum fnord
opus.
David Iain Greig
The delays are not at my end - there's no way to delay posting, it either
posts or not. Propagation, on the other hand, is out of my control.
I do not feed to Google directly (see the Path: header).
Anyhow, I strongly suspect you will see delays still.
--D.
Wombat
Ditto.
Wombat
Inez
There are an awful lot of us googlers. Let me see how fast this gets
there.
Inez
For the record this previous post showed up in a few minutes, rather
than the several days I was averaging with the filter on.
Ye Old One
You are. We know.
--
Bob.
Glenn
future.
But it's rather clear that t.o has been responsible for the delays, a
rather simple matter of elimination.
But what I meant above is that there have been posts such as "Buy Nike
shoes"
from posters with no history or none that have recently fnorded that
have made
their way through. Your fnord filter didn't work in that regard, at
least in those cases, unless those
addys had been previously whitelisted. And that seems rather unlikely.
Stuart
Test Test Test.
Stuart
Friar Broccoli
> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 06:02:18 -0400, Nashton wrote
>
>
>
> > Nashton wrote:
> >> David Iain Greig wrote:
> >>> Ok, until this clears up, it's off again.
>
> >>> Give it a week and let's see. The damn thing's not that complex,
> >>> if it's really Google we shall see.
>
> >>> Hopefully it is the script, at least I can fix that.
>
> >> test
>
> > I haven't been able to post for months now, neither from aioe nor a
> > couple of other news servers nor google.
>
> > There is something fundamentally amiss in the setup and it's very
> > annoying. This is the only group I am unable to post to. It's simply a PITA.
>
> Gee, nasty, I've seen several of your posts in the recent past. Replied to a
> few of them, in fact.
This is unfair.
All us GoogleGroup posters were experiencing apparently random
delays varying from one to four days. For all practical purposes this
means we were "unable to post to" TO, because the thread is dead
when our reply finally arrives or others reply and we are unable to
respond in a timely way.
Nailing Nashton for his willful ignorance is more than justifiable,
but willfully misinterpreting clear comments by him is not.
[M]adman
Fix it? I would hope you know how to do backups and use the last know good
/conf
Ray Martinez
> Ok, until this clears up, it's off again.
>
> Give it a week and let's see. The damn thing's not that complex,
> if it's really Google we shall see.
>
> Hopefully it is the script, at least I can fix that.
Why don't you just admit that you are banning Creationists?
Ray
J.J. O'Shea
(in article
<d056f986-42d5-48de...@b14g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>):
His reply was timestamped today, on a thread saying that the filter's been
removed. There shouldn't be any problem replying. In addition, he
specifically stated that he hasn't been able to post for 'months now', which
is not correct as I have seen posts of his over the last few months. In
addition, he states that it's not just a Google problem. Given that others
can and have posted from aioe (including up to yesterday I saw someone
sending a test post in from aioe) I'd say that he offered himself up as a big
fat target and deserves all the whacking he can get.
[M]adman
Hi Nash. Good to see ya.
Let's talk about willful ignorance on T.O. (among their so many other
fabulous attributes) for a moment.
These are the types of posting problems you have when you try to /sync a
moderated server with hundreds of other public news servers that do not
filter. It is better for all of the servers to be "singing the same tune"
with their config-files so-to-speak.
Their recent and biggest posting problems ( more then 1/2 of them could not
post for days) began within 2 days of tagging the headers for [M]adman. And
48 hours is about how long it would take to propagate TO's config changes
through the entire network of hundreds of machines that connect together to
make up usenet.
Seems like it back-fired huh?
But I'm not being fully truthful. They could simply have a corrupt config
file. Which became corrupted by adding tag lines to specific posters.
Augray
wrote in <madman-rOs1m.15945$Xw4....@bignews7.bellsouth.net> :
[snip]
>These are the types of posting problems you have when you try to /sync a
>moderated server with hundreds of other public news servers that do not
>filter. It is better for all of the servers to be "singing the same tune"
>with their config-files so-to-speak.
>
>Their recent and biggest posting problems ( more then 1/2 of them could not
>post for days) began within 2 days of tagging the headers for [M]adman. And
>48 hours is about how long it would take to propagate TO's config changes
>through the entire network of hundreds of machines that connect together to
>make up usenet.
>
>Seems like it back-fired huh?
You have no idea what you're talking about. All posts sent to
talk.origins are first sent to the mod-bot, which either approves the
post and forwards it, or doesn't approve it and *doesn't* forward it.
There's no need to "propagate TO's config changes through the entire
network of hundreds of machines that connect together to make up
usenet", since news servers are only supposed to accept a post to t.o.
if the mod-bot approves it.
>But I'm not being fully truthful.
I'm shocked!
>They could simply have a corrupt config
>file. Which became corrupted by adding tag lines to specific posters.
This is just more evidence that you don't know what you're talking
about.
Augray
<pyram...@yahoo.com> wrote in
<528a1925-ab8a-4991...@h2g2000yqg.googlegroups.com> :
Why would he admit something that is obviously false?
Friar Broccoli
> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 12:41:19 -0400, Friar Broccoli wrote
> (in article
Good points.
Tom McDonald
Who has been banned? I've seen at least one post from you in the last
several days.
