Re: alt.dev.null alt.hackers

8 views
Skip to first unread message

John Doe

unread,
Sep 28, 2021, 10:58:14 PM9/28/21
to
Sn!pe wrote: "Silent followups are most impolite."

Op 29-9-2021 om 00:05 schreef Ï:
> John Doe <john...@freedom.nl.invalid> wrote:
>
>> From the alt.hackers faq:
>> {quote}
>> 3) Why can't I post to this group?
>>
>> Because we don't want you here <grin>. Actually, alt.hackers is a
>> moderated group, so you'll have to figure out how to get around the
>> moderator to post here. No, I'm not the moderator and you're not
>> going to find out who is. It is a trivial hack to post here, so you're
>> going to look really stupid if you mail me or anyone else on the group
>> asking how to do it. Figure it out for yourself! One caveat:
>> Please don't post a million test messages to the group. Use
>> alt.dev.null for testing purposes. It is set up just like
>> alt.hackers, and you won't look stupid if you post a million test
>> messages there. If you can post to alt.dev.null but can't post to
>> alt.hackers, tell your newsadmin that alt.dev.null is set up wrong on
>> your machines. Thanks to Andrew Gierth <and...@erlenstar.demon.co.uk>
>> for the current status of alt.dev.null!
>> {/quote}
>>
>> I can post in alt.dev.null but not in alt.hackers.
>> Seems alt.dev.null is set up wrong on your machines.
>>
>
> One wonders why...
>
> Could the bit-bucket possibly be treated as a special case on E-S?
> Selectivity in server configuration is a powerful and flexible tool.
Yes that could. Unfortunately that makes alt.dev.null useless for
testing if you can post in alt.hackers.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages