Well, it seems to be abating.

[Boyle_M_Owl]

It seems that some people have taken the hint.

I'm happy.

--
Dan

[pla]

BMO wrote:
> It seems that some people have taken the hint.

Hint, nothing.

Your NNTP black magic takes all the credit. Thank you.




- pla

[Z]

You read News via BMO's server?

If not, what NNTP magic are you talking about?

[Boyle M. Owl]

On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 17:58:54 -0700, Z <z...@no.spam> wrote:
> pla wrote:
>> Hint, nothing.
>> Your NNTP black magic takes all the credit. Thank you.
>
> You read News via BMO's server?
>
> If not, what NNTP magic are you talking about?

Well *most* people have taken the hint. A few stragglers (W3 for one)
have refused to listen.

There *is* a bit of usenet black magic going on.

Go read this again:

<Pine.LNX.4.58.04...@linux.local>

--
BMO

[Z]

Boyle M. Owl wrote:
> Go read this again:
> <Pine.LNX.4.58.04...@linux.local>

What is that? A message id?

[bmo]

Z wrote:

>> <Pine.LNX.4.58.04...@linux.local>
>
>
> What is that? A message id?

Absolutely.

--
BMO

[Z]

bmo wrote:
>>> <Pine.LNX.4.58.04...@linux.local>

> Absolutely.

Ok, I reread it.

Are you canceling posts written by others?

How is that possible?

[pla]

Z wrote:
> You read News via BMO's server?

Well, actually, I think I do (as long as he uses TMOK). Though
I don't think he admins it (at least, neither he not Dave ever
mentioned it if he does). :-)

> If not, what NNTP magic are you talking about?

I had the impression, from his post, that he issued a mass
header change (cancel/reissue?) for the offending posts to
remove alt.RI.

Perhaps I gave him too much credit? Either way, fewer annoying
posts from our crossposting friends today.



- pla

[bmo]

pla wrote:

> Well, actually, I think I do (as long as he uses TMOK). Though
> I don't think he admins it (at least, neither he not Dave ever
> mentioned it if he does). :-)

I use TMOK from time to time. I used it every day when I was net.homeless.

I doubt that Daver would ever let me admin NNTP. We do have a history.

> I had the impression, from his post, that he issued a mass
> header change (cancel/reissue?) for the offending posts to
> remove alt.RI.

I actually did it the right way, at first. I replied to EVERY THREAD,
cutting out alt.rhode_island, and scolding people for being sheep at
each and every posting.

Then I waited. Death kept pulling shit. W3 kept pulling shit. Fritz
was just clueless. I proceeded to post the riot act to
alt.politics.homosexuality et alia, notifying everyone that if stuff
kept up, I would forge-cancel every post that came up.

I have been doing so ever since then. The cancels are lost in the noise
of the groups. APH gets a thousand posts a day, or more.

Now, for why I think that being a vigilante is appropriate:

1. The FAQ points out that USENET is not what it used to be before the
Never Ending September. Third party cancelling used to be sternly
looked down upon. Spam, floods, gibberish, have changed the scene.

2. Third party cancellings are acceptable in harrassment, excessive
cross posting, off topic BS and group moderation, given that there is an
actual moderator. If anyone has a problem with me doing this (biniohas
may vote, but he better be pretty persuasive to get me to listen),
please email me at TMOK.

3. I'm tired of the BS. Filtering was costing me clock cycles, waiting
for alt.ri to load.

4. It was Lillibunny mentioning about the group going downhill and Tony
P mentioning that LB was at AOL and that AOL's filtering sucked. I got
my shining armor out of the closet.

> Perhaps I gave him too much credit? Either way, fewer annoying
> posts from our crossposting friends today.

I'll try to keep up with the BS.

--
Dan