I amn't a creationist, but when I posted using Google Groups in the
recent past, my posts regularly disappeared in the aether or showed up
days later. Others have had the same experience.
DIG isn't targeting creationists for bans. That would defeat the
purpose of this ng, and there is no evidence for it.
BTW, while you were not posting here very much, did you make better
progress on your paper?
Dr. Acula
The purpose of this group is to keep you creationists here so we can
laugh at you. Banning you would defeat the purpose.
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <7jqc451codfdol5t3...@4ax.com>):
madman/uriel _never_ knows what he's talking about.
Frank J
I had more trouble posting than Madman, so in your bizarre fantasy
world I'm the creationist and not Madman.
Boikat
Same with mine. I *knew* it wasn't a "Filter/Google-fart"
coincidence.
Boikat
Boikat
> Nashton wrote:
> > David Iain Greig wrote:
> >> Ok, until this clears up, it's off again.
>
> >> Give it a week and let's see. The damn thing's not that complex,
> >> if it's really Google we shall see.
>
> >> Hopefully it is the script, at least I can fix that.
>
> > I think the fact that you turned the filter off has once again, made
> > it possible for me to post.
> > Even though I can see what you're trying to do and I appreciate
> > anybody who gives their time for the benefit of others, could you
> > please just leave well enough alone and stop frigging with it?
>
> > Thanks
>
> Hi Nash. Good to see ya.
>
> Let's talk about willful ignorance on T.O. (among their so many other
> fabulous attributes) for a moment.
With you, it's always "Me, me, me..." isn't it?
<snip whinging>
Boikat
Boikat
Yo, fucktard (=Raytard=Ray Martinez)! In case you hadn't noticed,
pretty much *every* poster that uses GoogleGroups to post from was
screwed, and it didn't matter if they were creationists or sane
people. You're creationist paranoia is showing again.
Boikat
Burkhard
Because it would be obviously wrong? Unless you think "posting from
google groups" automatically makes you a creationist. My posts did not
get through before I moved to a proper newsreader, and I'm rather on
record saying that creationism is simply silly.
Ray Martinez
> Ok, until this clears up, it's off again.
>
Yep, and since you have all my posts show up instantly. I WAS correct;
that DIG was the problem.
We don't need a filter----just ignore the trolls and spammers. "The
price of freedom is association with nuts" (Dr. Scott).
Ray
SNIP....
Robert Carnegie: Fnord
> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 06:02:18 -0400, Nashton wrote
>
> > I haven't been able to post for months now, neither from aioe nor a
> > couple of other news servers nor google.
> >
> > There is something fundamentally amiss in the setup and it's very
> > annoying. This is the only group I am unable to post to. It's simply a PITA.
> >
>
> Gee, nasty, I've seen several of your posts in the recent past. Replied to a
> few of them, in fact.
Google's searchable archive has been slow updating recently, but it
looks relatively healthy at the moment. The last post by and
including "Nashton" before today appears to be dated May 24th, about
five weeks ago. But we've had at least one apparent impersonation (of
someone else, probably by someone else).
Five weeks isn't "months", but May and June are months. As for "the
recent past", that depends whether you're a palaeontologist or a
geologist, or an astronomer. But the take home message is this:
Evolutionists are assholes.
As for blocking creationists: Egregious cross-posters are blocked.
Excessive name-changers are blocked. People using the former
Motzarella newsgroup service are blocked, but I don't remember if we
ever found out why. And lately, Google group and e-mail users.
Ray Martinez
The anger seen in the above comments indicates that my accusation
contained truth nonetheless.
Ray
Reddfrogg
"Birds of a feather, flock together".
DJT
Reddfrogg
Ray, you were the one who threw a profanity filled hissy fit when you
thought you couldn't post. Accusing Boikat of "anger" is very
ironic.
DJT
Nashton
Whatever.
I have tried to post for the past 3 months *at least*. If you responded
to my posts, I wasn't aware of it because the thread wasn't visible.
If you have difficulties understanding this statement, I can upload a
picture and use very colorful crayons, just to make sure the message can
get across.
I hope you don't lose it like this in your daily life, because I can
imagine individuals such as yourself abusing people around them.
Try to find some other outlet for your pent up frustrations.
Nashton
I deal with all kinds of people.
Fortunately I come across very few frustrated ignorants such as
yourself, and I mean it the most polite way.
Ray Martinez
>
> - Show quoted text -
I never denied being angry. Who wouldn't be angry with a computer nerd
that has no awareness of how stupid he really is?
And I used profanity to make a point, unlike Girldog.
Ray (Christian).
Nashton
> On Jun 27, 5:54 am, David Iain Greig <dgr...@ediacara.org> wrote:
>> Glenn <GlennShel...@msn.com> wrote:
>>> On Jun 26, 2:26 pm, David Iain Greig <dgr...@ediacara.org> wrote:
>>>> Ok, until this clears up, it's off again.
>>>> Give it a week and let's see. The damn thing's not that complex,
>>>> if it's really Google we shall see.
>>>> Hopefully it is the script, at least I can fix that.
>>> that have not fnorded. They have taken a day or more to show as have
>>> the ones that have fnorded. So it appears that at least some aspect of
>>> your news handling software was not functioning as advertised.
