Whorella, Laser Tag, anyone?
Whorella
From: "Kathleen J. Kramer" <kk...@andrew.cmu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.fan.dirty-whores
Subject: tattoo removal
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 21:08:00 -0500
Organization: Sponsored account, H&SS Dean's Office, Carnegie Mellon,
Pittsburgh, PA
Message-ID: <ojJGW0K00...@andrew.cmu.edu>
Tattoo Removal
A friend knew this plastic surgeon.
It cost ten times as much to get it off.
State of the art dermabrasion: lasers.
Sterile room, blue sheets, bright light.
Bentadine, yellow on the gauze,
red on my antiseptic skin.
A needle injected the anesthetic ~
burning, swelling, numbing
while they all put on safety glasses.
The colored pigment is heated
until it explodes. You can hear it.
Watch it burst. The laser has no color,
removes only colored cells.
Ceiling with little holes, casual talk,
the odor of burning flesh.
Whoever did this tattoo
went really deep,
through the epidermis
and into the fatty layer.
You~re going to have a nasty scar,
Are you sure I should finish?
I~m always sure.
Two drops of tattooed blood
remain on my puckered wrist
where the skin froze,
too painful to move
as it healed.
copyright 1994 kathy jo kramer
Phil Oliver
On Tue, 03 Jun 1997 17:55:20 -0700, Buford Rochester
<buf...@netpathway.com> wrote:
>Allan wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for filling newsgroups with your crap.......
>>
>> Allan
>> Canada
>>
>> --
>>
>> Remove "spamsucks" from address for personal reply.
>>
>> --
>
>I'm writting her Isp
>I'm a little tried of DOWNLOADING THIS CRAP
>Some of us TRY and read Newsgroups offline but this is worse than
>the normal spam on the newsgroup. It took me 20 minutes.
If you don't like it, get a damn newsreader with a killfile and kill
the word "Whorella". It's as simple as that, and you can quit your
stinking whining.
-Phil Oliver
Philip A. Daigle
>I'm a little tried of DOWNLOADING THIS CRAP
>Some of us TRY and read Newsgroups offline but this is worse than
>the normal spam on the newsgroup. It took me 20 minutes.
Buy a faster modem.
phil...@tiac.net Flipper- "Khouses" list admin.
NICK DROGO
In article <5mv9v9$9...@surf.beaches.net>, alex...@aol.com (Alex Tobias) wrote:
> box...@spamsucks.idirect.com (Allan) wrote:
>
>
> >Thanks for filling newsgroups with your crap.......
>
> >Allan
> >Canada
>
> What is this "Whore"-lla shit anyway? Kind of sad that someone is
> so in need of a life they have to post BS in the PJ newsgroup as a
> hobby....
>
> This person needs a life and a new hobby....my suggestion for the
> hobby part is smoking pot and listening to Ten...maybe that will
> rattle somehting in that sick head of theirs....
I HAVE A TICKET FOR SPAC THIS FRIDAY I WILL SELL IT FOR 17.50 THAT IS
CHAPER THAN THE TICKET MASTER PRICE EMAIL IF INTRESTED
NICK DROGO
Robin Colleen Moore
>On Tue, 03 Jun 1997 17:55:20 -0700, Buford Rochester <buf...@netpathway.com>
>wrote:
>>
>>I'm writting her Isp
>>I'm a little tried of DOWNLOADING THIS CRAP
>>Some of us TRY and read Newsgroups offline but this is worse than
>>the normal spam on the newsgroup. It took me 20 minutes.
>Buy a faster modem.
Or get a better ISP--sheesh, even AOHell has unlimited time now! The
combination of a better ISP & a faster modem would probably solve most of your
problem, and allow you to simply ignore posts you're not interested in, which
is what most of the known world does anyway (hint, hint...).
For the love of GOD, people--if you know already that you don't like someone's
posts, then *SKIP THEM*, for Christ's sake! I've managed quite nicely for 4-5
years online doing exactly that--it not only saves time & trouble, but also
spares you those bouts of apopletic indignation that invariably result from
reading material by someone who challenges your world view/doesn't think
exactly the way you do/just bothers somehow. But stop this "I'm gonna tell
Mommy, oops, I mean your ISP on you!" B.S., and let sysadmins deal with the
truly dangerous cases instead, OK? (Hint: They can't actually get to the
actively hazardous people because they're too busy wading through umpteen
posts from people sniveling because so-and-so said or did something they
didn't like...the deal about freedom of speech is that one *can* say virtually
anything and be protected as long as said speech isn't overtly threatening or
hostile--and forcing you to skip someone's posts because you don't like what
he/she has to say isn't generally regarded as threatening.)
Or you could just get a killfile...they're nifty little buggers, and work very
nicely...unless, of course, you'd *rather* stay Righteously Indignant, which
is my sneaking suspicion about most of the froth-mouthed anti-Kathy Jo
posters...but such is life.
Robin the mad photographer (waxing both helpful & slighly philosophic)
robin(at)mindspring(dot)com--Beware of photographers bearing brownies!
Mad Photographer/Net Goddess/Mama Hen/Jezebel's cat-mom/ASGTPR#57
"I'm sorry I didn't call you, but first I lost your number, and then
I got arrested!"/heater shirt info--http://www.amnin.com/heater.htm
Phil Oliver
[this is a repost because the original was cancelled by a rogue
canceller]
On Tue, 03 Jun 1997 17:55:20 -0700, Buford Rochester
<buf...@netpathway.com> wrote:
>Allan wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for filling newsgroups with your crap.......
>>
>> Allan
>> Canada
>>
>> --
>>
>> Remove "spamsucks" from address for personal reply.
>>
>> --
>
>I'm writting her Isp
>I'm a little tried of DOWNLOADING THIS CRAP
>Some of us TRY and read Newsgroups offline but this is worse than
>the normal spam on the newsgroup. It took me 20 minutes.
If you don't like it, get a damn newsreader with a killfile and kill
Buford Rochester
Robin Colleen Moore wrote:
>
> In article <33982a7b...@news.tiac.net> phil...@tiac.net (Philip A. Daigle) writes:
>
> >>I'm a little tried of DOWNLOADING THIS CRAP
> >>Some of us TRY and read Newsgroups offline but this is worse than
> >>the normal spam on the newsgroup. It took me 20 minutes.
>
>
> Or get a better ISP--sheesh, even AOHell has unlimited time now! The
> combination of a better ISP & a faster modem would probably solve most of your
> problem, and allow you to simply ignore posts you're not interested in, which
> is what most of the known world does anyway (hint, hint...).
It's not like that, see. Yeah see. I go to a stone age college, see.
The connection is slower than 4800 baud even though it's a 28800 modem,
see.
So if you would like to send money to the college go ahead, see.
>
> For the love of GOD, people--if you know already that you don't like someone's
> posts, then *SKIP THEM*, for Christ's sake! I've managed quite nicely for 4-5
> years online doing exactly that--it not only saves time & trouble, but also
> spares you those bouts of apopletic indignation that invariably result from
> reading material by someone who challenges your world view/doesn't think
> exactly the way you do/just bothers somehow. But stop this "I'm gonna tell
> Mommy, oops, I mean your ISP on you!" B.S., and let sysadmins deal with the
> truly dangerous cases instead, OK? (Hint: They can't actually get to the
> actively hazardous people because they're too busy wading through umpteen
> posts from people sniveling because so-and-so said or did something they
> didn't like...the deal about freedom of speech is that one *can* say virtually
> anything and be protected as long as said speech isn't overtly threatening or
> hostile--and forcing you to skip someone's posts because you don't like what
> he/she has to say isn't generally regarded as threatening.)
Yeah, it happens everyday that each and every ISP has to go up against
thousands of
hackers, threatening posters, and e-mailers.
It's the same thing as the "Tickle me Elmo for Sale". It doesn't go, in
most
any of the newsgroups it was put it. Remember no one was happy about
that
(except the guy selling the Elmo). I support the taking people off
Usenet
who constantly abuse Usenet, by posting crap in newsgroups where it
doesn't belong.
Speech on the Net is controlled by the intrest of the ISP. So he could
kill
every post that you put up that wasn't exactly on topic,
after all he does pay money for his connection. and I bet if you read
your aggreement,
it says he has the right to terminate any thing you write, or post to
the internet.
Your speech is not free here.
> Or you could just get a killfile...they're nifty little buggers, and work very
> nicely...unless, of course, you'd *rather* stay Righteously Indignant, which
> is my sneaking suspicion about most of the froth-mouthed anti-Kathy Jo
> posters...but such is life.
wouldn't the world be better if people weren't assholes and did post
three pages
of junk about there life, on a newsgroup about Pearl Jam, Counting
Crows, or Dave Matthews
Band. Then we wouldn't have to have killfiles.
