Top posters and over quoters
allen
was unnc and unnm prior to the visitations.
Censorship of management groups is your forte. If you can't do it by
underhand means you attempt to censor openly, probably suggesting that
you host the censor bot.
Give it up Richard you have been rumbled, your 8 votes in the
silversurfers vote and those of the committee will no longer run the
hierarchy.
Allen
{R} Richard Ashton wrote:
>
> This would restore unnc/unnm to the shit-heaps they were rather than the
> cess-pits they have become.
--
Allen
If you observe a really happy man, you will find he is happy in the
course of living life twenty-four crowded hours of each day.
~W. Beran Wolfe~
RubIsco
certain
> number of over quoted posts in a given sliding window would be auto
cancelled.
This sounds a bit unworkable. When a RFD is posted, there are perfectly
valid posts made composed of a few quoted lines of the RFD, plus a small
comment, such as, 'I would support this'.
These posts might easily be 80% quoted, but still useful to the discussion.
Top posting. Now that bothers me! But I still wouldn't want to see the
views of top-posters excluded.
Geoff Berrow
contained the following:
>These posts might easily be 80% quoted, but still useful to the discussion.
ISTR that when I first started posting to usenet I used to get an
error message if I over quoted. Helped make me the paragon of virtue
I am now dontcha kno.
>
>Top posting. Now that bothers me! But I still wouldn't want to see the
>views of top-posters excluded.
It is not so much top posting as irrelevant quoting, some of which
would have been picked by the error message I just mentioned.
--
Geoff Berrow
It's only Usenet, no one dies...
My opinions, not the committee's, mine.
Simple RFDs http://www.ckdog.co.uk/rfdmaker/
Mark Goodge
keyboard and typed:
>This is not an RFD it is a kite flying exercise
>
>I propose that I raise an RFD for unnc and unnm that will allow the
>cancellation of top posted and over quoted posts to these groups.
That's retromoderation, which is specifically banned in uk.*.
Pity, though - I rather like the idea. You could, of course, achieve
the same thing by robo-moderating the group, but that might be a bit
too controversial to fly.
Mark
--
Visit Mark's World at http://www.good-stuff.co.uk/mark/
fred
<dpig5ughaiucdqikk...@4ax.com>
ma...@good-stuff.co.uk "Mark Goodge" wrote:
> Pity, though - I rather like the idea. You could, of course, achieve
> the same thing by robo-moderating the group, but that might be a bit
> too controversial to fly.
I don't see why, so long as there are firm rules written into the
charter that there would be no censorship on content, no censorship
of any individual and any rules implemented would apply to all equally.
It would also give you protection, should it be needed, against message
floods and excessive cross-posting.
If you can make it work here it may be of benefit to other groups in the
uk.* hierachy, there could well be groups who wouldn't want to be the
first with a controversial RFD but would gladly copy an established
charter and go for a fasttrack.
--
ô
õçîd
fred
<MPG.16c26c79...@news.clara.net>
C...@CFI.CFI.invalid "Control Freaks Inc" wrote:
> <uk.net.news.config , fred , fr...@fredc.demon.co.uk>
>
> > > Pity, though - I rather like the idea. You could, of course, achieve
> > > the same thing by robo-moderating the group, but that might be a bit
> > > too controversial to fly.
> >
> > I don't see why, so long as there are firm rules written into the
> > charter that there would be no censorship on content, no censorship
> > of any individual and any rules implemented would apply to all equally.
>
> For a man with a PHD - your stupidity is stunning .
It's worth talking about Peter, that's all were doing at the moment.
BTW Your "am I in the wrong place" troll was a bit of a flop wasn't it?
--
ô
õçîd
fred
<MPG.16c2820bd...@news.clara.net>
C...@CFI.CFI.invalid "Control Freaks Inc" wrote:
> <uk.net.news.config , fred , fr...@fredc.demon.co.uk>
>
> > > > I don't see why, so long as there are firm rules written into the
> > > > charter that there would be no censorship on content, no censorship
> > > > of any individual and any rules implemented would apply to all equally.
> > >
> > > For a man with a PHD - your stupidity is stunning .
> >
> > It's worth talking about Peter, that's all were doing at the moment.
>
> Tell you what fred , *slowly* read what you wrote several times to grasp
> its content .
It's still worth talking about, makes sense to me.
It's pointless everybody arguing over rules and regulations when we
can't even enforce the basic rules neccessary for a group to function.
It's time to start thinking about putting the cart infront of the horse,
find a way to enforce the basics.
Now you read what I said slowly and carefully, no censorship of content,
no censorship of any individual, I'm talking about using robo-moderation
to protect freedom of speech in the uk.* hierachy, protect it from gangs
of thugs working the classic protection racket. Where better to start than
the uk.net.news hierachy, here freedom of speech must be protected, the
democratic(ish) process must be protected if we are to avoid mob rule.
--
ô
õçîd
Dick Gaughan
2002 17:32:24 +0000, {R} Richard Ashton <'{R}'@semolina.org>
wrote:
>I propose that I raise an RFD for unnc and unnm that will allow the
>cancellation of top posted and over quoted posts to these groups.
>
>It would work rather like the Briedbart Index more than a certain number of
>top posted post in a given sliding window would be auto cancelled.
>
>Similarly where the %age quoted was over a given value (60%) over a certain
>number of over quoted posts in a given sliding window would be auto cancelled.
I despise top-posting and overquoting with passionate venom, so
I'm totally sympathetic to the intent behind this suggestion but I
honestly can't see how it can be made to work in practise.
The BI is dealing with something much more precisely calculable
and which is invariable. There is *never* any valid reason for
multiposting to the extent of exceeding the BI. Contrariwise,
there are actually quite frequent circumstances can arise when
there can be a legitimate reason for quotes>newtext. I've seen you
do it on the odd occasion. (insert smiley of choice).
It will also be argued, perhaps over-pedantically (but this is
news) that, in spite of your disclaimer, it *would* be
content-based cancelling in that it would be cancelling on the
basis of a calculation made on what the post did in fact actually
contain. That argument could run and run.
Also, it would be ridiculously easy to work round the bot by not
using recognisable quote-marks or marking quotes in any way. I'm
not a for-real programmer (pace Midnight Cowboy) so I could be
entirely wrong but I can't imagine an algorithm which would
accurately and consistantly determine what is quoted and what
isn't except by checking the References: and doing a comparison.
And that would be a doddle to subvert.
And, as someone else has pointed out, it's also veering
dangerously close to retro-moderation, which opens up another can
of worms.
Unfortunately, I think this is a case of, "Nice try but no cigar
yet".
--
DG
Dave J.
uk.net.news.config, '{R} Richard Ashton' told us :
>I propose that I raise an RFD for unnc and unnm that will allow the
>cancellation of top posted and over quoted posts to these groups.
>
>It would work rather like the Briedbart Index more than a certain number of
>top posted post in a given sliding window would be auto cancelled.
>
>Similarly where the %age quoted was over a given value (60%) over a certain
>number of over quoted posts in a given sliding window would be auto cancelled.
I think the only way you could get close would be automated
cancellation of top-posted. To cancel bsaed on percentage would
probably mess up some sensible postings (Proposed alterations to
RFDs?) or at least force sensible posters to alter their style. I
don't think that would be good.