>> The delays are not at my end - there's no way to delay posting, it either
>> posts or not. Propagation, on the other hand, is out of my control.
>>
>> I do not feed to Google directly (see the Path: header).
>>
>> Anyhow, I strongly suspect you will see delays still.
>>
> I wouldn't have any idea how to predict what will happen in the
> future.
>
> But it's rather clear that t.o has been responsible for the delays, a
> rather simple matter of elimination.
>
> But what I meant above is that there have been posts such as "Buy Nike
> shoes"
> from posters with no history or none that have recently fnorded that
> have made
> their way through. Your fnord filter didn't work in that regard, at
> least in those cases, unless those
> addys had been previously whitelisted. And that seems rather unlikely.
>
All this time that I have tried to post, I have attempted via Google,
news.nbnet.nb.ca and aioe.net.
I have posted to at least 5 other ngs with no problem at *all*.
I'm not saying this to be critical, just offering some feedback. By
process of elimination, I would think that the problem originates from t.o.
Nashton
And this coming from you, who can't even fathom that the fact that you
responded to my posts doesn't necessarily mean that I actually saw the
posts or the threads that ensued.
LOL
Not only are you rude and lack manners, you're also quite obtuse and
thicker than a brick.
Nashton
> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 07:02:18 -0300, Nashton <na...@na.ca> enriched this
> group when s/he wrote:
>
>> Nashton wrote:
>>>> Ok, until this clears up, it's off again.
>>>>
>>>> Give it a week and let's see. The damn thing's not that complex,
>>>> if it's really Google we shall see.
>>>>
>>>> Hopefully it is the script, at least I can fix that.
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> I haven't been able to post for months now, neither from aioe nor a
>> couple of other news servers nor google.
>>
>> There is something fundamentally amiss in the setup and it's very
>> annoying. This is the only group I am unable to post to. It's simply a PITA.
>
>
LOL
Stuart
> On Jun 26, 11:26 am, David Iain Greig <dgr...@ediacara.org> wrote:
>
> > Ok, until this clears up, it's off again.
>
> > Give it a week and let's see. The damn thing's not that complex,
> > if it's really Google we shall see.
>
> > Hopefully it is the script, at least I can fix that.
>
>
> Stuart
Sorry DIG. Looks like you have a wee bit of debugging to do.
Stuart
Stuart
> On Jun 26, 2:26 pm, David Iain Greig <dgr...@ediacara.org> wrote:
>
> > Ok, until this clears up, it's off again.
>
> > Give it a week and let's see. The damn thing's not that complex,
> > if it's really Google we shall see.
>
> > Hopefully it is the script, at least I can fix that.
>
>
Does your paranoia know no bounds? Many posters have been affected by
these recent troubles. Unless DIG is banning creationists at the
expense
of a few scientists as well. Which doesn't make a whole lot of sense
does it?
Keep your shirt on.
STuart
Stuart
> David Iain Greig wrote:
> > Ok, until this clears up, it's off again.
>
> > Give it a week and let's see. The damn thing's not that complex,
> > if it's really Google we shall see.
>
> > Hopefully it is the script, at least I can fix that.
>
> /conf
I haven't seen any my posts get lost, just arrive at random times.
Besides, do you think your pearls of "wisdom" are really worth backing
up?
Stuart
[M]adman
> On Jun 26, 2:26 pm, David Iain Greig <dgr...@ediacara.org> wrote:
>> Ok, until this clears up, it's off again.
>>
>> Give it a week and let's see. The damn thing's not that complex,
>> if it's really Google we shall see.
>>
>> Hopefully it is the script, at least I can fix that.
>
>
> Ray
All of their troubles began 2 days after they started tagging MY headers
for defending my self.
.
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <h267sh$tt8$1...@aioe.org>):
Amazing. It's my fault that he didn't see my replies.
>
> If you have difficulties understanding this statement, I can upload a
> picture and use very colorful crayons, just to make sure the message can
> get across.
>
> I hope you don't lose it like this in your daily life, because I can
> imagine individuals such as yourself abusing people around them.
>
> Try to find some other outlet for your pent up frustrations.
>
--
Tom McDonald
You offering a freebie?
Does it come with a happy ending?
[M]adman
You buffoons know nothing about computers. Especially YOU. You know just
enough to be dangerous.
IRC Chat servers constantly unsync and have to resync. Why? One of the
reasons is usually the config files are not singing the same tune between
servers. That is because the kids that own and run them are inexperienced.
That is why your posts made in through some of the time or were slow other
times. The servers would connect and then disconnect and keep doing that
over and over because there is something corrupt in the config. I'm
surpassed someone somewhere did not disconnect the TO server from it's link
to keep it from slowing down their link and the rest of usenet.
But this is splitting hairs. Your problems began shortly after you began
tagging my headers. Which is good for your sorry asses. You should not be
using a damn "Bot" on usenet anyway. Bots are used by the kids on IRC and
the source codes for bots are usually written by kids.
"rnorman" did a good post when the issue of tagging certain people's headers
first came up.
You should go read it and learn how to be an adult.