1. Righteously Indignant, doesn't make sense, both words mean the same
thing.
It's like saying, "you want to scream yell at her don't you."
2. I didn't say I have a problem with what she says, it's where she
tells about
her boring life. (That answers you statment about being "Righteously
Indignant")
Get Real,
Stephen
Phil Oliver
On Fri, 06 Jun 1997 16:42:51 -0700, Buford Rochester
<buf...@netpathway.com> wrote:
>Phil Oliver wrote:
>>
>> If you don't like it, get a damn newsreader with a killfile and kill
>> the word "Whorella". It's as simple as that, and you can quit your
>> stinking whining.
>>
>> -Phil Oliver
>
>Why don't you download "a damn newsreader with a killfile" for me and
>send me the disk?
If you're too incompetent to download simple software, you don't
belong on Usenet in the first place.
>And then I will put it on my computer and you can quit
>your stinking whining.
Huh? You're the one doing the whining about how "Waahhh, this doesn't
belong here, let's complain to her ISP!!!". Look, jackass, these are
all alt.* groups w/o charters that ban poetry and short stories from
fans of the bands/people in question, so you have no justifiable
complaint. If you don't want to read it, hit "delete", or get a
newsreader with a killfile. If you can't manage that, perhaps you
should ask the person who turns on your computer for you to give you
some help.
-Phil Oliver
Judi Smith
so if i can't download software, i shouldn't be allowed to post in an
alt.fan group, or in fact even READ usenet groups? thanks for letting me
know the rules! here i've been online for three years, never downloaded a
thing, and have been posting to usenet groups all this time. i wonder if
i'm gonna get in trouble!
--
judi smith how can you breathe
jsm...@bc.seflin.org how can you see
i can't even sleep
all the perfect women when you're with me
are airbrushed! "suffocate"
-- gene -- counting crows
Buford Rochester
Phil Oliver wrote:
>
> On Fri, 06 Jun 1997 16:42:51 -0700, Buford Rochester
> <buf...@netpathway.com> wrote:
>
> >Phil Oliver wrote:
> >>
> >> If you don't like it, get a damn newsreader with a killfile and kill
> >> the word "Whorella". It's as simple as that, and you can quit your
> >> stinking whining.
> >>
> >> -Phil Oliver
> >
> >Why don't you download "a damn newsreader with a killfile" for me and
> >send me the disk?
>
> If you're too incompetent to download simple software, you don't
> belong on Usenet in the first place.
I never said I couldn't download it, I just don't want to waste
my time doing that. If you want me to get one, you can send it to
me.
> >And then I will put it on my computer and you can quit
> >your stinking whining.
>
> Huh? You're the one doing the whining about how "Waahhh, this doesn't
> belong here, let's complain to her ISP!!!".
I never said "Waahhh." So if I started posting 10 meg binaries with
Pearl Jam sounds in them, that would be okay too? Or if I started trying
to sell everyone a Tickle Me Elmo, that would be okay? Or what if I
started taking about how the being Jewish, gay, or black is wrong??
Is that okay for a Pearl Jam newsgroup. If we don't try and control
ourselves (by the means we have at hand), we will just be newsgroups
full of "spam". mark my words.
> Look, jackass, these are
> all alt.* groups w/o charters that ban poetry and short stories from
> fans of the bands/people in question, so you have no justifiable
> complaint.
Then why complain about my post, hell, why post at all???
> If you don't want to read it, hit "delete",
Well, I'll try that, nope the delete key didn't do anything.
let's see, maybe there is a delete button in one of the menu's, nope.
well, your delete theory is shot.
> or get a
> newsreader with a killfile.
You can mail me one, i'll give you my address.
> If you can't manage that, perhaps you
> should ask the person who turns on your computer for you to give you
> some help.
Derrrrrrrr.
>
> -Phil Oliver
Hester
Senorita Buttclench wrote:
> If you want real spam, look to the sex industry and those people who
> spam Usenet in order to sell their useless products. These are the
> real enemies, and they aren't going away. Face it, spam and
> cross-posting are inevitable.
>
> >Get Real,
> >Stephen
>
> Get over it,
> Lex
Just curious; I can understand why someone selling something would want
to 'spam', but when so many in the PJ ng politely or otherwise request
that you not post here, why do you persist in doing so? I agree you
have every 'right' to post here, but why do you want to post where
people don't appreciate it? I just can't understand why? Is it just a
knee-jerk reaction to people asking you not to? Is it revenge because
you are insulted that we don't want you here? There are many who seem
to enjoy Whorella's posts. They are free to go to the two newsgroups
that are focussed on that kind of thing to read them. Why here?
Laurie
Senorita Buttclench
>(except the guy selling the Elmo). I support the taking people off
>Usenet
>who constantly abuse Usenet, by posting crap in newsgroups where it
>doesn't belong.
And you admit this proudly? Well, Mr. Whining Baby, what if not
everyone agrees with your personal snotty view of what is Usenet
abuse?
>Speech on the Net is controlled by the intrest of the ISP. So he could
>kill
>every post that you put up that wasn't exactly on topic,
>after all he does pay money for his connection. and I bet if you read
>your aggreement,
>it says he has the right to terminate any thing you write, or post to
>the internet.
And I'll bet you that most ISP providers have better things to do than
worry about killing every post that some little baby like you cries
about, especially when there are much more serious offenses out there.
>Your speech is not free here.
Well, you know what? As long as my speech isn't obscene and doesn't
threaten harm to anyone, it is as free as the wind.
Some ISPs just might support you in your peevish complaints, but there
are many more who wouldn't. And we dirty whores know who they are.
>
>
>> Or you could just get a killfile...they're nifty little buggers, and work very
>> nicely...unless, of course, you'd *rather* stay Righteously Indignant, which
>> is my sneaking suspicion about most of the froth-mouthed anti-Kathy Jo
>> posters...but such is life.
>
>wouldn't the world be better if people weren't assholes and did post
>three pages
>of junk about there life, on a newsgroup about Pearl Jam, Counting
>Crows, or Dave Matthews
>Band. Then we wouldn't have to have killfiles.
>
>1. Righteously Indignant, doesn't make sense, both words mean the same
>thing.
> It's like saying, "you want to scream yell at her don't you."
Yeah, but in your case, redundancy is appropriate. Because you are
whiner crying.
>2. I didn't say I have a problem with what she says, it's where she
>tells about
> her boring life. (That answers you statment about being "Righteously
>Indignant")
Kathy Jo's posts are relevant because a) we are all fans of the music;
b) we all have life experiences; c) we all can stand to learn things.
Kuhl
--------------54D3A87203C7665CC421BD77
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Buford Rochester wrote:
> It's not like that, see. Yeah see. I go to a stone age college, see.
> The connection is slower than 4800 baud even though it's a 28800
> modem,
> see.
> So if you would like to send money to the college go ahead, see.
>
I still dont understand... how much more time does it take to downlord
the 3-7 message headers that Kathy writes? No mater what speed your at
is should be only a few secs
> Yeah, it happens everyday that each and every ISP has to go up against
>
> thousands of
> hackers, threatening posters, and e-mailers.
> It's the same thing as the "Tickle me Elmo for Sale". It doesn't go,
> in
> most
> any of the newsgroups it was put it. Remember no one was happy about
> that
> (except the guy selling the Elmo). I support the taking people off
> Usenet
> who constantly abuse Usenet, by posting crap in newsgroups where it
> doesn't belong.
> Speech on the Net is controlled by the intrest of the ISP. So he could
>
> kill
> every post that you put up that wasn't exactly on topic,
>
ummmmm....no. you see there are 'moderated' Newsgroups and there are
'unmoderated' Newsgroups. it is impossible for an ISP to censensor is
customer on an unmoderated NG nomater how annoying you find him/her..
> after all he does pay money for his connection. and I bet if you read
> your aggreement,
> it says he has the right to terminate any thing you write, or post to
> the internet.
> Your speech is not free here.
>
OH you mean i get the Internet for free? whats going on here???? my ISP
is paying for my Internet Access/Email/Disscussion???...and ah who is
'he' anyways? you mean Mr.ISP?
you might wanna rethink that statement.
> wouldn't the world be better if people weren't assholes and did post
> three pages
> of junk about there life, on a newsgroup about Pearl Jam, Counting
> Crows, or Dave Matthews
> Band. Then we wouldn't have to have killfiles.
>
Back to what i said before. if you dont like this 'unmoderated'
newsgroup maybe you should propose a moderated
alt.music.dave-matthews...
then maybe you can be Hitler....er...the moderator.
Sean
--------------54D3A87203C7665CC421BD77
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<HTML>
Buford Rochester wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>
<P>It's not like that, see. Yeah see. I go to a stone age college, see.
<BR>The connection is slower than 4800 baud even though it's a 28800 modem,
<BR>see.