The idea of basing the overquote cancellation on percentage of
postings as well as percentage of quote sounds good but could imho
lead to some nasty countermeasures by the trolls.
As pointed out, none or it is viable without an RFD that changes the
universal ban on retro moderation.
'Tis a shame {R}, I rather like your kite, but you'd have to run like
hell to get it to fly :(
For one or two reasons it is a pity there is not a node somewhere that
could be set up and left, with no alteration possible without
cooperation of the whole comitte (or at least a large percentage). If
there was, it could be trusted to robo-moderate this group.
I would only vote for that if there was a unnc.junk group created for
_all_ nonspam denied postings. Otherwise too much limitation on free
speech. (unnc.junk would at least be googled)
So, instead of post or ignore, the 'bot would always post but would
decide which group.
Another way the 'untamperable' dream appeals is that it could be used
to relay (and log) _all_ votes. Unfortunately I see no way it could be
done.
--
Dave Johnson : req...@freeuk.com
Thomas Lee
Ashton <'{R}'@semolina.org> writes
>I propose that I raise an RFD for unnc and unnm that will allow the
>cancellation of top posted and over quoted posts to these groups.
What RFC Standard will you cite to give some validity to this idea?
If/when there is an RFC that says posters MUST NOT top-post, then fine.
Otherwise, this is not a good idea.
Thomas
--
Thomas Lee
(t...@psp.co.uk)
allen
Is that the samer as clique rule fred?
Look what a mess you made of that in ULY ;-)
Allen
fred wrote:
>
>. Where better to start than
> the uk.net.news hierachy, here freedom of speech must be protected, the
> democratic(ish) process must be protected if we are to avoid mob rule.
--
Geoff Berrow
Gaughan contained the following:
> I can't imagine an algorithm which would
>accurately and consistantly determine what is quoted and what
>isn't except by checking the References: and doing a comparison.
>And that would be a doddle to subvert.
Like I say Dick, it used to be done, I certainly remember posts being
rejected by Virgin for having too much quoted text. Perhaps it was
when ISPs were a little more mindful of bandwidth. Some of the more
newsy guys will be able to tell you more no doubt.
It was easy to subvert. If you simply had to quote a large amount,
all you had to do was add some extra blank lines. Point was, it was
then a conscious decision, requiring clue. Normally, when I want to
reply to a single point in a post, I highlight it and select follow
up. OE does not have this useful function TTBOMK. It just bangs the
whole message in as a quote and the laziness of posters does the
rest.
Thus the whole top posting/over quoting farrago can be squarely laid
at the door of OE, as if I was telling you something you didn't
already know.
Someone could probably calculate the extra cost of this poor software.
I dare say it would not be an insignificant sum.
allen
allen
You must be blind if you didn't see that.
Allen
Dave Fawthrop wrote:
>
>
>
> "allen" <al...@allen.as> wrote in message
> news:3C59269B...@allen.as...
> | Mob Rule ?
> |
> | Is that the samer as clique rule fred?
> |
> | Look what a mess you made of that in ULY ;-)
>
> uly was a good newsgroup till Allen invited Megadim John et. al. to ruin
> it.
> Using a killfile however improves matters and makes reasonable
Jim Hill
> >cancellation of top posted and over quoted posts to these groups.
>
> What RFC Standard will you cite to give some validity to this idea?
He's proposing a policy for moderating a newsgroup, not
discussing implementation details.
> If/when there is an RFC that says posters MUST NOT top-post, then fine.
Rfc specify interoperability requirements in those terms and I
can't see the ietf permitting a standards track document to
misuse them in the way that you suggest. All we have is ...
| rfc1855 Netiquette Guidelines
| 3.1.1
|
| - If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you
| summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just
| enough text of the original to give a context. This will make
| sure readers understand when they start to read your response.
| Since NetNews, especially, is proliferated by distributing the
| postings from one host to another, it is possible to see a
| response to a message before seeing the original. Giving context
| helps everyone. But do not include the entire original!
However, idiot infestations are hardly likely to be interested in
complying with the finer points of an fyi document, are they?
> Otherwise, this is not a good idea.
Otherwise or not, it's still not a good idea for myriad reasons,
none of which have got anything to do with rfc.
Nobody owns Usenet. Leave them to do their own thing and they'll
move on when they're ready. Reacting in any way, including this
proposal, delays that outcome. Learn to press (n)ext.
allen
you were chess or scrabble there would be no swearing but as you are my
bestest pal I don't like it.
Love to Cherry. ;-)
Allen
{R} Richard Ashton wrote:
>
>
> Fuck you too.
>
> {R}
allen
RFC 1855 states.
Status this document has no status,
Allen
Jim Hill wrote:
>
>
> | rfc1855 Netiquette Guidelines
> | 3.1.1
Dave Mayall
>
> Hi there corrupt jim;
>
> RFC 1855 states.
>
> Status this document has no status,
No it doesn't.
It says;
This memo provides information for the Internet community. This memo
does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of
this memo is unlimited.
Which is exactly what you would expect. Standards Track documents
specify
technical things.
RFC 1855 is an FYI series (although it would perhaps be better elevated
to
the BCP series).
It isn't a standard, because it recognises that Netiquette will differ
in
different places. However, in your eagerness to dismiss the document,
you
omitted this;
Abstract
This document provides a minimum set of guidelines for Network
Etiquette (Netiquette) which organizations may take and adapt for
their own use.
Notice, a MINIMUM set, with an option for organisations to apply more
exacting standards in their own areas.
Chris Croughton
<$b...@ckdog.co.uk> wrote:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Like I say Dick, it used to be done, I certainly remember posts being
rejected by Virgin for having too much quoted text. Perhaps it was
when ISPs were a little more mindful of bandwidth. Some of the more
newsy guys will be able to tell you more no doubt.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
That sort of filter generally goes on known quote marks. If you just
paste in the text, as I did above, and maybe wrap it differently (as I
also did, and as some software does automagically) it can be definitely
complex to determine how much is quoted material. Or you can
paraphrase.
>It was easy to subvert. If you simply had to quote a large amount,
>all you had to do was add some extra blank lines. Point was, it was
>then a conscious decision, requiring clue. Normally, when I want to
>reply to a single point in a post, I highlight it and select follow
>up. OE does not have this useful function TTBOMK. It just bangs the
>whole message in as a quote and the laziness of posters does the
>rest.
I have never used a mailer or newsreader with that capability. The
program just loads the reply into a file and passes it to vi (or vim)
and then I edit the parts I want (if I'm lucky, it also puts a standard
quote mark at the start of each line).
>Thus the whole top posting/over quoting farrago can be squarely laid
>at the door of OE, as if I was telling you something you didn't
>already know.
No, it is not the fault of OE this time. It is pure laziness. Every
mailer and newseader I've used has (a) put the whole message into a
buffer to be edited and (b) positioned the cursor at the top -- I edit,
trim and insert to fit.
The fault, if there is one outside the laziness of posters, is in ISPs
which don't even give the minimum netiqeutte information to their users.
It used to be that when a new customer signed up, their newsreader would
be preloaded with the standard newsgroups, and frequently would have
"readme" documents containing the information.
>Someone could probably calculate the extra cost of this poor software.
>I dare say it would not be an insignificant sum.
