POST ANY E-MAIL you WANT TO -- NO RESTRICTIONS!
Stephen Boursy
Michael D. Phoenix <mic...@Xenon.Stanford.EDU> wrote:
>In article <DJqB4...@world.std.com>,
>Stephen Boursy <bou...@world.std.com> wrote:
>
>
>Why not just call him on the telephone? I'll even send you a few
>bucks to cover your phone bill, if it's too expensive for you.
>
>Or is this, as it appears to be, a thinly veiled threat of physical
>violence?
>
I've never threatened violence against Mr. Lewis. You've an
over active imaginantion. I do want to see what makes him tick, have
a personal chat with him, and discuss his behaviors with local press,
authorities and business.
>> What I said was given a choice between felons like Mr. Lewis
>>[deletia]
>> Yes--am well aware and more determined than ever. The ones
>>you need to be talking with are the Lewis's on the net and more
>>importantly the sys admins that honor cancels from this known
>>felon. They are the ones who have opened the Pandora's box--I'm
>
>Libel. Calling Mr. Lewis a "known felon" when he has never been
>convicted of a felony is libel.
>
Mr. Lewis is more than welcome to sue me for libel. I could
sue you for libel in fact for faulsely suggesting that I'm going
to commit violence against Lewis. You're a rather small mind. Of
course for Mr. Lewis to sue me he'd have to cross the US border which
I'd imagine he'll be avoiding.
>You do realize, don't you, that the FBI would probably be quite
>interested in hearing about your threats of physical violence and your
>libelous statements about Mr. Lewis?
>
Well I believe you already stated you were going to them. Good
for you!!! It calls more attention to this nonsense. Mr. Lewis belongs
in jail.
>Tell you what--why don't you go to the FBI and rant about cancels,
>which they've already stated they ignore--and I'll go to the FBI and
>show them your threats of physical violence and your libelous
>statements about Mr. Lewis.
>
>And we'll see who they're more interested in prosecuting.
>
Sounds good to me. Don't forget to leave out the state police--
they also have some jurisdiction.
Steve
Tim Skirvin
>this message is reposted because Tim Skirvin Blocked the first one:
I told you, all you have to do is make an agreement with me,
and I will allow you to post to alt.is.
>Sten -- being anti-Boursy means
>you are against Freedom of Speech.
*scribble*
- Tim Skirvin (tski...@uiuc.edu)
--
<a href="http://www.uiuc.edu/ph/www/tskirvin">Skirv's Homepage</a>
<a href="http://arh0062.urh.uiuc.edu/killfile.html">The Daemons</a>
Tom Evans
DrG <ma...@manus.org> wrote:
>Mickey is out of like for supporting forged
>content cancellations of any kind.
>content is sacrosanct. period.
>
>DrG
newsgroups really munged
-------------------------
Manus, suggesting *any* post you spew has 'content" is stretching the
definition of the term . I think you would be better suited to say
a carwash in Pittsburg.
Get an education boy - you're never going to make it in Wired writing
spewtum like this.
--
This program posts news to thousands of machines throughout the entire
civilized world. Your message will cost the net hundreds if not thousands
of dollars to send everywhere. Please be sure you know how to ?keyword?rh:m
Tom Evans
Stephen blablah Boursy blahblahed
>
>>And Chris Lewis is Canadian.
>>
>
>
> Yes--but those who conspire with him and honor his cancels are
>quite often in the US. And there are many cancels, including outright
>forgeries from others, which are honored within US borders. And that
>is a crime.
>
> Steve
stevie wonder - read this fast!!
FWD:
As "mickey" so apltly puts it......
From: mic...@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Michael D. Phoenix)
Re: POST ANY E-MAIL you WANT TO -- NO RESTRICTIONS!
Date: Thu Dec 21 19:04:11 EST 1995
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Lines: 67
You're lying again, Steve.
In article <DJwos...@world.std.com>,
Stephen Boursy <bou...@world.std.com> wrote:
>What really irritated me most about that cancel thought was that
>it wasn't even a legitimate one--
Steve. Let me put this simply.
The cancel was legitimate in every way, *regardless* of why it was
issued.
They could have put "Canceled because Steve Boursy is a pompous
windbag and full of shit." and it would still have been a legitimate
cancel.
And do you know *WHY* this is?
Because the cancel was for a post in a non-big-8/alt newsgroup, and
THEY GET TO MAKE THEIR OWN RULES ABOUT CANCELS.
And you broke one of them.
-snip-
You included in your post an advertisement for a "make money fast"
phone-calling pyramid scheme. That's an advertisement, and as such
it's banned on biz.*.
Deal with it.
-snip-
>I would hope that no one would honor cancels from this
>person' in the future--he's been proven to be discredible so there is
>no excuse.
He's proven to be acting according to the rules of his non-big-8/alt
newsgroup hierarchy, biz.*
You, on the other hand, have proven that you have absolutely no desire
nor ability to understand even the most basic facts about the
technology involved in getting your stupid, pointless, off-topic posts
spread around the net.
Idiot.
Mickey.
-EOF-
again....