You do not need a BOT on usenet. But you do have to know how to work a
killfile
Boikat
The "anger" is in your imagination, just like your claim that there
was some sort of "creationist poster" filtering. As admonkey says,
you're being a "dram queen". Grow up.
Boikat
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <madman-Qfz1m.4197$Uf1....@bignews2.bellsouth.net>):
But you just said that I didn't know anything...
>
> IRC Chat servers constantly unsync and have to resync. Why? One of the
> reasons is usually the config files are not singing the same tune between
> servers. That is because the kids that own and run them are inexperienced.
>
> That is why your posts made in through some of the time or were slow other
> times. The servers would connect and then disconnect and keep doing that
> over and over because there is something corrupt in the config. I'm
> surpassed someone somewhere did not disconnect the TO server from it's link
> to keep it from slowing down their link and the rest of usenet.
But we're not using IRC...
>
> But this is splitting hairs. Your problems began shortly after you began
> tagging my headers. Which is good for your sorry asses. You should not be
> using a damn "Bot" on usenet anyway. Bots are used by the kids on IRC and
> the source codes for bots are usually written by kids.
But the bot has been in use since 1997 and you're not the first one to be
tagged...
>
> "rnorman" did a good post when the issue of tagging certain people's headers
> first came up.
>
> You should go read it and learn how to be an adult.
>
> You do not need a BOT on usenet. But you do have to know how to work a
> killfile
>
Oh, my.
*Hemidactylus*
> On Jun 26, 2:26 pm, David Iain Greig <dgr...@ediacara.org> wrote:
>> Ok, until this clears up, it's off again.
>>
>> Give it a week and let's see. The damn thing's not that complex,
>> if it's really Google we shall see.
>>
>> Hopefully it is the script, at least I can fix that.
>
> Why don't you just admit that you are banning Creationists?
>
What? Creationists in the Private Newsreader Circuit probably hadn't noticed
any problem with their access to the Group. Baby-eating, fire-breathing
darwin atheists posting from google groups were in the same boat as you. I
decided at that point to abandon ship.
--
*Hemidactylus*
-it ends here-
Augray
<h267sh$tt8$1...@aioe.org> :
Then what the heck are these?:
http://groups.google.ca/group/talk.origins/msg/5fc9d415415d8b4a
http://groups.google.ca/group/talk.origins/msg/475b568a7fdabdc9
http://groups.google.ca/group/alt.talk.creationism/msg/d02e4c2ee9e8cf29
http://groups.google.ca/group/alt.talk.creationism/msg/f0bd9f8ee3918bb6
http://groups.google.ca/group/talk.origins/msg/c06185b44527f323
http://groups.google.ca/group/talk.origins/msg/cc4e960076dd9ed5
http://groups.google.ca/group/talk.origins/msg/7839d36d80a879e5
http://groups.google.ca/group/talk.origins/msg/71182ea6c1938da4
Wombat
So Ray is another creationist who cannot tell the difference between
exasperation and anger. Nothing new there, then.
Wombat
Glenn
> Glenn wrote:
> > But it's rather clear that t.o has been responsible for the delays, a
> > rather simple matter of elimination.
>
Yes, it is. And the data for this conclusion is documented.
Present your reasoning and standard of proof, if you have any, which I
doubt.
Why do you want your posts to be removed and not to be archived?
Nashton
You need to realize that most of the ignorants in this ng have been
trained/conditioned to respond in a specific manner to anyone that dares
to offer a contrary opinion to their own.
It's such a shame to see grown ups take the ToE so personally that they
need to resort to name-calling and arguing with them is totally useless
and futile.
If the opinion comes from a creationist, it doesn't matter whether it's
true or not, they will shoot it down and defend their idiocies to the death.
I see you have some experience in Unix systems. I have been maintaining
a mail server, running a web page and use a Xserve dual G5 to host a FMP
database for years now. There are times that I'm up to my ears in config
files, probably something the fanatics either have never heard about or
don't want to learn about (talk about being purposefully ignorant).
Never had to configure a Usenet ng before though, I must admit, but I'm
sure that whomever played with the rules screwed it up immensely and I'm
sure it had something to do with a config file, because most
customizations on Unix (unless there is a graphical front end) are done
via the terminal in a command file via pico.
God gave us free will. Some people use this free will to act like
schoolchildren a school yard brawl. Their choice.
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <kmkd451b4cgvj5obi...@4ax.com>):
Even more evidence that he's an arrant liar?
Boikat
<snip>
>
> If the opinion comes from a creationist, it doesn't matter whether it's
> true or not, they will shoot it down and defend their idiocies to the death.
If it were true, nobody would be able to "shoot it down".
<snip>
> God gave us free will. Some people use this free will to act like
> schoolchildren a school yard brawl. Their choice.
And some use their free will to remain willfully ignorant.
Boikat
David Iain Greig
> On Jun 26, 2:26�pm, David Iain Greig <dgr...@ediacara.org> wrote:
>> Ok, until this clears up, it's off again.
>>
>> Give it a week and let's see. �The damn thing's not that complex,
>> if it's really Google we shall see.
>>
>> Hopefully it is the script, at least I can fix that.
>
Because that would be a lie, and lying is a sin.
--D.