It's not the software. It is no more difficult for a person who uses
Outhouse Excess to trim and write at sensible places than it is for me
to do it using vi, or someone using Nutscrape. There are some programs
which make it even easier (I gather you are using one of them), but it
isn't rocket science. It's laziness.
Chris C
Dave Fawthrop
Hash: SHA1
"allen" <al...@allen.as> wrote in message
news:3C59457D...@allen.as...
| Hi there corrupt jim;
|
| RFC 1855 states.
|
| Status this document has no status,
|
| Allen
|
| Jim Hill wrote:
| >
| >
| > | rfc1855 Netiquette Guidelines
| > | 3.1.1
It would be a good idea if all new charters specifically quoted a string
of RFCs etc.
"All posts should be made to the latest version of RFC ???, RFD ???"
This would give them the status for which Allen is asking, and would stop
his continual carping.
- --
Dave Fawthrop <da...@hyphenologist.co.uk>
Killfile FAQ and Anti Troll FAQ at http://www.hyphenologist.co.uk/killfile
Please check when you reply to *any* post that the newsgroups line
contains
only the groups that you intend.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/AwUBPFlRtp53Yvp2WrV4EQJ4YwCgwZ2jgasRb8L37rpJ6K9++/L+CSAAnRY1
WtPGSmNZuzi86WnZRMtgC6b/
=gIeu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
allen
in an environment where he is a 'big fish', his small pool reinforces
that assuption.
For a long time he and a few others have been able to abuse proposers
of new groups in the uk.* management groups. They have evolved 'catch 22
' rules which meant the proponent always had to accept their bullying
because Richard led the gang in the playground and the committee and uk
voting followed his lead.
Each RFD had to change 'something' just to be allowed any peace, the
voters were 'disallowed' because they didn't meet Ashtons rules. The
profane language with which he accuses all and sundry of cheating except
of course himself is his usual seen here.
But by careful detective work and skilled algorythms I and others have
uncovered the fact that he uses 8 sock puppets and the committee use a
further half dozen sufficient to swing any vote in normal circumstances.
When complained about they tried forgery to discredit and now a number
of persons are bringing it out publicly Richard is reverting to swearing
and ridiculing in forums where he stalks me.
Note his attitude in this group.
I think giving him the elbow along with the other abusers and committee
timeservers and yesmen is the best advice I can give.
He has today sugested that he should be allowed to cancel any posts to
the uk debating forums that he disagrees with or are 'top posted' or
criticise the committee or uk voting or come from none approved posters.
The committee and uk voting are all for this proposal of his.
He also wants a group to be called uk.people.support.bullying . Now I
don't support bullying and I think the others here feel the same way.
What does everyone else feel about Ashton and his carry on ?
Allen
Mike Reed wrote:
>
> You must be a fine shot with the revolver Allen, it takes lots of
> practise to be able to shoot someone in the elbow! :)
>
> Perhaps you should quote every word Richard says to enable his
> postings to be seen in their full glory in 30 years?
>
> I still can't get over 'Newsgroup Wrecker'. It just sounds hilarious.
> :)
>
> Mike
allen
NOT RULES !
Allen
--
allen
Try using PhilT as one ;-)
Allen
Phil Todd wrote:
>
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2002 21:40:46 +0100, martinp <mar...@wanadoo.nl>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >how about at the same time discarding all post containing the words
> >fuckwitted
> >cunt
> >troll
> >idiot
> >TLCA
> >...
>
> So you favour censorship on content, more specifically, the language
> used in the content.
>
> YATLCAAICMFP.
>
> --
> PhilT
Dave Mayall
>
> Notice ' Guidelines '
Indeed.
> NOT RULES !
How right you are.
Much like the Guidelines for Group Creation then?
Guidelines are there to be followed. they do not have the force of
absolute rules, but those who wish to see usenet prosper do not
disregard guidelines lightly. They adhere to them unless there
are strong reasons for not doing so in a particular circumstance.
fester
"Sweely" <csw...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:kbgi5uo331o2rtf91...@4ax.com...
> "Dave Fawthrop" <hyp...@hyphenologist.co.uk>, in the message
> <a3bdeu$1732h2$1...@ID-88541.news.dfncis.de> posted this...
>
> >uly was a good newsgroup till Allen invited Megadim John et. al. to ruin
> >it.
>
> post here through your cross-posted warnings to stay out. Now you
> blame everyone but yourself for your problem excepting new posters to
> the group.
>
> >Using a killfile however improves matters and makes reasonable
>
>
> ><ng line trimmed to uly>
>
> Ha! You forgot to set your follow-ups to uk.test, Dave. You've been
> slipping lately.
>
> --
> Sweely
He's quite fond of x posting ain't he .. even more so than the beloved
!jones .... and Allen is right ....I have seen just as much mud slinging and
threatening from the resident netkopps here.
As for killfiles they are a waste of time in my opinion, i like to be able
to choose what to read, and the only way to be able to do that is to
download it all and not let some bit of software filter out things for me.
In agreement with Allen which surprises me:P
allen
If any committee member decides to contribute to the formation
processes they will be just as welcome as any other subscriber.
The voting is open fair and honest. So far there have been no disputed
votes !
Now how about the committee sock puppets and the eight operated by
Ashton.
Or are you not commenting on those now that it is out in the open !
Someone should have realised we would take a close look after
accusations were made without evidence. You made us cross, now you are
getting the feedback.
Allen
--
Dave Mayall
>
> Your set of Guidelines are being closely followed.
They are not mine, they belong to the uk.* community, and setting up
your parody of them is not following them.
> If any committee member decides to contribute to the formation
> processes they will be just as welcome as any other subscriber.
As you are not running any such process, there is nothing to
contribute to.
> Now how about the committee sock puppets and the eight operated by
> Ashton.
>
> Or are you not commenting on those now that it is out in the open !
I'll comment on any concrete allegation that you care to put. I'm
not a sock puppet, and I don't run any sock puppets.
> Someone should have realised we would take a close look after
> accusations were made without evidence. You made us cross, now you are
> getting the feedback.
Ah, I see.
"I got caught, so I'm going to exact revenge"
Pandinus imperator
> He also wants a group to be called uk.people.support.bullying . Now I
>don't support bullying and I think the others here feel the same way.
>
> What does everyone else feel about Ashton and his carry on ?
>
>Allen
There are two basic observations I have made regarding Ashton:
1) His childish outbusts of profanities and attempts at ridicule are
despicable.
2) If natural selection works by removing the weakest and most genetically
unfit members of a species, then he is clearly going to be the first to go.
P.I.
Charles Lindsey
>This is not an RFD it is a kite flying exercise
>I propose that I raise an RFD for unnc and unnm that will allow the
>cancellation of top posted and over quoted posts to these groups.
This strikes me as a particularly bad idea (and the thin end of a rather
nasty wedge).
Granted that top posting and over quoting are two problems endemic
throughout Usenet, I cannot see that dubious fixes here and there in
individual groups is the way to fix them.
--
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: c...@clw.cs.man.ac.uk Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5
allen
serial abuser and bully.
So the gang got together and decided on justice.
Allen
--
Gromett
"allen" <al...@allen.as> wrote in message news:3C5961D0...@allen.as...
> What does everyone else feel about Ashton and his carry on ?