<BR>So if you would like to send money to the college go ahead, see.
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I still dont understand... how much more time does it take to downlord
the 3-7 message headers that Kathy writes? No mater what speed
your at is should be only a few secs
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>
<P>Yeah, it happens everyday that each and every ISP has to go up against
<BR>thousands of
<BR>hackers, threatening posters, and e-mailers.
<BR>It's the same thing as the "Tickle me Elmo for Sale". It doesn't go,
in
<BR>most
<BR>any of the newsgroups it was put it. Remember no one was happy about
<BR>that
<BR>(except the guy selling the Elmo). I support the taking people off
<BR>Usenet
<BR>who constantly abuse Usenet, by posting crap in newsgroups where it
<BR>doesn't belong.
<BR>Speech on the Net is controlled by the intrest of the ISP. So he could
<BR>kill
<BR>every post that you put up that wasn't exactly on topic,
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
ummmmm....no. you see there are 'moderated' Newsgroups
and there are 'unmoderated' Newsgroups. it is impossible for an ISP
to censensor is customer on an unmoderated NG nomater how annoying
you find him/her..
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>after all he does pay money for his connection. and
I bet if you read
<BR>your aggreement,
<BR>it says he has the right to terminate any thing you write, or post
to
<BR>the internet.
<BR>Your speech is not free here.
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
OH you mean i get the Internet for free? whats going on here????
my ISP is paying for my Internet Access/Email/Disscussion???...and ah who
is 'he' anyways? you mean Mr.ISP?
<P>you might wanna rethink that statement.
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>
<P>wouldn't the world be better if people weren't assholes and did post
<BR>three pages
<BR>of junk about there life, on a newsgroup about Pearl Jam, Counting
<BR>Crows, or Dave Matthews
<BR>Band. Then we wouldn't have to have killfiles.
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Back to what i said before. if you dont like this '<B>unmoderated</B>'
newsgroup maybe you should propose a <B>moderated</B> alt.music.dave-matthews...
<P>then maybe you can be Hitler....er...the <B>moderator.</B><B></B>
<P>Sean
<BR> </HTML>
--------------54D3A87203C7665CC421BD77--
Unknown
In article <339A4E...@earthlink.net>, Hester says...
>
>Just curious; I can understand why someone selling something would want
>to 'spam', but when so many in the PJ ng politely or otherwise request
>that you not post here, why do you persist in doing so? I agree you
>have every 'right' to post here, but why do you want to post where
>people don't appreciate it? I just can't understand why? Is it just a
>knee-jerk reaction to people asking you not to? Is it revenge because
>you are insulted that we don't want you here? There are many who seem
>to enjoy Whorella's posts. They are free to go to the two newsgroups
>that are focussed on that kind of thing to read them. Why here?
>
>Laurie
Fair question.
Because she LOVES PJ and feels that the music has had a major impact on the
way she thinks/writes/sees the world. Yes, people who want to read just about
Whorella ARE free to go to her groups. But, people who are interested in what
the music means in real people's real lives are HERE, aren't they? I mean, there
must be a few who wonder how it affects others, and why they themselves are so
wigged when they crack a bowl and press on "TEN" headphones, right?
How is that less legitimate than wnting tickets, or tabs or lyrics or how did
PJ get their name?
It isn't, that's how. People who think and feel about the music are just as legit as
people who make music or want tickets to see the band.I just don't see why this
is so hard to understand. People who, politely or otherwise, ask a writer to go away
(when she is not seling anything or engaging in any illegitimate activity) are
wrong. They can skip her, or killfile her if the very sight of her name is
toch for them to stand. BUT they have no right to politely ask her to leave.
I am not trying to be a dick. I am honestly trying to tell you why she does not
have to listen to the "polite" askers. She is a fan and PJ music affected the
things she thinks and the way she writes. What more legitimacy should it take?
YOU cannot be the one who decides what "people" appreciate. You are not, nor are
the rest of the 'group nazis,' the arbitor or PJ relevance.
That's "why here."
Buford Rochester
Senorita Buttclench wrote:
>
> On Sat, 07 Jun 1997 23:17:43 -0700, Hester <SPAMf...@earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Senorita Buttclench wrote:
> >
> >> If you want real spam, look to the sex industry and those people who
> >> spam Usenet in order to sell their useless products. These are the
> >> real enemies, and they aren't going away. Face it, spam and
> >> cross-posting are inevitable.
> >>
> >> >Get Real,
> >> >Stephen
> >>
> >> Get over it,
> >> Lex
> >
> >to 'spam', but when so many in the PJ ng politely or otherwise request
> >that you not post here, why do you persist in doing so? I agree you
> >have every 'right' to post here, but why do you want to post where
> >people don't appreciate it? I just can't understand why? Is it just a
> >knee-jerk reaction to people asking you not to? Is it revenge because
> >you are insulted that we don't want you here? There are many who seem
> >to enjoy Whorella's posts. They are free to go to the two newsgroups
> >that are focussed on that kind of thing to read them. Why here?
> >
> >Laurie
>
>
> I found Kathy Jo when she cross-posted to alt.fan.courtney-love. I
> was pissed at first, but the more I read her posts, the more intrigued
> and moved I was. I am now a die-hard fan. She talks about
> interesting things, and writes with an incredible honesty and style
> that I've never seen anywhere else. If I hadn't seen her posts in the
> music newsgroups, I might have never known that she existed.
> Imagine if Eddie Vedder, Dave Matthews, or Adam Duritz had started the
> same way. They too probably would have been lambasted for violating
> the rules of netiquette. Yes, a lot of people don't like what Kathy
> Jo has to say, but many more of us DO.
That's why she has a newsgroup.
This is liking trying to convert Jews to Nazism though, look
at the people who are kicking and screaming that Kathy-Jo
post elsewhere. She is posting here the same reason that Nazi's
post to the Jewish Newsgroup.
> I believe that Kathy Jo's original cross-posting intentions were
> merely to share thoughts and experiences with people who loved the
> same music she does. After all, who else would better understand her
> feelings than people who love the same music?
Pearl Jam is my favorite band. I don't like her anymore because of
it. I don't like her any less becuase of it either. But I see what
you are trying to say, we might some how relate with her obbsession
with Dave Matthews because we listen to the music. It's like saying
we relate more to Ted Bundy because he listened to whatever. That
argument is silly.
> Imagine her
> disappointment when she found that those people she believed to be
> kindred souls turning on her?
Tears.....
We all get disappointed at some time or another.
It's life, some people like you some don't. But
wait she has her own Newsgroup. why is she so
dissapointed?? People read her newsgroup too,
from what I understand. Now I really don't
understand why she is dissapointed.
> So then, she and her friends reacted in a perfectly understandable
> way: anger and defiance.
> Who are these people who dare to tell us
> what we can talk about and where?
That's the spirit, now while your at it, go threaten the
president.
> And what is so sacred about Usenet
> newsgroups that these self-imposed rigid rules for conversation be
> imposed on us?
it called being polite
> Especially, knowing that there are worse things
> happening out here, like kiddie porn and sex spams.
yeah, go stop that and leave us alone.
> Seeing people attack Kathy Jo, threaten her job and health for the
> mere crime of posting off-topic seems amazingly petty and peevish and
> doesn't speak well for the human race in general.
threaten her job???? Trying to compare usenet with the human race
in general is laughable
> I have always had
> this theory that people, who in real life feel helpless and trodden
> upon, find the ability on the internet to attack people and exorcise
> their anger because they are under the cloak of facelessness and/or
> anonymity.
No one here is covering up their name.
> In real life when a bully kicks sand in your face, you
> can't do much about it, but online it's easy and safe to say "hey fuck
> off, you piece of shit!"
You can get a baseball bat and beat him. I guess Usenet is better
than I thought. I makes people stand up for themselves.
> So, in answer to those who politely ask us not to post off-topic here,
> we reply: thank you for asking politely. We understand your request
> that we not post off-topic, but with all due respect, we have a
> different opinion of what is relevant and appropriate. We are not
> breaking any laws, we are not threatening or hurting people. We are
> here to challenge boundaries and rules, and to start people thinking.
> All we want is intelligent, honest, meaningful dialogue. And since
> everyone has the ability to either ignore, delete, or killfile, we
> don't see why this should be a problem.
You want to cause trouble, that's all it is. If you didn't want to
offend people you could post in the Kathy-Jo newsgroup. But since
this proves you do want to offend people, I guess that makes you
fall into the cateogory of the letting the Bully kick sand in your
face. You know the the type, you were talking about before "who in real
life feel helpless and trodden upon, find the ability on the internet to
attack people and exorcise their anger because they are under the cloak
of facelessness and/or anonymity" isn't that right: Senorita Buttclench.