--
david iain greig dgr...@ediacara.org
moderator, talk.origins sp4 kox
http://www.ediacara.org/~dgreig arbor plena alouattarum
John S. Wilkins
> Ray Martinez <pyram...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 26, 2:26 pm, David Iain Greig <dgr...@ediacara.org> wrote:
> >> Ok, until this clears up, it's off again.
> >>
> >> Give it a week and let's see. The damn thing's not that complex,
> >> if it's really Google we shall see.
> >>
> >> Hopefully it is the script, at least I can fix that.
> >
> > Why don't you just admit that you are banning Creationists?
>
> Because that would be a lie, and lying is a sin.
>
Whoever told you that was spinning a yarn.
--
John S. Wilkins, Philosophy, University of Sydney
http://evolvingthoughts.net
But al be that he was a philosophre,
Yet hadde he but litel gold in cofre
David Iain Greig
> David Iain Greig wrote:
>> Ok, until this clears up, it's off again.
>>
>> Give it a week and let's see. The damn thing's not that complex,
>> if it's really Google we shall see.
>>
>> Hopefully it is the script, at least I can fix that.
>
> /conf
The 'script' is called by a procmail filter rule. All I did was comment
out the procmail filter rule in the t.o account .procmailrc.
--D.
David Iain Greig
You're still tagged. So that rules you out. I'm sure you find this
reassuring.
--D.
David Iain Greig
>>> Ok, until this clears up, it's off again.
>>>
>>> Give it a week and let's see. The damn thing's not that complex,
>>> if it's really Google we shall see.
>>>
>>> Hopefully it is the script, at least I can fix that.
>>>
>>
>> it possible for me to post.
>> Even though I can see what you're trying to do and I appreciate
>> anybody who gives their time for the benefit of others, could you
>> please just leave well enough alone and stop frigging with it?
>>
>> Thanks
>
> Hi Nash. Good to see ya.
>
> Let's talk about willful ignorance on T.O. (among their so many other
> fabulous attributes) for a moment.
>
> These are the types of posting problems you have when you try to /sync a
> moderated server with hundreds of other public news servers that do not
> filter. It is better for all of the servers to be "singing the same tune"
> with their config-files so-to-speak.
>
> Their recent and biggest posting problems ( more then 1/2 of them could not
> post for days) began within 2 days of tagging the headers for [M]adman. And
> 48 hours is about how long it would take to propagate TO's config changes
> through the entire network of hundreds of machines that connect together to
> make up usenet.
Completely wrong.
All articles submitted to talk.origins, because it is moderated, are
emailed to me.
I post them locally on darwin, then they are sent to my newsfeed peers
via NNTP, and so on. Eventually they reach Google's newsfeeds, and then
are sent via NNTP to Google.
At no time is any metadata copied, the only data sent are the articles
themselves. No changes made locally on darwin are visible to any other
server.
David Iain Greig
USENET uses NNTP as a transfer protocol, not IRC.
"Are you really this stupid, or are you just being cute?"
- Prof. S. Dmitrevsky, ELE150
Boikat
> On Jun 27, 3:42 pm, Reddfrogg <reddfr...@bresnan.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 27, 4:34 pm, Ray Martinez <pyramid...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 27, 2:18 pm, Boikat <boi...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>
> > > > > On Jun 26, 2:26 pm, David Iain Greig <dgr...@ediacara.org> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Ok, until this clears up, it's off again.
>
> > > > > > Give it a week and let's see. The damn thing's not that complex,
> > > > > > if it's really Google we shall see.
>
> > > > > > Hopefully it is the script, at least I can fix that.
>
>
> > > > pretty much *every* poster that uses GoogleGroups to post from was
> > > > screwed, and it didn't matter if they were creationists or sane
> > > > people. You're creationist paranoia is showing again.
>
> > > > Boikat
>
> > > The anger seen in the above comments indicates that my accusation
> > > contained truth nonetheless.
>
> > thought you couldn't post. Accusing Boikat of "anger" is very
> > ironic.
>
> > DJT- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> I never denied being angry. Who wouldn't be angry with a computer nerd
> that has no awareness of how stupid he really is?
>
> And I used profanity to make a point, unlike Girldog.
My profanity is also to make a point, asshole. Do you need me to
explain what the point was?
>
> Ray (Christian-fucktard)
I mended your sig. Don't bother to thank me.
Boikat
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <cabal-slrnh4f...@darwin.ediacara.org>):
<gets popcorn and awaits madman/uriel's reply>
This should be fun.
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <cabal-slrnh4f...@darwin.ediacara.org>):
> [M]adman <ad...@hotmaill.et> wrote:
He's really this stupid.
And by the post quoted he has just proved that I was absolutely correct when
I said that he never knows what he's talking about.
Hey, madman/uriel, don't ever leave. No day would be complete without reading
some of your stuff, and you get sillier and sillier with each post. You
really should consider sending some of your stuff into the late night talk
shows, I'm sure that Conan or Dave would find a spot for you...
Dana Tweedy
>>
>>> The anger seen in the above comments indicates that my accusation
>>> contained truth nonetheless.
>>
>> Ray, you were the one who threw a profanity filled hissy fit when you
>> thought you couldn't post. Accusing Boikat of "anger" is very
>> ironic.