I think we should ignore all his posts that contain swearing, insults, bigotry or are
just plain
rude and stop rising to his bait. Use a bit of social training like you would a puppy
or young
child, if he's bad ignore him if he's good reward him with a civilised response.
If Allen would stop rising to his bait everytime, it "may" also help.
FWIW, I am not religious, old fashioned or a prude. I just don't think lowering the
content
to noise ratio as {aRse} does is very productive. Using a little intelligence to
provide a measured
case for your side of a debate raises the standard of the debate and of peoples
opinion of you.
Dropping down to name calling and swearing adds nothing to the debate and makes you
look
a complete Ashton.
Isaac Walton
> Dropping down to name calling and swearing adds nothing to the debate and
>makes you
>look
> a complete Ashton.
>
Mr. Grommett, you have inspired me write a new book.
Taking into account the success of the book on fishing, "The Compleat Angler",
I shall concentrate on {R} as the subject matter, and dedicate my book to him.
It will be a book about pond life, and I shall name it, "The Compleat Ashton".
I am indebted to you for your foresight and inspiration, and hope that it will
be available at an internet bookshop near you, before this year is out.
Will 10% of the royalties sit well with you?
Isaac
Gromett
"Isaac Walton" <I...@c.walton> wrote in message news:a3c58v$hmh$1...@paris.btinternet.com...
> "Gromett" <gro...@thepissup.com_> wrote:
> It will be a book about pond life, and I shall name it, "The Compleat Ashton".
LOL, I suppose an addendum to my comments must be "Unless its funny"
> Will 10% of the royalties sit well with you?
And get accused of living off imoral earnings... Thanks but no thanks ;-)
Gromett
www.thepissup.com - Pub Humour etc
Alex Threlfall
people from posting in these groups.
I would not support this proposal.
--
Alex Threlfall
webmaster - bulbyonder
www.bulbyonder.co.uk
Live Life - Live in the Dark.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.320 / Virus Database: 179 - Release Date: 31/01/2002
Pandinus imperator
> What a fuckwitted cunt you are.
Abuse is no argument, it serves merely to exhibit that you do not possess the
mental prowess to formulate one.
I really do pity you, Richard.
P.I.
Thomas Lee
>Hi there corrupt jim;
>
> RFC 1855 states.
>
> Status this document has no status,
Correct.
RFC 1855 is a FYI - meant to provide guidance and suggestions for best
practice. As it says, it "offers a minimum set of behaviors which
organizations and individuals may take and adapt for their own use."
So no, you don't have to follow it. Like any 'best practice' you are
free to ignore it at your peril.
Thomas
--
Thomas Lee
(t...@psp.co.uk)
Thomas Lee
<un...@unews.jhc.org.uk> writes
>Thomas Lee in <TJCV6fF+...@mail.psp.co.uk>:
>> In message <oiag5uotf1nnq4rho...@4ax.com>, {R} Richard
>>
>> >I propose that I raise an RFD for unnc and unnm that will allow the
>> >cancellation of top posted and over quoted posts to these groups.
>>
>> What RFC Standard will you cite to give some validity to this idea?
>
>He's proposing a policy for moderating a newsgroup, not
>discussing implementation details.
I well realise what Richard is proposing. My point is that if/when there
is an RFC stating that the correct format for responding to bottom
network news messages is to 'bottom post' then I'll give his proposal my
fullest support. Until then, it's just a preference (as well as good
practice).
I agree with Richard that top posting is to be avoided, but I can not
see the point in moderating based on top posting or over-quoting.
However much I think unnc would be improved by seeing fewer of both
types of post.
>> If/when there is an RFC that says posters MUST NOT top-post, then fine.
>
>Rfc specify interoperability requirements in those terms and I
>can't see the ietf permitting a standards track document to
>misuse them in the way that you suggest.
I am certainly aware that many folks share Richard's negative views of
top posting - but I agree that getting an RFC to mandate bottom vs top
posting and forbidding over quoting is unlikely.
> All we have is ...
>
>| rfc1855 Netiquette Guidelines
>| 3.1.1
>|
>| - If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you
>| summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just
>| enough text of the original to give a context. This will make
>| sure readers understand when they start to read your response.
>| Since NetNews, especially, is proliferated by distributing the
>| postings from one host to another, it is possible to see a
>| response to a message before seeing the original. Giving context
>| helps everyone. But do not include the entire original!
>
>However, idiot infestations are hardly likely to be interested in
>complying with the finer points of an fyi document, are they?
No.
:-(
>
>> Otherwise, this is not a good idea.
>
>Otherwise or not, it's still not a good idea for myriad reasons,
>none of which have got anything to do with rfc.
Probably.
>Nobody owns Usenet. Leave them to do their own thing and they'll
>move on when they're ready. Reacting in any way, including this
>proposal, delays that outcome. Learn to press (n)ext.
I could not agree more...
At best we can encourage new posters.
Thomas Lee
>Your set of Guidelines are being closely followed.
Yes - this is correct.
> If any committee member decides to contribute to the formation
>processes they will be just as welcome as any other subscriber.
Yes.
> The voting is open fair and honest. So far there have been no disputed
>votes !
I believe the voting is open, fair and honest. Anyone can vote, and the
vote takers continue to improve their ability to spot mistakes, double
votes.
Is it perfect? No. The Silvers Surfer's vote was regrettable. But as
long as the vote takers are volunteers and have real lives, we must be
willing to be flexible. Mark did a good job in picking up the ball and
getting the vote out.
There have certainly been some disputed votes in some elections - but
based on the evidence I've seen, I believe the vote takers have got it
right in terms of what to do with those votes.
We keep hearing about evidence to the contrary, but thus far, I have not
seen anything that would change my mind.
> Now how about the committee sock puppets and the eight operated by
>Ashton.
Would you care to be more specific? Either that or with draw the
allegation.
> Or are you not commenting on those now that it is out in the open !
What is out in the open?
>Someone should have realised we would take a close look after
>accusations were made without evidence. You made us cross, now you are
>getting the feedback.
So you are admitting to operating socks then Allen?
Thomas
Yeah, I know - DNFTT.
Sorry.
--
Thomas Lee
(t...@psp.co.uk)
Paul Cummins
inv...@sarnie.org.uk (egg sarny) wrote:
> Seems to me that you are the tosser who threatened to have him tossed
> from usenet.
>
> As that hasent happened what have you got to say for yourself??
>
> WANKER.
Hi Allen
--
Paul Cummins DD (ULC) | /"\ ASCII RIBBON
Tel: 07021 117179 Fax: 07092 105150 + \ / CAMPAIGN
Email: paul(at)cummins.ie.eu.org | X AGAINST HTML MAIL
UCE not welcome, £50 charge applies | / \ AND POSTINGS
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCC d+ s-:+ a C++ UV+ U*+ P L+ !E W+++$ N+++ o? K w++++$ O- M-- V-- PS+
PE++ Y+ PGP++ t* 5? X+ R- tv+ b++++ DI++ D+ G e* h++ r+++ y+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Russell Driver
fester <fes...@gmx.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3c596...@news.teranews.com...
Brain = Filter
Killfiles are for the narrow visioned.
Russell
--
Luck is when the paths of preparation and opportunity cross.
www.auseelife.com
fester
"Russell Driver" <ty...@picknowl.com.au> wrote in message
news:newscache$dmztqg$5kc$1...@maggie.netlink.com.au...