And as I recall you called me "Mr. Whining Baby." Isn't that alot like
saying: '"hey fuck off, you piece of shit!"'
You are a hypocrite. You pretend to be the type person that is trying to
help, but you are not. You are one of those faceless one, that you
mentioned before.
> We could all go away and not bother you ever again, but someone or
> something else annoying will take our place.
I'm willing to take that chance.
> There will always be
> someone that bugs you, or has a different opinion. You can't make
> every single annoyance in life go away, so why not either listen or
> ignore?
Since I like talking about the Nazi's so much. Think what would
have happened if we had ignored them (The Nazi's)?? what about listening
to them???
Stephen Rochester.
Judi Smith
Hester (SPAMf...@earthlink.net) wrote:
: Just curious; I can understand why someone selling something would want
: to 'spam', but when so many in the PJ ng politely or otherwise request
: that you not post here, why do you persist in doing so? I agree you
: have every 'right' to post here, but why do you want to post where
: people don't appreciate it? I just can't understand why? Is it just a
: knee-jerk reaction to people asking you not to? Is it revenge because
: you are insulted that we don't want you here? There are many who seem
: to enjoy Whorella's posts. They are free to go to the two newsgroups
: that are focussed on that kind of thing to read them. Why here?
STOP THAT! NO LOGIC ALLOWED! this is a fight for the RIGHT TO POST!! this
isn't about rational thought!
Bob Phillips
Judi Smith (jsm...@bcfreenet.seflin.org) wrote:
: can we start a newsgroup called "alt.fan.pointless-bickering"?
: then all of our posts will be on topic.
Judi, pray they don't find out about The Cafe, you and Ginzo. :)
--
/`-, Bob Phillips
/ `-, a037...@bc.seflin.org
O/ `-, tropi...@juno.com
l `-,
/\ `-,
\ \_ `-,
########## `-,
# #~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'@(((<~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
# # o o o o @((((<
# # ( ( >)))@ o ____ ___ ( (
# # ) ) _*o(_ll_)____/_ ) ) )
# # ( ( O(_)( o ___/ \ ( ( (
# # ) ) @((((< ^ __/---o-' ) ) )
# # ( ( >)))@ ( ( (
-#-----#-----------------------------------------------------------------
Phil Oliver
>Robin Colleen Moore wrote:
>>
>> In article <33982a7b...@news.tiac.net> phil...@tiac.net (Philip A. Daigle) writes:
>>
>> >On Tue, 03 Jun 1997 17:55:20 -0700, Buford Rochester <buf...@netpathway.com>
>> >wrote:
>> >>
>> >>I'm writting her Isp
>> >>I'm a little tried of DOWNLOADING THIS CRAP
>> >>Some of us TRY and read Newsgroups offline but this is worse than
>> >>the normal spam on the newsgroup. It took me 20 minutes.
>>
>> >Buy a faster modem.
>>
>> Or get a better ISP--sheesh, even AOHell has unlimited time now! The
>> combination of a better ISP & a faster modem would probably solve most of your
>> problem, and allow you to simply ignore posts you're not interested in, which
>> is what most of the known world does anyway (hint, hint...).
>
>
>It's not like that, see. Yeah see. I go to a stone age college, see.
>The connection is slower than 4800 baud even though it's a 28800 modem,
>see.
>So if you would like to send money to the college go ahead, see.
And your 85 line long post doesn't use up as much downloading time as
one of Whorella's pieces?
<snip>
>I support the taking people off Usenet who constantly abuse Usenet, by
>posting crap in newsgroups where it doesn't belong.
You obviously have no clue as to how Usenet works. The only document
that illustrates what "belongs" in an unmoderated newsgroup is the
newsgroup charter. In none of these groups' charters do I see a part
that says "Fans of these artists may not talk about their lives and
experiences."
>wouldn't the world be better if people weren't assholes and did post
>three pages of junk about there life,
No, the world would be better if people weren't jackasses and posted
with a least a modicum of proper language use.
>on a newsgroup about Pearl Jam, Counting
>Crows, or Dave Matthews
>Band. Then we wouldn't have to have killfiles.
Who the fuck are you to decide what a newsgroup is about?
Whorella likes the three bands in question, and I assume their music
has influenced her, so posts about her life are on topic unless the
charters specifically ban fans from posting about life experiences.
>2. I didn't say I have a problem with what she says, it's where she
>tells about her boring life. (That answers you statment about being
>"Righteously Indignant")
Again, what is the problem with where she posts?
>Get Real,
>Stephen
Get a clue,
-Phil Oliver
Senorita Buttclench
OK. I tried. Your arguments are silly and make you sound like a
belligerent teenager. You make comparisons using nazis and serial
killers....very lame. I have better use for my energies. You, Mr.
Rochester, may return to your chest-beating and bleating. We will
STILL post what we want where we want.
Howl away, young-un!
Lex
Phil Pietrowski
Senorita Buttclench <le...@gte.net> wrote in article
<5nejk7$92p$1...@news13.gte.net>...
> So, in answer to those who politely ask us not to post off-topic here,
> we reply: thank you for asking politely. We understand your request
> that we not post off-topic, but with all due respect, we have a
> different opinion of what is relevant and appropriate. We are not
> breaking any laws, we are not threatening or hurting people. We are
> here to challenge boundaries and rules, and to start people thinking.
> All we want is intelligent, honest, meaningful dialogue. And since
> everyone has the ability to either ignore, delete, or killfile, we
> don't see why this should be a problem.
I get it. You and the rest of your freakshow minions have decided that you
want to pollute these newsgroups with your crap and since there are no
rules against it, you're going to go to town. That's really nice of you.
> We could all go away and not bother you ever again, but someone or
> something else annoying will take our place. There will always be
> someone that bugs you, or has a different opinion. You can't make
> every single annoyance in life go away, so why not either listen or
> ignore?
>
Ah yes, the ol' "I don't give a shit what you want. If I'm not bothering
you, someone else will" arguement. Here's a better idea. Instead of
shitting in everyone's newsgroup, stick to the TWO you people have. If
someone want's to read about blowjobs, drug use and welfare mothers, they
can swing by a.fan.kathy-jo or a.fan.dirty-whores. You have somewhere to
go to discuss your ideas in peace, leave us to ours.
--
"Nolite Te Bastardes Carborundorum"
"Vengeance is a waste of time if reaped on someone who would wreck
themselves, if left to it."
The Tragically Hip
Email PPietrowski(AT)zwa(DOT)com
Buford Rochester
Phil Oliver wrote:
> Who the fuck are you to decide what a newsgroup is about?
I didn't decide what the newsgroup was about.
let's see
alt.music.pearl-jam
hmmmmm could it be about Pearl Jam.
My next post will be about my experiences on the crapper
while playing Ten on the Cd player.
Phil Oliver
On 10 Jun 1997 00:07:03 GMT, jsm...@bcfreenet.seflin.org (Judi Smith)
wrote:
>Phil Oliver (fel...@SZSPAMBLOCKbiosys.net) wrote:
>
>: How many times to I have to tell you people that a charter is the only
>: indicator of what is on topic for the newsgroup, and that the
>: newsgroup name has nothing to do with it?
>
>we must be an awful trial to you!
>maybe you should send us to our rooms.
I prefer killfiles, thanks. :)
-Phil Oliver
Phil Oliver
On 10 Jun 1997 00:05:54 GMT, jsm...@bcfreenet.seflin.org (Judi Smith)
wrote:
>: >Phil Oliver wrote:
>: >> If you're too incompetent to download simple software, you don't
>: >> belong on Usenet in the first place.
>
>since you asked, THIS is what i was talking about. excuse me, what IN THE
>WORLD i was talking about. :)
Yeah, if someone is too incompetent to download simple software, they
are probably too incompetent to learn how Usenet works. What's your
complaint?
-Phil Oliver
Phil Oliver
On 9 Jun 1997 17:24:53 GMT, "Phil Pietrowski" <Add...@bottom.post>
wrote:
>
>
>Senorita Buttclench <le...@gte.net> wrote in article
><5nejk7$92p$1...@news13.gte.net>...
>> So, in answer to those who politely ask us not to post off-topic here,
>> we reply: thank you for asking politely. We understand your request
>> that we not post off-topic, but with all due respect, we have a
>> different opinion of what is relevant and appropriate. We are not
>> breaking any laws, we are not threatening or hurting people. We are
>> here to challenge boundaries and rules, and to start people thinking.
>> All we want is intelligent, honest, meaningful dialogue. And since
>> everyone has the ability to either ignore, delete, or killfile, we
>> don't see why this should be a problem.
>
>I get it. You and the rest of your freakshow minions have decided that you
>want to pollute these newsgroups with your crap and since there are no
>rules against it, you're going to go to town. That's really nice of you.