>>
>> DJT- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> I never denied being angry. Who wouldn't be angry with a computer nerd
> that has no awareness of how stupid he really is?
Again, jealousy green is not your color. You get angry with people who are
more intelligent and world savvy than you are.
>
> And I used profanity to make a point, unlike Girldog.
From an observer's perspective, it appears you used profanity because you
can't express yourself in a calm, rational manner. Playing silly
schoolyard games with a person's internet handle is also inidicative of
immaturity.
>
> Ray (Christian).
It's too bad that you self identify as "Christian" when you show no signs of
understanding Christ's message.
DJT
Ray Martinez
>
> - Show quoted text -
This is what I like about Boikat: he doesn't try to hide his hatred of
Christians. Boikat is an honest Atheist, unlike Dana Tweedy.
Ray
Free Lunch
<pyram...@yahoo.com> wrote in talk.origins:
>On Jun 28, 12:17�pm, "Dana Tweedy" <reddfr...@bresnan.net> wrote:
>> Ray Martinez wrote:
>> > On Jun 27, 3:42 pm, Reddfrogg <reddfr...@bresnan.net> wrote:
>> snip
>>
>> >>> The anger seen in the above comments indicates that my accusation
>> >>> contained truth nonetheless.
>>
>> >> Ray, you were the one who threw a profanity filled hissy fit when you
>> >> thought you couldn't post. Accusing Boikat of "anger" is very
>> >> ironic.
>>
>> >> DJT- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> >> - Show quoted text -
>>
>> > I never denied being angry. Who wouldn't be angry with a computer nerd
>> > that has no awareness of how stupid he really is?
>>
>> Again, jealousy green is not your color. � You get angry with people who are
>> more intelligent and world savvy than you are.
>>
>
>You don't believe that----you are just lashing out. The fact that you
>reply to most of my messages dictates that my messages challenge your
>level of intellectuality the most.
>
>>
>>
>> > And I used profanity to make a point, unlike Girldog.
>>
>> From an observer's perspective, it appears you used profanity because you
>> can't express yourself in a calm, rational manner. � �Playing silly
>> schoolyard games with a person's internet handle is also inidicative of
>> immaturity.
>>
>>
>>
>> > Ray (Christian).
>>
>> It's too bad that you self identify as "Christian" when you show no signs of
>> understanding Christ's message.
>>
>> DJT- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>Your neo-Puritan-Fundamentalist view of Christianity is noted and
>shaken. I use profanity routinely because its the only language
>profane persons understand.
>
>Ray (Protestant Evangelical)
Ray, you don't believe anything about any gods. You worship your own
claims and insist that God intends whatever you want Him to. As long as
you use God as your sockpuppet, you are not a believer.
Nashton
So you were lucky.
LOL
>
> Hey, madman/uriel, don't ever leave. No day would be complete without reading
> some of your stuff, and you get sillier and sillier with each post. You
> really should consider sending some of your stuff into the late night talk
> shows, I'm sure that Conan or Dave would find a spot for you...
And this coming from you.
What a joke:)
>
Nashton
> On Jun 27, 7:16 am, "[M]adman" <ad...@hotmaill.et> wrote:
>> David Iain Greig wrote:
>>> Ok, until this clears up, it's off again.
>>> Give it a week and let's see. The damn thing's not that complex,
>>> if it's really Google we shall see.
>>> Hopefully it is the script, at least I can fix that.
>> /conf
>
>
> Besides, do you think your pearls of "wisdom" are really worth backing
> up?
>
> Stuart
>
How can you "see" any posts get lost if they weren't posted, Einstein?
Nashton
"Most of us receive many unwanted e-mails on a daily basis. It may be
junk e-mail or spam, computer viruses and worms, or attachments. One way
to combat this seemingly ever increasing amount of junk e-mail is to use
e-mail filters. The use of procmail (a mail processor available on
fraser) can help to reduce the junk e-mail that shows up in your inbox.
Creating filters in Eudora or Webmail is very easy. Procmail is
admittedly more complex to configure and requires a bit of Unix
knowledge including regular expressions."
From http://www.sfu.ca/itservices/email/spam/procmail.htm
Actually, it is a config file (procmailrc).
^^
(FYI, an rc file is a hidden config file, deep in a Unix system,
invisible because its name starts with a ".".)
Soo JJ O'Shea, was wrong
....again.
You self-proclaimed science lovers can sure be wrong in a *very* big way.
Nashton
> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 18:52:52 -0400, Nashton wrote
> (in article <h267sh$tt8$1...@aioe.org>):
>
>> Friar Broccoli wrote:
>>> On Jun 27, 1:47 pm, "J.J. O'Shea" <try.not...@but.see.sig> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 12:41:19 -0400, Friar Broccoli wrote
>>>> (in article
>>>> <d056f986-42d5-48de-b82e-ae77af630...@b14g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>):
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Jun 27, 6:59 am, "J.J. O'Shea" <try.not...@but.see.sig> wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 06:02:18 -0400, Nashton wrote
>>>>>> (in article <h24qnm$l1...@aioe.org>):
>>>>>>>> David Iain Greig wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Ok, until this clears up, it's off again.