Russell ... stop making simple sensible statements i agree with .....
I always wondered what people like allen and dave used instead of a brain,
perhaps their mum still has the parental controls switched on for their pc
to keep them from viewing nasty content:P
allen
--
Pandinus imperator
>Nobody was arguing. You *are* a fuckwitted cunt.
Might I suggest a name change for you, from "jaf" to "Jackass".
P.I.
Patrick Herring
>
> Message-ID: <026i5u0g1f2l5c96q...@4ax.com> from Dick
> Gaughan contained the following:
>
> > I can't imagine an algorithm which would
> >accurately and consistantly determine what is quoted and what
> >isn't except by checking the References: and doing a comparison.
> >And that would be a doddle to subvert.
>
> Like I say Dick, it used to be done, I certainly remember posts being
> rejected by Virgin for having too much quoted text. Perhaps it was
> when ISPs were a little more mindful of bandwidth. Some of the more
> newsy guys will be able to tell you more no doubt.
It relies on the user not being able to change the quoting character
e.g. in Netscape.
It really would make sense to standardise the quoting character - you
could do so many things e.g. guaranteebly filter out old text for an
initial presentation of a reply - the user then selects to see more of
the context.
> It was easy to subvert. If you simply had to quote a large amount,
> all you had to do was add some extra blank lines. Point was, it was
> then a conscious decision, requiring clue. Normally, when I want to
> reply to a single point in a post, I highlight it and select follow
> up. OE does not have this useful function TTBOMK. It just bangs the
> whole message in as a quote and the laziness of posters does the
> rest.
More lack of clue than laziness I suspect.
> Thus the whole top posting/over quoting farrago can be squarely laid
> at the door of OE, as if I was telling you something you didn't
> already know.
ISTR Lotus' cc:Mail doing top-posting in the early 90's, before MS was
doing anything like OE. Top-posting seems to have become the norm in the
commercial world, at least for email (and is anyone going to claim email
formatting should be fundamentally different from ng posting format?),
in the name of efficiency I believe. I can accept that MS is essentially
aiming to fulfill what business users think they want.
I used to have arguments about it when I last worked in business. People
expected the latest email in an exchange to have all replies in reverse
sequence from the top. It makes some sort of sense, but I never did
manage to convince anyone of the usefulness of the
top-down/left-to-right convention, bizarrely.
So I'd lay (most of) the blame for top-posting at the commercial world's
inability to think straight & consistently when there's the prospect of
saving a few micro-pence in the short term.
--
Patrick Herring
http://www.dcs.shef.ac.uk/cgi-bin/makeperson?P.Herring
Wm...
21:45:44 Thomas Lee <t...@psp.co.uk>:
Allen:
>> Now how about the committee sock puppets and the eight operated by
>>Ashton.
>
>Would you care to be more specific? Either that or with draw the
>allegation.
This is just dull, Thomas. I think I'm one of the accused and don't
*ever* expect anything but noise. You can probably be as sure as anyone
else that the voters Allen thinks are sock puppets are in his mind only.
Please just leave it alone until he actually produces some evidence
(yes, I know it can be hard and I'm not claiming perfection in never
having responded).
>Yeah, I know - DNFTT.
>
>Sorry.
Uh huh.
--
Wm ...
address valid for at least 31 days from date of posting
e-mail to tcnw41@tarrcity will be rejected after 22 Feb
Wm...
Jan 2002 17:32:24 {R} Richard Ashton <'{R}'@semolina.org>:
>This is not an RFD it is a kite flying exercise
Understood.
>I propose that I raise an RFD for unnc and unnm that will allow the
>cancellation of top posted and over quoted posts to these groups.
My concern wrt unn[mc] is that unless the rules are fairly lax newcomers
to group creation may get caught by it. For example I think some of the
posts the proponent of uk.people.asian made would have been cancelled
under a scheme like this and I'm not sure that would have been helpful.
>It would work rather like the Briedbart Index more than a certain number of
>top posted post in a given sliding window would be auto cancelled.
>
>Similarly where the %age quoted was over a given value (60%) over a certain
>number of over quoted posts in a given sliding window would be auto cancelled.
I can see us getting bogged down interminably on what those numbers
should be.
>This would have the effect of removing fuckwitted troll, idiot as well as the
>evil vicious wrecking tactics of Allen Hughes the confirmed liar, cheat,
>fraudster, maker of threats, and general wind bag who threatens much but does
>nothing, 6 CEO's of ISP's, ROTFL, sewer scum.
Depersonalising it might help you to see some of the possible drawbacks.
While I like the general idea I am concerned that there would be
innocent victims.
>If this idea meets with any approval I would raise and RFD, not this is
>content neutral cancellation, it doesn't matter who goes over the limit, or
>who top posts or why or what about, it is just a algorithmic decision taking
>no account of meaning just content parameter values.
Understood.
>This would restore unnc/unnm to the shit-heaps they were rather than the
>cess-pits they have become.
I also wonder if it might not simply result in more people (mainly those
with ill intent) simply changing accounts or addresses more frequently
(hardly a challenging thing nowadays) which would result in more mess
not less to my way of thinking.
>The cancel bot would keep score and email any sinners before cancellation.
That wouldn't be very useful if someone was posting anonymously or only
provided a reliable address in their .sig would it?
Finally I'm not at all sure unn[mc] should be the testing ground for
this. Don't we want uk.* to be open to people inexperienced in
netiquette and shouldn't we of any group (roughly speaking those that
follow unn[mc] ) within uk.* be capable of dealing with problem people
ourselves?
Wm...
has already seen it]
Message-ID: <maZSpSO$VIW8...@tarrcity.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 23:45:03 +0000
From: "Wm..." <tcn...@tarrcity.demon.co.uk>
Reply-To: "Wm ..." <tcn...@tarrcity.demon.co.uk>
Newsgroups: uk.net.news.config
Subject: Re: Top posters and over quoters
Path: tarrcity.demon.co.uk!tcnw51
References: <oiag5uotf1nnq4rho...@4ax.com>
Lines: 63
Organization: n/a
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=us-ascii;format=flowed
User-Agent: Turnpike/6.01-Beta-2-U (<qwy8xw4Rxn4Xw0KndK702ol58f>)
Tim Miller
news:gMzzMMHX...@tarrcity.demon.co.uk...
> [It seems this hasn't appeared, I'd be interested to know if anyone else
> has already seen it]
>
Tim (tm)
Lord Mark
Ashton wrote :
>
> Demon are fucked, again.
Please don't swear in UNNC Richard.
Allen
{R} Richard Ashton wrote:
>
>
> Demon are fucked, again.
>
> {R}
--
Allen
Nothing will ever be attempted, if all possible objections must
first be overcome.
~Samuel Johnson~ (1709-1784, British Author)
Mike Reed
thanks ;-)
it.
Your well thought-out and credible post turned into utter humour with
the last line. Perhaps 'Ashton' will be added to the next print of the
Oxford as an adverb?
Mike
Dick Gaughan
2002 11:17:04 +0000, Geoff Berrow <$b...@ckdog.co.uk> wrote:
>Thus the whole top posting/over quoting farrago can be squarely laid
>at the door of OE, as if I was telling you something you didn't
>already know.