Who is to say what is "crap" and what isn't? I might find the idea of
favorite song polls "crap", but is it fair for me to say "You can't
post these favorite song polls?" Of course not.
If you want "rules against it", make your own newsgroup that either
bans such posts in the charter, or make a moderated group. It's that
simple.
>Here's a better idea. Instead of shitting in everyone's newsgroup,
No one "owns" any of these groups.
>stick to the TWO you people have. If
>someone want's to read about blowjobs, drug use and welfare mothers, they
>can swing by a.fan.kathy-jo or a.fan.dirty-whores.
Does this mean that discussion of, say, the Counting Crows isn't
allowed in any other music newsgroup. Nope.
>You have somewhere to
>go to discuss your ideas in peace, leave us to ours.
Do you mind telling me how the "ours" in that sentence
purchased or gained ownership of these newsgroups?
-Phil Oliver
Judi Smith
Judi Smith
Phil Oliver (fel...@SZSPAMBLOCKbiosys.net) wrote:
: How many times to I have to tell you people that a charter is the only
: indicator of what is on topic for the newsgroup, and that the
: newsgroup name has nothing to do with it?
we must be an awful trial to you!
maybe you should send us to our rooms.
--
Ryan Lynn
You know...you need to start your own newsgroup
alt.fucking.policeman.ofthe.usenet and keep you childish flame wars off
the dave newsgroup. I come in here to read about people looking for
tapes, news about dave. Not to talk about what's right and wrong with
the Usenet. Chill out and if you want to bitch people out....do it
privately....
"Why don't you try and clean up the entire Internet of smut, piracy and
other vulgor forms of communication....you can do it Phil...you really
can!!!"
Ryan
Phil Oliver wrote:
>
> On 8 Jun 1997 15:57:41 GMT, jsm...@bcfreenet.seflin.org (Judi Smith)
> wrote:
>
> >Hester (SPAMf...@earthlink.net) wrote:
> >: Just curious; I can understand why someone selling something would want
> >: to 'spam', but when so many in the PJ ng politely or otherwise request
> >: that you not post here, why do you persist in doing so? I agree you
> >: have every 'right' to post here, but why do you want to post where
> >: people don't appreciate it? I just can't understand why? Is it just a
> >: knee-jerk reaction to people asking you not to? Is it revenge because
> >: you are insulted that we don't want you here? There are many who seem
> >: to enjoy Whorella's posts. They are free to go to the two newsgroups
> >: that are focussed on that kind of thing to read them. Why here?
> >
> >
> >STOP THAT! NO LOGIC ALLOWED! this is a fight for the RIGHT TO POST!! this
> >isn't about rational thought!
>
> No, it is about rational thought, the rational ability to find out
> about what's allowed in a newsgroup and what isn't. Apparently many
> people don't seem to understand this principle.
>
> -Phil Oliver
Phil Oliver
On Wed, 11 Jun 1997 19:39:50 -0400,
theintrep...@worldnet.att.net wrote:
>> > which is why charters exist. Let's say there's a newsgroup called
>> > alt.fan.bush. Is it for the band? The president? The tree? The
>> > newsgroup name tells nothing here.
>>
>
>
>Phil Phil Phil,
>What exactly is your mental deficiency?
My "mental deficiency" is that the jackasses of these groups don't
understand how Usenet works!
>If a newsgroups was called alt.phil.oliver.is.a.moron, what do you think the
>topic would be?
I think the topic would be how the buffoons who keep trying to insult
me:
1) Can't even formulate a logical argument so they just call me a
"moron". I think the rest of us got past that in the 3rd grade, but I
understand some of you DMB fans are probably still below that level.
2) Have no clue as to how Usenet works. Why, oh why do these ISPs let
you children loose on the internet without giving you a clue first???
>There is a REASON its called alt.music.dave-matthews or
>alt.music.counting-crows.
>
>1) alt - no explanation needed...
I bet you don't even know what the alt.* stands for. Tell me, what
does the alt.* heirarchy do and why does it exist?
>2) music - to discuss music
>3) counting crows - specifically that related to counting crows.
And Kathy Jo's poems ARE related to Counting Crows, numb nut.
The point is that a newsgroup name is only to give one a quick idea as
to what the topic of a newsgroup is about. The charter of the
newsgroup is to give a more detailed description of what is allowed.
Since the charter for none of these newsgroups bans tangential
discussion or poetry/stories by fans of the band, they are allowed
to be posted. Period. If you don't like it, I've been nice enough to
tell you what your other options are.
>Kathy Jo- if people like Phil took my side on an argument, I'd be really
>saddened.
Why? Because I'm the one person who knows how Usenet works? Why
don't you crawl back under the rock you came from and don't get out
until you have a clue!
-Phil Oliver
theintrep...@worldnet.att.net
Phil Oliver wrote:
> >There is a REASON its called alt.music.dave-matthews or
> >alt.music.counting-crows.
> >
> >1) alt - no explanation needed...
>
> I bet you don't even know what the alt.* stands for. Tell me, what
> does the alt.* heirarchy do and why does it exist?
Here is another example of why you're an asshole who thinks you are the
god of the internet. Phil, the reason why alt.* exists is because
people wanted a hierarchy that was seperate from soc, rec, news, sci,
etc. A hierarchy without guidelines or voting processes. How's that?
Is that good enough for you or should I have gone into charters. As
that is the only word you like.
> And Kathy Jo's poems ARE related to Counting Crows, numb nut.
[I snipped out a lot of crap about charters...]
Well, in that case, I deem this post to be poetry and that it is all
related to whatever newsgroup you're in right now. Because it's all
open to interpretation and who are you to tell me that this "poem" isnt
related to pearl jam?
It's not about logic. It's about consideration. My favorite sports
team is the Eagles. I dont go post my opinions about the Eagles to the
Dilbert newsgroup. There's a reason for that. I know no one there
gives a rat's ass.
> Why? Because I'm the one person who knows how Usenet works?
You're the ONE person who knows how Usenet works? A little full of
ourselves, arent we, Phil?
tf...@indy.net
> The point is that a newsgroup name is only to give one a quick idea as
> to what the topic of a newsgroup is about
That's funny....I just saw the same post in:
news:instructions.how-usenet-works
"It is ill-manners to silence a fool, and cruelty to let him go on."
-Benjamin Franklin
Buford Rochester
> > >Phil Oliver wrote:
> > > which is why charters exist. Let's say there's a newsgroup called
> > > alt.fan.bush. Is it for the band? The president? The tree? The
> > > newsgroup name tells nothing here.
look like I said before. There will never be a newsgroup named
alt.fan.bush becuase of that reason. People post new ideas for
newsgroups in alt.config. The cabal then gives suggestions on how the
name could be improved, so when you create a newsgroup it won't
Rmgroup'ed.
> My "mental deficiency" is that the jackasses of these groups don't
> understand how Usenet works!
I think you are the only one here who doesn't know how it works.
I think you are either a really young know-it-all or about mid to late
40's who picked up a few words while reading a text file on newsgroups
one day.
> >If a newsgroups was called alt.phil.oliver.is.a.moron, what do you think the
> >topic would be?
>
> I think the topic would be how the buffoons who keep trying to insult
> me:
> 1) Can't even formulate a logical argument so they just call me a
> "moron". I think the rest of us got past that in the 3rd grade, but I
> understand some of you DMB fans are probably still below that level.
> 2) Have no clue as to how Usenet works. Why, oh why do these ISPs let
> you children loose on the internet without giving you a clue first???
>
> >There is a REASON its called alt.music.dave-matthews or
> >alt.music.counting-crows.
> >
> >1) alt - no explanation needed...
>
> I bet you don't even know what the alt.* stands for. Tell me, what
> does the alt.* heirarchy do and why does it exist?
It stands for alto, or could be altatic, or maybe altar, or what about
alternation. Tell you what though, I heard it was called alternate,
becuase it was an alternate to the big 7 newsgroup like sci, and rec.
But I think that is wrong. I think it stands for altercation, becuase
that's all that happens in them. Espically when someone post 30 off
topic 3 page post in one day.
> >2) music - to discuss music
> >3) counting crows - specifically that related to counting crows.
>
> And Kathy Jo's poems ARE related to Counting Crows, numb nut.
uh, I don't know what you saw but most of those THIRTY or so post were
not poems, numb nut.
> The point is that a newsgroup name is only to give one a quick idea as
> to what the topic of a newsgroup is about. The charter
You keep saying that, but I don't think you are right.
Name an alt Newsgroup with a charter. I don't think any have
them. I think the only guidence for alt newsgroups are in the FAQ.
and the "never post more than 5 off topic messages in a day clause"
> of the
> newsgroup is to give a more detailed description of what is allowed.