>>>>>>>>> Give it a week and let's see. The damn thing's not that complex,
>>>>>>>>> if it's really Google we shall see.
>>>>>>>>> Hopefully it is the script, at least I can fix that.
>
Focus, Einstein.
The discussion revolves around posts appearing or not in this ng.
If I can't see my posts, how am I supposed to know that you replied to
them, if the thread is lost?
You are wrong....again.
And look up .procmailrc and come back and tell us it's not a
configuration file, as Adman stated.
Why not just take your schoolyard bullying tactics somewhere else? it's
obvious you're compensating for something ;)
Nashton
>> I have tried to post for the past 3 months *at least*.
>
> Then what the heck are these?:
> http://groups.google.ca/group/talk.origins/msg/5fc9d415415d8b4a
> http://groups.google.ca/group/talk.origins/msg/475b568a7fdabdc9
> http://groups.google.ca/group/alt.talk.creationism/msg/d02e4c2ee9e8cf29
> http://groups.google.ca/group/alt.talk.creationism/msg/f0bd9f8ee3918bb6
> http://groups.google.ca/group/talk.origins/msg/c06185b44527f323
> http://groups.google.ca/group/talk.origins/msg/cc4e960076dd9ed5
> http://groups.google.ca/group/talk.origins/msg/7839d36d80a879e5
> http://groups.google.ca/group/talk.origins/msg/71182ea6c1938da4
I didn't say I didn't post, I said I attempted to post and they were not
visible in my newsreader.
I'm sure even *you* can understand this.
Nashton
> On Jun 26, 2:26 pm, David Iain Greig <dgr...@ediacara.org> wrote:
>> Ok, until this clears up, it's off again.
>>
>> Give it a week and let's see. The damn thing's not that complex,
>> if it's really Google we shall see.
>>
>> Hopefully it is the script, at least I can fix that.
>
>
>
I don't think he's purposefully banning anyone.
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <h28njo$vuk$3...@aioe.org>):
> Augray wrote:
>
>>> I have tried to post for the past 3 months *at least*.
>>
>> Then what the heck are these?:
>> http://groups.google.ca/group/talk.origins/msg/5fc9d415415d8b4a
>> http://groups.google.ca/group/talk.origins/msg/475b568a7fdabdc9
>> http://groups.google.ca/group/alt.talk.creationism/msg/d02e4c2ee9e8cf29
>> http://groups.google.ca/group/alt.talk.creationism/msg/f0bd9f8ee3918bb6
>> http://groups.google.ca/group/talk.origins/msg/c06185b44527f323
>> http://groups.google.ca/group/talk.origins/msg/cc4e960076dd9ed5
>> http://groups.google.ca/group/talk.origins/msg/7839d36d80a879e5
>> http://groups.google.ca/group/talk.origins/msg/71182ea6c1938da4
>
> I didn't say I didn't post, I said I attempted to post and they were not
> visible in my newsreader.
And I'm saying that your posts showed up... and I even replied to some of
them.
>
> I'm sure even *you* can understand this.
I'm sure that you can't understand this.
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <h28mrk$v7l$2...@aioe.org>):
They were posted... you just didn't see them. Others did.
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <h28nfe$vuk$1...@aioe.org>):
They appeared. If they didn't appear, then I could not have seen them, and
replied to them.
> If I can't see my posts, how am I supposed to know that you replied to
> them, if the thread is lost?
Not my problem.
>
> You are wrong....again.
Nope.
>
> And look up .procmailrc and come back and tell us it's not a
> configuration file, as Adman stated.
>
> Why not just take your schoolyard bullying tactics somewhere else? it's
> obvious you're compensating for something ;)
For being right, as usual?
>
>
>
>>
>>> If you have difficulties understanding this statement, I can upload a
>>> picture and use very colorful crayons, just to make sure the message can
>>> get across.
>>>
>>> I hope you don't lose it like this in your daily life, because I can
>>> imagine individuals such as yourself abusing people around them.
>>>
>>> Try to find some other outlet for your pent up frustrations.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
--
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <h28nnv$vuk$4...@aioe.org>):
Several people _have_ been banned, in the past. One or two of them have been
'evolutionists'. None have been banned for being creationists; rather,
they've been banned for doing specific things which were against the rules,
and continuing to do them after being warned.
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <h28mpi$v7l$1...@aioe.org>):
I was right.
> LOL
damn right I am.
>
>
>>
>> Hey, madman/uriel, don't ever leave. No day would be complete without
>> reading
>> some of your stuff, and you get sillier and sillier with each post. You
>> really should consider sending some of your stuff into the late night talk
>> shows, I'm sure that Conan or Dave would find a spot for you...
>
> And this coming from you.
>
> What a joke:)
You are.
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <h28n82$von$1...@aioe.org>):
Nope.
>
>
> ....again.
>
> You self-proclaimed science lovers can sure be wrong in a *very* big way.
>
You're awfully silly.