I would shift the emphasis there slightly and suggest that OE's
main fault seems to be that it's made it far too easy for the
ignorant to remain ignorant. Like everyone else, I was completely
ignorant about how to post when I first got online but the
limitations of the software available in those days (DOSDis, IIRC)
meant it would actually have taken a considerable effort to remain
ignorant. And once I saw the standard way of quoting/responding it
was obvious that it was a sensible way to do it. Recent "do it
all" stuff like OE has created the opposite situation.
These days, like you, I'm using Agent and, as you discuss, all the
newsreaders I've ever used have had the facility for only quoting
selected blocks of text. One which wouldn't allow that I'd
consider badly broken. The obvious solution would be them all
having a default of quoting only what's been selected rather than
the default being quote everything, but that's wishful thinking
and it's never going to happen. There is simply too much money
being made ensuring idiots remain idiots.
I can understand people doing it deliberately to be malicious
(trolls et al) but I've seen otherwise apparantly sentient beings
do it. Baffles the hell out of me why anyone with a working
braincell could imagine it makes any sense at all to place
response above quote, particularly when in most groups, or at
least in the ones I inhabit, the majority do it that way so there
are plenty of good examples for them to see.
--
DG
Lord Mark
Ashton wrote :
> Fuck you, sunshine.
Please don't swear in unnc, Richard.
Brian {Hamilton Kelly}
I...@c.walton "Isaac Walton" writes:
[snip meaningless waffle]
> Isaac
I see that you still haven't learnt to spell properly the name of your
illustrious antecedent.
It's "Izaak". (Look in any biographical dictionary.)
--
Brian {Hamilton Kelly} b...@dsl.co.uk
"We have gone from a world of concentrated knowledge and wisdom to one of
distributed ignorance. And we know and understand less while being incr-
easingly capable." Prof. Peter Cochrane, formerly of BT Labs
Brian {Hamilton Kelly}
2002...@jhc.org.uk "Jim Hill" writes:
> Nobody owns Usenet. Leave them to do their own thing and they'll
> move on when they're ready. Reacting in any way, including this
> proposal, delays that outcome. Learn to press (n)ext.
Hear, hear.
This is what the more sober and long-standing readers of uk.telecom said
when that group was under attack from Habanec and other trolls (not to
mention meowers). Those that were incapable of ignoring went so far as
to have uk.telecom.moderated created, despite the fact that the main
sources of intelligence had all said that they would not be reading the
new group, and would most definitely continue to post replies only in the
original group.
The new group quickly fell into disuetude, and has since been rmgrouped.
Many of those who voted for the creation of uk.telecom.moderated had
never been seen before, nor since, in uk.telecom. I rather thought that
they inhabited this group...
Gromett
"Mike Reed" <mike.reed....@webtapestry.net> wrote in message
news:a3efcr$18t$1...@paris.btinternet.com...
> Your well thought-out and credible post turned into utter humour with
> the last line. Perhaps 'Ashton' will be added to the next print of the
> Oxford as an adverb?
I don't object to humour, in fact it quite often adds to a
debate by keeping it lively and interesting. I do object
to childish, rude or insulting behaviour.
Lord Mark
> I do object
> to childish, rude or insulting behaviour.
>
>
In which case I suggest you killfile Ashton then.
Julian.Edge
news:Xns91A8BEC0...@62.253.162.107...
And me.
Or you could just fuck off and save the kf space for the rest of us.
Lord Mark
:
> Or you could just fuck off and save the kf space for the rest of us.
Please don't swear in unnc, Julian.
Hmmmm....
Julian????
Isn't that a bit of a tarts' name?
Julian.Edge
> In message news:a3eour$17e7hk$1...@ID-97562.news.dfncis.de, Julian.Edge
wrote
> :
>
> > Or you could just fuck off and save the kf space for the rest of us.
>
> Please don't swear in unnc, Julian.
Ah! Please don't cross post, your Lordship.
Lord Mark
:
> Ah! Please don't cross post, your Lordship.
Why not? You did.
Or are you suggesting that *you* can crosspost, but others cannot?
If so, your arrogance transcends dimensions few would dare to tread.
Dick Gaughan
19:23:17 GMT, Lord Mark <markb...@lineoneSHEEP.net> wrote:
>If so, your arrogance transcends dimensions few would dare to tread.
May I suggest proof-reading your posts before committing them to
your server?
This small act would make such posts intelligible to the average
reader.
(Also, you could read up on mangling metaphors.)
--
DG
Lord Mark
wrote :
> May I suggest proof-reading your posts before committing them to
> your server?
>
> This small act would make such posts intelligible to the average
> reader.
>
> (Also, you could read up on mangling metaphors.)
You sad, pathetic DONKEY!
Alan LeHun
markb...@lineoneSHEEP.net says...
>
> You sad, pathetic DONKEY!
>
In article <Xns91A8CF91...@62.253.162.107>,
markb...@lineoneSHEEP.net says...
> You betray your true intelligence by resorting to personal insults.
>
>
--
Alan LeHun
Dick Gaughan
20:28:06 GMT, Lord Mark <markb...@lineoneSHEEP.net> wrote:
>You sad, pathetic DONKEY!
I've been flamed by sentient beings. Bots are no problem. And,
judging by the standard of insult this one's shown so far, they
really are turning out an inferior model these days.
One is minded of Denis Healey's comment about being attacked by
Howe resembling "being mauled by a dead sheep".
Kind of apt, now I look at its "from" header.
Anyway, I don't engage (for long) with trolls, sockpuppets and
syntactically-challenged fuckwits.
It may congratulate itself on having provided 5 minutes' mildly
amusing diversion for someone lying in bed battling 'flu and with
nothing better to do.
--
DG
Richard Tibbetts
Ashton <'{R}'@semolina.org> wrote on Fri, 01 Feb 2002 14:40:33 +0000:
> In uk.net.news.config on 1 Feb 2002 10:37:05 GMT, Huge in
> <a3dr4h$sg1$1...@anubis.demon.co.uk> aspersed:
>
> }In article <newscache$dmztqg$5kc$1...@maggie.netlink.com.au>, "Russell Driver" <ty...@picknowl.com.au> writes:
> }
> }[41 lines snipped]
> }
> }>Brain = Filter
> }>
> }>Killfiles are for the narrow visioned.
> }
> }Doing it "manually" is for morons with high boredom thresholds.
>
> Or without access to a suitable female/male.
>
> {R}
...or even a sockpuppet, perhaps.
--
Richard Tibbetts
http://www.primepeace.ltd.uk/
allen
Dick Gaughan wrote:
> I was completely
> ignorant about how to post when I first got online
--
allen
{R} Richard Ashton wrote:
>
> In uk.net.news.config on Fri, 01 Feb 2002 14:50:43 GMT, Lord Mark in
> <Xns91A896E0...@62.253.162.106> aspersed:
> Fuck you, sunshine.
>
> {R}
Richard Tibbetts
Why do you say this? Either you are genuinely offended, in which case
why quote it, or just kill-file him, or you are a troll. In which
case I can only say "Fuck you, sunshine."
allen
--
Lord Mark
Tibbetts wrote :
> Why do you say this? Either you are genuinely offended, in which case
> why quote it, or just kill-file him, or you are a troll. In which
> case I can only say "Fuck you, sunshine."
I don't do killfiles.
And please don't swear in unnc, Richard. It must be something about the
name...
--
__________________
Lord Mark
markb...@tiscali.co.uk
markb...@lineone.net
Lord Mark's Website: http://www.bowlandcentral.co.uk
Lord Mark's Tiscali Help Pages:
http://www.markbowland.screaming.net/kwikhelp
Pandinus imperator
>Fuck you, sunshine.
>
>{R}
Richard, you are presently performing with the aplomb of a stringless
marionette.
P.I.
Wm...
Feb 2002 14:47:06 {R} Richard Ashton <'{R}'@semolina.org>:
Wm:
>}[It seems this hasn't appeared, I'd be interested to know if anyone else
>}has already seen it]
>}
>}Message-ID: <maZSpSO$VIW8...@tarrcity.demon.co.uk>
>Demon are fucked, again.
Yup. Worked that out now. Apols to all for the dup.
--
Wm ...
address valid for at least 31 days from date of posting
e-mail to tcnw41@tarrcity will be rejected after 22 Feb
Pandinus imperator
> I can only say "Fuck you, sunshine."
It's probably time you had your speech module replaced.
P.I.
Russell Driver
Huge <hu...@nospam.huge.org.uk> wrote in message
news:a3dr4h$sg1$1...@anubis.demon.co.uk...
> In article <newscache$dmztqg$5kc$1...@maggie.netlink.com.au>, "Russell
Driver" <ty...@picknowl.com.au> writes:
>
> [41 lines snipped]
>
> >Brain = Filter
> >
> >Killfiles are for the narrow visioned.
>
> Doing it "manually" is for morons with high boredom thresholds.
>
Thanks for the compliment Huge.
Even some of the worst'trolls' come out with some rather interesting
stuff/crossposts.
But I suppose some people do not want to see the entire variety of life and
prefer to live in a sheltered closet surrounded by automated filters.
Russell
--
Luck is when the paths of preparation and opportunity cross.
www.auseelife.com
Russell Driver
fester <fes...@gmx.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3c5a3...@news.teranews.com...
>
> "Russell Driver" <ty...@picknowl.com.au> wrote in message
> news:newscache$dmztqg$5kc$1...@maggie.netlink.com.au...
> >
> > fester <fes...@gmx.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:3c596...@news.teranews.com...
> > >
> > > "Sweely" <csw...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:kbgi5uo331o2rtf91...@4ax.com...
> > > > "Dave Fawthrop" <hyp...@hyphenologist.co.uk>, in the message
> > > > <a3bdeu$1732h2$1...@ID-88541.news.dfncis.de> posted this...
> > > >
> > > > >uly was a good newsgroup till Allen invited Megadim John et. al. to
> > ruin
> > > > >it.
> > > >
> > > > ULY is a fine group, Dave, and as a matter of fact, you invited me
to
> > > > post here through your cross-posted warnings to stay out. Now you
> > > > blame everyone but yourself for your problem excepting new posters
to
> > > > the group.
> > > >
> > > > >Using a killfile however improves matters and makes reasonable
> > > >
> > > > As many people have found by putting you in theirs.
> > > >
> > > > ><ng line trimmed to uly>
> > > >
> > > > Ha! You forgot to set your follow-ups to uk.test, Dave. You've
been
> > > > slipping lately.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Sweely
> > >
> > > He's quite fond of x posting ain't he .. even more so than the beloved
> > > !jones .... and Allen is right ....I have seen just as much mud
slinging
> > and
> > > threatening from the resident netkopps here.
> > >
> > > As for killfiles they are a waste of time in my opinion, i like to be
> > able
> > > to choose what to read, and the only way to be able to do that is to
> > > download it all and not let some bit of software filter out things for
> me.
> > >
> >
> > Brain = Filter
> >
> > Killfiles are for the narrow visioned.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Luck is when the paths of preparation and opportunity cross.
> > www.auseelife.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> I always wondered what people like allen and dave used instead of a brain,
> perhaps their mum still has the parental controls switched on for their pc
> to keep them from viewing nasty content:P
>
>
>
Some people do like to live a 'secure' life - I prefer to see the rich
tapestry of life in all it's raw and untamed glory.
I saw this attitude a lot when we were moving here to Oz from the UK.
People can live very mundane lives in complete control of all that surrounds
them.
They all said "I don't know how you can move all that way' and similar
statements.
It takes guts and an ability to see life as it is.Letting a little
'uncertainty' into your life makes it interesting.
allen
{R} Richard Ashton wrote:
>
> Or without access to a suitable female/male.
>
> {R}
--
Richard Tibbetts
<markb...@lineoneSHEEP.net> wrote on Fri, 01 Feb 2002 22:47:57 GMT:
> In message news:tq4m5u41b93gvc1de...@4ax.com, Richard
> Tibbetts wrote :
>
> > Why do you say this? Either you are genuinely offended, in which case
> > why quote it, or just kill-file him, or you are a troll. In which
> > case I can only say "Fuck you, sunshine."
>
> I don't do killfiles.
>
> And please don't swear in unnc, Richard. It must be something about the
> name...
Thank you for clearing that up, troll.
Lord Mark
Tibbetts wrote :
> Thank you for clearing that up, troll.
ROFL!
Yet another sad, self-centered poltroon who thinks anyone putting over a
different opinion to his own is a 'troll'.
Did you notice I disagreed with you *without* calling you a troll?? Try
it, it works.
Also, how many trolls give their *real* full name and *real* email
addresses out on Usenet? Not to mention using a fixed IP?
Dr.Toger 舶安 :->
?
---
Outgoing mail from The Beast is certified Virus Free by AVG.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.320 / Virus Database: 179 - Release Date: 30/01/2002
Linz
> Tattifalarious Plumptiousness <j...@jaf.SPAMMENOTco.uk> wrote:
>
> >Nobody was arguing. You *are* a fuckwitted cunt.
>
> Might I suggest a name change for you, from "jaf" to "Jackass".
>
> P.I.
Abuse is no argument, it serves merely to exhibit that you do not
possess the mental prowess to formulate one.
Remind me who wrote that originally?
--
grazer of knees, adorner of imputrescible Nappa, nemesis of
fools, smiter of the ill-mannered, lambaster of the impolite,
fustigater of the dedecorous, scourger of men[1]
[1] by prior appointment only. Not Sundays. All major credit cards.
Lord Mark
:-> wrote :
> Julian is a tarts name, doncha know?
Julian? I'm sure that's a tarts' name!
Julian.Edge
> Abuse is no argument, it serves merely to exhibit that you do not
> possess the mental prowess to formulate one.
>
> Remind me who wrote that originally?
Wasn't me.
I called him a fuckwitted cunt as well.
Richard Tibbetts
<markb...@lineoneSHEEP.net> wrote on Sat, 02 Feb 2002 13:30:56 GMT:
> In message news:7ppn5uc6gm7e8fc9t...@4ax.com, Richard
> Tibbetts wrote :
>
> > Thank you for clearing that up, troll.
>
> ROFL!
>
> Yet another sad, self-centered poltroon who thinks anyone putting over a
> different opinion to his own is a 'troll'.
You did not contest my argument that it was the act of a troll to at
the same time to both object to swearing and to quote it gratuitously.