> Since the charter for none of these newsgroups bans tangential
> discussion or poetry/stories by fans of the band, they are allowed
> to be posted. Period. If you don't like it, I've been nice enough to
> tell you what your other options are.
>
> Why? Because I'm the one person who knows how Usenet works?
This made me laugh. I almost spit up the coke I was drinking.
Phil Oliver
>You know...you need to start your own newsgroup
>alt.fucking.policeman.ofthe.usenet and keep you childish flame wars off
>the dave newsgroup. I come in here to read about people looking for
>tapes, news about dave. Not to talk about what's right and wrong with
>the Usenet. Chill out and if you want to bitch people out....do it
>privately....
Um, you might want to read the thread a bit more carefully. These
other people are being the "policemen" and claiming that this
"Whorella" has no right to post here, and that they're going to
complain to her ISP if she continues. I think that's "wrong". I am
not starting any childish flame wars, I'm simply explaining that she
has the right to post here, and I've explained the options others have
if they don't like it (killfiles, making another newsgroup she can't
post to, etc.). Since they can't make a logical response, they
degrade things into a childish flame war and call me a "moron". So be
it.
>"Why don't you try and clean up the entire Internet of smut, piracy and
>other vulgor forms of communication....you can do it Phil...you really
>can!!!"
What in the hell are you talking about? I've never said anything of
the sort.
-Phil Oliver
Ryan Lynn
To the one and only guy who knows anything about Usenet:
You know Phil....who cares if you know how Usenet works....what does it
get you? It's the same thing as us using a network....most people are
using it but don't know how it works...but guess what...I could tell you
how a network functions from bit level to the wide scope of
things....but who CARES!!!!!If you wanna start some crusade to educate
the Internet....have fun....it's all you boyyyyy......
Phil Oliver wrote:
>
> On Wed, 11 Jun 1997 19:39:50 -0400,
> theintrep...@worldnet.att.net wrote:
>
> >> > which is why charters exist. Let's say there's a newsgroup called
> >> > alt.fan.bush. Is it for the band? The president? The tree? The
> >> > newsgroup name tells nothing here.
> >>
> >
> >
> >Phil Phil Phil,
> >What exactly is your mental deficiency?
>
> My "mental deficiency" is that the jackasses of these groups don't
> understand how Usenet works!
>
> >If a newsgroups was called alt.phil.oliver.is.a.moron, what do you think the
> >topic would be?
>
> I think the topic would be how the buffoons who keep trying to insult
> me:
> 1) Can't even formulate a logical argument so they just call me a
> "moron". I think the rest of us got past that in the 3rd grade, but I
> understand some of you DMB fans are probably still below that level.
> 2) Have no clue as to how Usenet works. Why, oh why do these ISPs let
> you children loose on the internet without giving you a clue first???
>
> >There is a REASON its called alt.music.dave-matthews or
> >alt.music.counting-crows.
> >
> >1) alt - no explanation needed...
>
> I bet you don't even know what the alt.* stands for. Tell me, what
> does the alt.* heirarchy do and why does it exist?
>
> >2) music - to discuss music
> >3) counting crows - specifically that related to counting crows.
>
> And Kathy Jo's poems ARE related to Counting Crows, numb nut.
> The point is that a newsgroup name is only to give one a quick idea as
> to what the topic of a newsgroup is about. The charter of the
> newsgroup is to give a more detailed description of what is allowed.
> Since the charter for none of these newsgroups bans tangential
> discussion or poetry/stories by fans of the band, they are allowed
> to be posted. Period. If you don't like it, I've been nice enough to
> tell you what your other options are.
>
> >Kathy Jo- if people like Phil took my side on an argument, I'd be really
> >saddened.
>
> Why? Because I'm the one person who knows how Usenet works? Why
Phil Oliver
On Thu, 12 Jun 1997 18:23:13 -0400,
theintrep...@worldnet.att.net wrote:
>Phil Oliver wrote:
>
>> >There is a REASON its called alt.music.dave-matthews or
>> >alt.music.counting-crows.
>> >
>> >1) alt - no explanation needed...
>>
>> I bet you don't even know what the alt.* stands for. Tell me, what
>> does the alt.* heirarchy do and why does it exist?
>
>Here is another example of why you're an asshole who thinks you are the
>god of the internet.
When did I ever say I'm the "god of the internet"?
>Phil, the reason why alt.* exists is because people wanted a hierarchy that
>was seperate from soc, rec, news, sci, etc. A hierarchy without guidelines or
>voting processes. How's that?
The first part is correct, the second is incorrect. Alt.* does exist
because people wanted a hierarchy separate from the big 7 (soc.*,
rec.*, news.*, sci.*, comp.*, talk.*, and misc.* One of the main
differences between alt.* and the big 7 is the lack of voting
processes, all one must do to create an alt.* group is issue a
properly formatted newgroup message (that doesn't mean the group will
propogate, but that's a different discussion for a different day and a
different newsgroup). However, alt.* is not without guidelines.
Alt.* groups can be moderated, and guidelines for posting can be set
in the newsgroup's charter.
>Is that good enough for you or should I have gone into charters. As
>that is the only word you like.
It's not "the only word I like", but so many people don't understand
the purpose of a charter that I have to repeat it constantly. These
people are saying "Because it says Counting Crows", only posts
directly about the Counting Crows are allowed. This is totally
incorrect, and they have no authority to say such a thing.
>It's not about logic. It's about consideration. My favorite sports
>team is the Eagles. I dont go post my opinions about the Eagles to the
>Dilbert newsgroup. There's a reason for that. I know no one there
>gives a rat's ass.
There's a big difference between the two. As far as I can tell, there
is no connection whatsoever between the Eagles and Dilbert. These
newsgroups are all arts related, and Kathy Jo claims to be influences
by these three artists, so she wishes to post them here.
I know there are people in the music groups who wish to read Kathy
Jo's work, they just aren't as vocal as the detractors, with good
reason. Kathy Jo has been posting as long as I've read alt.music.*
(at least 2 years), and has been insulted plenty of times before and
she's never stopped posting. Most people who wish to read her have no
need to speak up because they know she's not going to stop posting
just because a few buffoons can't operate a killfile; I'm only
replying because I'm offended by rampant stupidity.
>> Why? Because I'm the one person who knows how Usenet works?
>
>You're the ONE person who knows how Usenet works?
In replies to this thread, apparently I am.
>A little full of ourselves, arent we, Phil?
No, because no one else replying to this thread has demonstrated even
basic compentency in explaining what's on topic for a newsgroup and
what isn't. The standard reply is "It says Dave Matthews, so if it
isn't explicitly about Dave Matthews you can't post it! You moron!"
Many music and other arts related newsgroups appreciate reading other
art that is influenced by the subject of the newsgroup (in this case,
Kathy Jo claims influences by C Crows, Dave Matthews, and Pearl Jam).
It's not Kathy Jo's fault if many of the current readership don't want
to read her work, but should she stop posting just because they feel
they're allowed to dictate what is "allowed" in this newsgroup and
what isn't.
-Phil Oliver
Phil Oliver
On Thu, 12 Jun 1997 21:02:33 -0700, Buford Rochester
<buf...@netpathway.com> wrote:
>> > >Phil Oliver wrote:
>> > > which is why charters exist. Let's say there's a newsgroup called
>> > > alt.fan.bush. Is it for the band? The president? The tree? The
>> > > newsgroup name tells nothing here.
>
>look like I said before. There will never be a newsgroup named
>alt.fan.bush becuase of that reason.
Says who? The biggest difference between alt.* and the big 7 is that
there are no voting procedures for alt.* so that anyone who can post a
properly formatted newgroup message can create an alt.* group.
Scanning my newsfeed briefly, I see the following poorly or vaguely
named newsgroups in the alt.music.* heirarchy. Note that my newsfeed
only carries approximately 12,000 newsgroups; there are a total of
almost 40,000 newsgroups.
a.m.beck
-Jeff Beck or Beck Hansen?
a.m.chicago
-the band or the city of Chicago's music scene?
a.m.ct-dummies
-10 years from now, who's going to remember who the "Crash
Test Dummies" were?
a.m.garbage
-the band or just discussion of crappy music?
a.m.live.the.band
-"the" is a subcategory of "live" and "band" is a subcategory
if "the". um, ok.
a.m.manics
-I assume this is for the Manic Street Preachers, but there
are plenty of other bands with "manic" or "manics" in their names.
a.m.mariah.carey
-alt.music.mariah shouldn't be a heirarchy of it's own.
a.m.perl-jam
-no comment
That's when I got bored and figured my point was made. So you see,
just reading the newsgroup line doesn't always help.
>People post new ideas for newsgroups in alt.config. The cabal
There is no cabal.
>then gives suggestions on how the name could be improved, so when
>you create a newsgroup it won't Rmgroup'ed.