Augray
<h28njo$vuk$3...@aioe.org> :
>Augray wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 19:52:52 -0300, Nashton <na...@na.ca> wrote in
>><h267sh$tt8$1...@aioe.org> :
>>
>>>Friar Broccoli wrote:
>>>> On Jun 27, 1:47 pm, "J.J. O'Shea" <try.not...@but.see.sig> wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 12:41:19 -0400, Friar Broccoli wrote
>>>>> (in article
>>>>> <d056f986-42d5-48de-b82e-ae77af630...@b14g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>):
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Jun 27, 6:59 am, "J.J. O'Shea" <try.not...@but.see.sig> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 06:02:18 -0400, Nashton wrote
>>>>>>> (in article <h24qnm$l1...@aioe.org>):
>>>I have tried to post for the past 3 months *at least*.
>>
>>Then what the heck are these?:
>> http://groups.google.ca/group/talk.origins/msg/5fc9d415415d8b4a
>> http://groups.google.ca/group/talk.origins/msg/475b568a7fdabdc9
>> http://groups.google.ca/group/alt.talk.creationism/msg/d02e4c2ee9e8cf29
>> http://groups.google.ca/group/alt.talk.creationism/msg/f0bd9f8ee3918bb6
>> http://groups.google.ca/group/talk.origins/msg/c06185b44527f323
>> http://groups.google.ca/group/talk.origins/msg/cc4e960076dd9ed5
>> http://groups.google.ca/group/talk.origins/msg/7839d36d80a879e5
>> http://groups.google.ca/group/talk.origins/msg/71182ea6c1938da4
>
>I didn't say I didn't post,
Yes, you did. You wrote in news:h24qnm$l1f$1...@aioe.org that
I haven't been able to post for months now, neither from aioe nor
a couple of other news servers nor google.
Why you feel the need to make claims that are easily disproven is
puzzling, to say the least.
>I said I attempted to post and they were not
>visible in my newsreader.
Then the problem is with your news server, or news reader, since many
others saw your posts, and replied to them, including myself. And they
were visible in Google too, since Google users replied to your posts
which appeared there.
It's obvious that your postings were successful, and that your claim
that "I haven't been able to post for months now..." is false.
>I'm sure even *you* can understand this.
I understand that you're either confused, or lying.
Ray Martinez
I disagree.
In legal terms it's called "constructive knowledge" (= could of known;
should have known) that said filter would ban Creationists.
Evolutionists caught in the same filter are irrelevant since they are
a dime a dozen here, expendable.
Ray
Ray Martinez
> On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 13:30:55 -0700 (PDT), Ray Martinez
>
> - Show quoted text -
They said the same about Christ; that he was insane and/or demon
possessed (= not from God or a believer in God).
Jesus said that His true disciples would be treated the same.
Free Lunch is an Atheist. His rejection of me is excellent evidence
supporting the fact that I am a real Christian because Atheists would
never approve of a real Christian.
Ray
Nashton
They do an awful lot of barking, that's for sure.
>
> Ray
>
Robert Carnegie: Fnord
> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 19:52:52 -0300, Nashton <na...@na.ca> wrote in
> <h267sh$tt8$1...@aioe.org> :
>
> >Friar Broccoli wrote:
> >> On Jun 27, 1:47 pm, "J.J. O'Shea" <try.not...@but.see.sig> wrote:
> >>> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 12:41:19 -0400, Friar Broccoli wrote
> >>> (in article
> >>> <d056f986-42d5-48de-b82e-ae77af630...@b14g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>):
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On Jun 27, 6:59 am, "J.J. O'Shea" <try.not...@but.see.sig> wrote:
> >>>>> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 06:02:18 -0400, Nashton wrote
> >>>>> (in article <h24qnm$l1...@aioe.org>):
> >>>>>>> David Iain Greig wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Ok, until this clears up, it's off again.
> >>>>>>>> Give it a week and let's see. The damn thing's not that complex,
> >>>>>>>> if it's really Google we shall see.
> >>>>>>>> Hopefully it is the script, at least I can fix that.
As far as I could see earlier, Nashton was excluded from talk.origins
in late May and has been able to post again since the filter against
Google users has been suspended. But you seem to have the Canadian
version of Google going there, so maybe that runs at a different speed.
Robert Carnegie: Fnord
> On Jun 27, 5:34 pm, Ray Martinez <pyramid...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 27, 2:18 pm, Boikat <boi...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > > On Jun 26, 2:26 pm, David Iain Greig <dgr...@ediacara.org> wrote:
> >
> > > > > Ok, until this clears up, it's off again.
> >
> > > > > Give it a week and let's see. The damn thing's not that complex,
> > > > > if it's really Google we shall see.
> >
> > > > > Hopefully it is the script, at least I can fix that.
> >
> >
> > > pretty much *every* poster that uses GoogleGroups to post from was
> > > screwed, and it didn't matter if they were creationists or sane
> > > people. You're creationist paranoia is showing again.
> >
> > > Boikat
> >
> > contained truth nonetheless.
>
> was some sort of "creationist poster" filtering. As admonkey says,
> you're being a "dram queen". Grow up.
So you call people "fucktard" after you excluded anger from your
heart? Truly you have become a Zen Master of profanity. You do not
cuss someone out. The universe moves, and through your mouth, your
hands, "it" cusses them out.
Other people call it "Tourette's syndrome", but I'm sure you have
something to say to /them/, too.