QED.
What kind of "sad, self-centered poltroon" calls himself a Lord??
> Did you notice I disagreed with you *without* calling you a troll?? Try
> it, it works.
I did, the first time. Sadly, it didn't.
> Also, how many trolls give their *real* full name and *real* email
> addresses out on Usenet? Not to mention using a fixed IP?
Keep up at the back! Trolls are not necessarily sock puppets! Trolls
only tend to assume false identities when they have seen the following
enough times:
IMHO, you are a fuckwit. Welcome to my killfile. *plonk*
Lord.Mark
Tibbetts wrote :
> Keep up at the back! Trolls are not necessarily sock puppets! Trolls
> only tend to assume false identities when they have seen the following
> enough times:
>
You disagree with my opinion, therefore you killfile me.
Do you behave like this in the *real* world? I do hope not.
Russell Driver
Tattifalarious Plumptiousness <j...@jaf.SPAMMENOTco.uk> wrote in message
news:pagm5us9j9drtl94l...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 02 Feb 2002 00:54:50 GMT, "Russell Driver"
> <ty...@picknowl.com.au> wrote:
>
> >Even some of the worst'trolls' come out with some rather interesting
> >stuff/crossposts.
>
> as up.
As do my investments but you wait until they get better ;-)
Mind you - the same could be applied to an infection.
allen
Idiot.
Allen
Steve Firth wrote:
>
> Lord.Mark <mark.b...@lineoneSHEEP.net> wrote:
>
> >
> > You disagree with my opinion, therefore you killfile me.
>
> No, I think you're a stupid cunt and a waste of good oxygen.
>
> --
> It is not enough to succeed. Others must fail.
--
Allen
Anger is a killing thing: it kills the man who angers, for each rage
leaves him less than he had been before - it takes something from him.
~Louis L'Amour~(1908-1988, American Western Author)
Russell Driver
> Control Freaks Inc <C...@CFI.CFI.invalid>, in the message
> <MPG.16c63b0fb...@news.clara.net> posted this...
>
> ><uk.net.news.config , Sweely , csw...@hotmail.com>
> >
> >> I personally have no use for a killfile, but if I did, Dave would not
> >> be in it. He has so much entertainment value.
> >
> >Some people say i'm a poet but dont know it , Lets see what you think of
> >my dave poem .
> >
> >
> >Dave the man who drives a van
> >
> >Dave has a runny botty because he ate a bad totty
> >
> >Dave likes to preen because hes a queen
> >
> >Dave eats a bun because its fun
> >
> >Dave wanted to be a banker because hes a wanker
>
> Err, needs work...
>
Who -Dave?
Dr.Toger 舶安 :->
Julian IS a tarts name.
"Lord Mark" <markb...@lineoneSHEEP.net> wrote in message
news:Xns91A9D1A8...@62.253.162.107...
> In message news:a3h91p$185mq6$1...@ID-124861.news.dfncis.de, Dr.Toger 舶安
> :-> wrote :
>
> > Julian is a tarts name, doncha know?
>
> Julian? I'm sure that's a tarts' name!
---
Dr.Toger 舶安 :->
You keep it up, you have a right to post *totally* superfluous, wholly
content-free, and unutterably pointless replies.
Dont worry about this fat Bast*&d takin the p*&s.
And I dont want you doing any different:-))))))))))))
Dr.Toger
"Tattifalarious Plumptiousness" <j...@jaf.SPAMMENOTco.uk> wrote in message
news:ei9p5uovj2co4cdl6...@4ax.com...
> Congratulations, Russell, on the world's first *totally* superfluous,
> wholly content-free, and unutterably pointless reply.
Dr.Toger 舶安 :->
Plumptious Bast*&d :-))
Gromett
"{D} Dora Trashchin" <{D}@tapioca.pudding> wrote in message
news:a3i5ie$9q0$1...@paris.btinternet.com...
> And you are a strangulated excuse for a cunt you fuckwit.
>
> {D}
>
Had enough of this shit, Finally going to start using filters. Good bye
illiterate idiots.
Mike Fleming
<mark.b...@lineoneSHEEP.net> writes:
> You disagree with my opinion, therefore you killfile me.
No, I think you're a trolling cunt, therefore I killfile you.
--
Mike Fleming
Yorkie Bob
>Anyway, I don't engage (for long) with trolls, sockpuppets and
>syntactically-challenged fuckwits.
After which he wrote:
>It may congratulate itself on having provided 5 minutes' mildly
>amusing diversion for someone lying in bed battling 'flu and with
>nothing better to do.
Surely that should read either, "battling against influenza", or "battling
against the 'flu", shouldn't it?
If'n tha's gonna talk, let's 'ave it reet.
Bob
Lord Mark
wrote :
>
> No, I think you're a trolling cunt, therefore I killfile you.
Please don't use profanities in unnc, Mike, there's a good chap.
Otherwise we'll have allen onto you.
Russell Driver
> On Sun, 03 Feb 2002 00:08:53 GMT, "Russell Driver"
> <ty...@picknowl.com.au> wrote:
>
> [some guff]
>
> Congratulations, Russell, on the world's first *totally* superfluous,
> wholly content-free, and unutterably pointless reply.
>
The first?
Some of the denizens of this group have been at it for years?
--
Luck is when the paths of preparation and opportunity cross.
www.auseelife.com
> --
> jaf @ jaffullstopcoanotherfullstopuk
> ne cede malis
> In the land of the mad, only the mad man is sane.
Russell Driver
Dr.Toger 舶安 :-> <dr_t...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:a3jjre$18j67n$2...@ID-124861.news.dfncis.de...
> Ooooo Sorry
> Plumptious Bast*&d :-))
>
>
Should that be Obesally challenged?
Russell
--
Luck is when the paths of preparation and opportunity cross.
www.auseelife.com
Russell Driver
±··Møgàdóñ Jôhñ··± <¥møgàdöñjôhñ²õöö²¥@×nitrazepam×10mg.o.nz> wrote in
message news:e70r5ucsnqmj25qgd...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 03 Feb 2002 02:56:44 +0000, Tattifalarious Plumptiousness
> <j...@jaf.SPAMMENOTco.uk> wrote:
>
> >On Sun, 03 Feb 2002 00:08:53 GMT, "Russell Driver"
> ><ty...@picknowl.com.au> wrote:
> >
> >[some guff]
> >
> >Congratulations, Russell, on the world's first *totally* superfluous,
> >wholly content-free, and unutterably pointless reply.
>
>
Yeah -that was ages ago - where have you been Obesely challenged?
This is what Usenet is for.
Dick Gaughan
03 Feb 2002 21:01:07 GMT, Yorkie Bob <b...@the-yorkshire.dales>
wrote:
>If'n tha's gonna talk, let's 'ave it reet.
Ony wey ye can gie's thir aince mair sae us normal hantle can
jalouse whit ye're sayin?
Ken whit A mean, like, gadjie, eh?
<rubs side of nose with thumb>
--
DG
Molly Mockford
<di...@dickalba.demon.co.uk> writes
><rubs side of nose with thumb>
>
Dick, I know you've got 'flu, but for heaven's sake use a hankie like a
decent person.
--
Molly
I don't speak for UKVoting. Hey, half the time I don't even speak for myself.