Discussion in alt.config isn't mandatory, and newgrouping w/o
discussion in alt.config doesn't mean it will be rmgrouped (although
some sites may choose not to carry it). On the whole, newgroup
messages propogate better than rmgroup ones do. I've read alt.music.*
for 2 years on various news servers (on newsfeeds that only carry a
small percentage of newsfeeds), and all 4 have carried
"alt.music.perl-jam".
>> My "mental deficiency" is that the jackasses of these groups don't
>> understand how Usenet works!
>
>I think you are the only one here who doesn't know how it works.
Please point out the error in any of my logic so far that demonstrates
my lack of knowledge about Usenet.
>I think you are either a really young know-it-all
One's age is completely irrelevant. One of the most respected
individuals in the news.admin.net-abuse.* heirarchy wasn't even a
legal adult when he wrote the cancel FAQ.
>or about mid to late 40's who picked up a few words while reading a
>text file on newsgroups one day.
Yes, several years of experience on Usenet have taught me nothing; my
knowledge is all from a text file. I forgot that "It says Dave
Matthews so if it isn't directly about Dave Matthews it can't be here!
Moron!"
>> >If a newsgroups was called alt.phil.oliver.is.a.moron, what do you think the
>> >topic would be?
>>
>> I think the topic would be how the buffoons who keep trying to insult
>> me:
>> 1) Can't even formulate a logical argument so they just call me a
>> "moron". I think the rest of us got past that in the 3rd grade, but I
>> understand some of you DMB fans are probably still below that level.
>> 2) Have no clue as to how Usenet works. Why, oh why do these ISPs let
>> you children loose on the internet without giving you a clue first???
>>
>> >There is a REASON its called alt.music.dave-matthews or
>> >alt.music.counting-crows.
>> >
>> >1) alt - no explanation needed...
>>
>> I bet you don't even know what the alt.* stands for. Tell me, what
>> does the alt.* heirarchy do and why does it exist?
>
>It stands for alto, or could be altatic, or maybe altar, or what about
>alternation. Tell you what though, I heard it was called alternate,
>becuase it was an alternate to the big 7 newsgroup like sci, and rec.
>But I think that is wrong. I think it stands for altercation, becuase
>that's all that happens in them.
The only reason there's an altercation is because the people who don't
want to read it don't seem to be capable of skipping over it.
>Espically when someone post 30 off topic 3 page post in one day.
The "one day" part is meaningless, especially since it often takes
longer than that for news articles to propogate to all servers.
On the whole, the volume of Kathy Jo's posts are miniscule compared
to the total traffic in a.m.c-c and a.m.p-j (I don't read the Dave
Matthews group), so it's not something worth getting your panties in
a bunch over. I believe Kathy Jo's averaged less than 2 posts a day
in the past 2 weeks, and since a.m.p-j gets well over 100 posts a day
that's nothing.
>> >2) music - to discuss music
>> >3) counting crows - specifically that related to counting crows.
>>
>> And Kathy Jo's poems ARE related to Counting Crows, numb nut.
>
>uh, I don't know what you saw but most of those THIRTY or so post were
>not poems, numb nut.
I'm not sure what specific posts you are referring to, but I've read
posts of hers before that were poems. If they were short stories,
that doesn't change the fact that they were influenced by the C. Crows
or the other groups.
>> The point is that a newsgroup name is only to give one a quick idea as
>> to what the topic of a newsgroup is about. The charter
>
>You keep saying that, but I don't think you are right.
>Name an alt Newsgroup with a charter.
Geez, lots of alt.* newsgroups have charters. The charter is written
as part of the newgroup message when it's created (at least in alt.*,
in the big 7 it's part of the CFV). The first one I came across was
alt.binaries.pictures.motorcycles.sportbike (noticed this because a
booster was just posted 4 days ago). I won't bother reposting the
charter because I doubt anyone cares, so go to this website:
http://www.cs.ubc.ca/spider/edmonds/usenet/good-newgroup.html
It will give you a basic idea of what a charter is, in simplest form
"what the newsgroup is for".
>I don't think any have them. I think the only guidence for alt newsgroups are
>in the FAQ.
Nope. FAQs are guidelines, but they don't dictate what is on topic
and what isn't. A FAQ can say "We've been over the topic 100 times,
Eddie Vedder's sexual orientation is not worth discussing any
further", but if someone posts "Is Eddie gay?" it's not off-topic.
>and the "never post more than 5 off topic messages in a day
>clause"
Are you being facetious or did someone really tell you that? That's
Very Incorrect, where did you hear that. Off-topic is off-topic no
matter how many times and when it's posted, but my argument all along
is that Kathy Jo is on-topic.
As an side, almost no Usenet guidelines include "a day" as a
timeframe, mainly because it can take several days for a message to
propogate from server to server.
>> of the
>> newsgroup is to give a more detailed description of what is allowed.
>> Since the charter for none of these newsgroups bans tangential
>> discussion or poetry/stories by fans of the band, they are allowed
>> to be posted. Period. If you don't like it, I've been nice enough to
>> tell you what your other options are.
>>
>
>> Why? Because I'm the one person who knows how Usenet works?
>
>This made me laugh. I almost spit up the coke I was drinking.
Don't you mean snorting?
Seriously, no one responding to this thread has offered me a valid
argument as to why I am wrong. I'm the one explaining what a charter
is an such, so I believe my claim of "being the only one who knows how
Usenet works" is perfectly valid. And I make no claims of being an
expert, I only possess a rudimentary knowledge of Usenet, but it
doesn't seem like anyone else responding even knows that much...
-Phil Oliver
Buford Rochester
Phil Oliver wrote:
> Isn't it sad that "the Internet" needs education in the first place?
> If ISPs gave their users just a bit of information about Usenet rules
You said there were no rules before.
why are there rules all of the sudden????
Phil Oliver
>Phil Oliver wrote:
>
>> Isn't it sad that "the Internet" needs education in the first place?
>> If ISPs gave their users just a bit of information about Usenet rules
>
>You said there were no rules before.
When did I ever say "there were no rules"? If I recall correctly, you
said "I thought Usenet had no rules, like the Wild West", and I
corrected you. Please tell me where i said there are no rules on
Usenet.
>why are there rules all of the sudden????
There have always been rules on Usenet. I've never disputed that.
-Phil Oliver
Phil Oliver
On Sat, 14 Jun 1997 13:10:16 -0700, Buford Rochester
<buf...@netpathway.com> wrote:
>Phil Oliver wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 13 Jun 1997 21:07:13 -0700, Buford Rochester
>> <buf...@netpathway.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Phil Oliver wrote:
>> >
>> >> Isn't it sad that "the Internet" needs education in the first place?
>> >> If ISPs gave their users just a bit of information about Usenet rules
>> >
>> >You said there were no rules before.
>>
>> When did I ever say "there were no rules"? If I recall correctly, you
>> said "I thought Usenet had no rules, like the Wild West",
>
>I was mocking your charter thing, that you came up with
>after you told us there were no rules regarding post into
>alt. newsgroups.
You are misquoting me, I never said there are no rules regarding posts
to groups in alt.*. I said the same basic rules that apply to all
other groups apply to alt.*, you can't EMP/ECP, can't post "Make Money
Fast", can't post binaries to discussion groups, etc.
Also, I didn't "come up with" the idea of a charter. This is a basic
newsgroup feature that is supposed to be included in the newgroup
message and dictates what is on topic and appropriate for the group.
Unless these newsgroups' charters have banned poetry/stories by fans
of the artist in question, Kathy Jo is on-topic.
-Phil Oliver
THE Jim Gallagher
In article <33A2FA...@netpathway.com>, Buford says...
>I was mocking your charter thing, that you came up with
>after you told us there were no rules regarding post into
>alt. newsgroups.
>Does that refresh your memory???
OK, not to make a mockery of this discussion, but I have a question:
Does anyone know where the charters reside? I am not necessarily endorsing
the idea that posters "must" or even should abide by them, but how can
anyone even discuss them without reading the bloody things?
Buford Rochester
Phil Oliver wrote:
>
> On Fri, 13 Jun 1997 21:07:13 -0700, Buford Rochester
> <buf...@netpathway.com> wrote:
>
> >Phil Oliver wrote:
> >
> >> Isn't it sad that "the Internet" needs education in the first place?
> >> If ISPs gave their users just a bit of information about Usenet rules
> >
> >You said there were no rules before.
>
> When did I ever say "there were no rules"? If I recall correctly, you
> said "I thought Usenet had no rules, like the Wild West",
I was mocking your charter thing, that you came up with
Buford Rochester
>Phil Oliver wrote:
>
> Also, I didn't "come up with" the idea of a charter. This is a basic
> newsgroup feature that is supposed to be included in the newgroup
> message and dictates what is on topic and appropriate for the group.
> Unless these newsgroups' charters have banned poetry/stories by fans
> of the artist in question, Kathy Jo is on-topic.
Name an alt. newsgroup with a charter.
Phil Oliver
How many times do you have to ask that,? I already did name an alt
group with a charter in one of my earlier replies. Literally hundreds
of alt.* groups have charters, they are contained in the newgroup
message creating the group.
-Phil Oliver
Jeffrey Potoff
Phil Oliver wrote:
>
> On Sun, 15 Jun 1997 11:29:13 -0700, Buford Rochester
> <buf...@netpathway.com> wrote:
>
> >>Phil Oliver wrote:
> >>
> >> Also, I didn't "come up with" the idea of a charter. This is a basic
> >> newsgroup feature that is supposed to be included in the newgroup
> >> message and dictates what is on topic and appropriate for the group.
> >> Unless these newsgroups' charters have banned poetry/stories by fans
> >> of the artist in question, Kathy Jo is on-topic.
> >
> >
> >Name an alt. newsgroup with a charter.
>
> How many times do you have to ask that,? I already did name an alt
> group with a charter in one of my earlier replies. Literally hundreds
> of alt.* groups have charters, they are contained in the newgroup
> message creating the group.
Who cares ?! Whorella doesn't post anymore, problem solved. It
wouldn't
suprise me if she set all this in motion just so she could watch it and
laugh.
Jeff
Phil Oliver
On 14 Jun 1997 12:07:03 -0700, THE Jim Gallagher <bit...@spam.sux>
wrote:
>In article <33A2FA...@netpathway.com>, Buford says...
>
>>I was mocking your charter thing, that you came up with
>>after you told us there were no rules regarding post into
>>alt. newsgroups.
>>Does that refresh your memory???
>
>OK, not to make a mockery of this discussion, but I have a question:
>
>Does anyone know where the charters reside? I am not necessarily endorsing
>the idea that posters "must" or even should abide by them, but how can
>anyone even discuss them without reading the bloody things?
Did you send me e-mail about this? Someone sent me an e-mail asking
where charters can be found, but my mail server won't let me send mail
I cannot reply. Anyway, charters are found with the newgroup message
which creates the group. Certain newsgroups will archive their
charter along with their FAQ, and will either post it to the group
periodically or put it on a website. If the newsgroup you are looking
for doesn't do that, try searching on Dejanews for "cmsg newgroup
newsgroup.name" without the quotes and inserting the name of the
newsgroup you are looking for in place of newsgroup.name
-Phil Oliver
THE Jim Gallagher
In article <33a587dd...@news.enter.net>,
fel...@AEJSPAMBLOCKbiosys.net says...
>
>Did you send me e-mail about this? Someone sent me an e-mail asking
>where charters can be found, but my mail server won't let me send mail
>I cannot reply. Anyway, charters are found with the newgroup message
>which creates the group. Certain newsgroups will archive their
>charter along with their FAQ, and will either post it to the group
>periodically or put it on a website. If the newsgroup you are looking
>for doesn't do that, try searching on Dejanews for "cmsg newgroup
>newsgroup.name" without the quotes and inserting the name of the
>newsgroup you are looking for in place of newsgroup.name
>
>-Phil Oliver
Yup, t'was I. I took your advice and was able to find only one "cmsg"
post which I reproduce below. (I am removing the "from" because I don't
even know who it is, but you can find it yourself through Dejanews.)
The funny thing (Phil, did you KNOW this?) is that the only one I found is for
alt.fan.kathy-jo.
Well, here it is:
>Subject: cmsg rmgroup alt.fan.kathy-jo
>From: x...@xxx.net
>Date: 1995/07/29
>Message-Id: <3vbtm4$t...@hg.oro.net>
>Newsgroups: alt.config,alt.fan.kathy-jo.ctl
>
>not discussed in alt.config
>
>The orignal article was:
>> Path:
xxxnet!news.sprintlink.net!worldlinx.com!news.newedge.net!news.newedge.net!news
>> Date: 21 Jul 1995 13:29:43 ADT
>> From: ne...@news.newedge.net
>> Subject: cmsg newgroup alt.fan.kathy-jo
>> Control: newgroup alt.fan.kathy-jo
>> Newsgroups: alt.fan.kathy-jo.ctl
>> Message-ID: <news-alt.fan.kathy-jo-...@news.newedge.net>
>> Approved: news
>> Distribution: na
>> Lines: 3
>>
>> For your newsgroups file:
>> alt.fan.kathy-jo Fans of Kathy-Jo Kramer
>> Fans of Kathy-Jo Kramer
Considering that the charters of the other groups are unavailable, all we can
fairly say (again, if we are to assume that the charter defines the "topic")
is that any post in alt.fan.kathy-jo which is NOT from a FAN OF KATHY-JO
KRAMER, is off-topic and a form of net abuse which should be reported
immediately to the
proper authorities. Please notice that I have added
news.admin.net-abuse.usenet to the list of groups in the header so that
this message will act as an official notification to the Usenet community.
Crossposting "from" alt.fan.kathy-jo is fine, but crossposting "into" said
group by non-fans will not be tolerated. This group was started and
chartered as a place for the fans of kathyjo kramer and all you other
bastards are off-topic by definition, no matter what you say.
We, the true fans, (aka minions, cult-followers, sycophants, zealots,
slaves, thugs, and/or "posse") are the only ones allowed. Of course,
since none of you can come up with an authenticated charter for YOUR
groups, we, the jo slaves, can wander right in and say any damned thing we
please.
I hope to goodness that this ends this silly discussion.
BTW, anyone who wants to start a new group of their own should read the
above quoted message carefully. It has most of the magic words in it.
But, for God's sake, include a "charter" in the "For your newsgroups
file:" statement. I think you can now see just how important it can be!
Oh, one more thing. It seems to me that this entire thread is
"off-topic." It began as a post about laser tattoo removal. Since I
posted it, I have the right to say that everyone has to talk about that,
not about netiquette or anything else. It is extremely rude to just
change the subject without asking. I mean, as long as I am posting this
to news.admin.net-abuse.usenet, I just feel I should say mention it.
In fact, consider yourselves on notice. No matter what group they are
posted to, my posted messages are hereby declared "thread charters," and
any deviation from the "topic" shall be cause for serious reprimand.
Repeated violations will lead to a series of, as yet undetermined, but
increasingly severe, sanctions.
I am the King of My Posts and everyone has to pay attention to me and talk
about what I want to talk about and just do what I say.
So there.
love,
jim, sd
Buford Rochester
Phil Oliver wrote:
> >Name an alt. newsgroup with a charter.
> >
> I already did name an alt
> group with a charter in one of my earlier replies.
no you didn't.
Buford Rochester
Phil Oliver wrote:
>
> Did you send me e-mail about this? Someone sent me an e-mail asking
> where charters can be found, but my mail server won't let me send mail
> I cannot reply. Anyway, charters are found with the newgroup message
> which creates the group. Certain newsgroups will archive their
> charter along with their FAQ, and will either post it to the group
> periodically or put it on a website. If the newsgroup you are looking
> for doesn't do that, try searching on Dejanews for "cmsg newgroup
> newsgroup.name" without the quotes and inserting the name of the
> newsgroup you are looking for in place of newsgroup.name
>
> -Phil Oliver
So, we have to search deja news for this charter. This is more like the
quest for the holy grail. I think if it was that important, that we
would see it alot more in the newsgroups. I also think you would see it
in alt.config at least a little.
Phil Oliver
>Phil Oliver wrote:
>>
>> Did you send me e-mail about this? Someone sent me an e-mail asking
>> where charters can be found, but my mail server won't let me send mail
>> I cannot reply. Anyway, charters are found with the newgroup message
>> which creates the group. Certain newsgroups will archive their
>> charter along with their FAQ, and will either post it to the group
>> periodically or put it on a website. If the newsgroup you are looking
>> for doesn't do that, try searching on Dejanews for "cmsg newgroup
>> newsgroup.name" without the quotes and inserting the name of the
>> newsgroup you are looking for in place of newsgroup.name
>>
>> -Phil Oliver
>
>
>So, we have to search deja news for this charter. This is more like the
>quest for the holy grail.
No, we don't have to search deja news. If you want you could just
find the newsgroup labelled "control" and just hunt through there, but
you'd need a news server that goes back that far. There are other
ways to find charters, I'm just not sure which are accessible to all
and which are just accessible to news admins. I'll get back to you on
this one.
>I think if it was that important, that we
>would see it alot more in the newsgroups.
Some newsgroups repost their charter from time to time. Others
include it in the FAQ. These groups apparently don't.
>I also think you would see it in alt.config at least a little.
Sometimes people post the charter of their potential newsgroup to
alt.config.
-Phil Oliver