comp.lang.c++.moderated status

[Richard]

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

FYI, I am working with Daveed Vandevoorde to revive moderation of
comp.lang.c++.moderated so we can all get away from the spam and the
trolls. Hopefully we can get moderation back online by January, 2018.
--
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book <http://tinyurl.com/d3d-pipeline>
The Terminals Wiki <http://terminals-wiki.org>
The Computer Graphics Museum <http://computergraphicsmuseum.org>
Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>

[Marcel Mueller]

On 07.12.17 00.20, Richard wrote:
> [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
>
> FYI, I am working with Daveed Vandevoorde to revive moderation of
> comp.lang.c++.moderated so we can all get away from the spam and the
> trolls. Hopefully we can get moderation back online by January, 2018.

From my experience the latency of moderated groups is more bothersome
than the junk posts that can be mostly filtered by blacklists. In fact a
common, /moderated filter list/ would be significantly more effective.
Too bad that there is no standard for that.


Marcel

[Rick C. Hodgin]

A while back I proposed us writing an add-on to Thunderbird which
would allow connection to a central database whereby individual
posts could be flagged as spam, as well as users, and then they
would either not appear in Thunderbird, or they would be shown
only in a special folder.

We are software developers. Such things are within our grasp.

--
Rick C. Hodgin

[Chris Vine]

Assuming you are the real Rick Hodgin, you have got one hell of a
nerve. The irony of your posting, and your own lack of self-knowledge,
is extraordinary. When you have written the software to which you
refer, you could call it the "Rick Hodgin spam filter" and pass into
history as being like the Oracle of Delphi: the only oracle (as far as I
am aware) to foretell its own demise.

[Rick C. Hodgin]

I am the real Rick. And none of you understand.

You all think the posts I make are spam, that I'm here because I enjoy
posting spam and making this intrusion into people's lives, like I in some
perverse way enjoy that intrusion.

The message of the cross is an offering by God. We could not save
ourselves from sin, so He came here to save us. He commands His
servants to go forth and teach about Him, but there is nothing given
to us to make anyone believe. Even He Himself will honor our choice,
even if that choice sends us to Hell.

The message of the cross is given for those who will be saved. It is
not given for other people, except as a witness against them in God's
final court.

All who wish to separate themselves from the message are free to do
so. The warning is: It will cost you your eternal soul.

--
Rick C. Hodgin

[Chris Vine]

On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 04:00:49 -0800 (PST)

"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c...@gmail.com> wrote:

[snip]

> I am the real Rick. And none of you understand.
>
> You all think the posts I make are spam, that I'm here because I
> enjoy posting spam and making this intrusion into people's lives,
> like I in some perverse way enjoy that intrusion.

[snip]

You have posted the elided text probably 100 times over the past year.
We do understand. We also understand that you are a nuisance, you are
one of the causes of the need for a moderated group, you have minimal
self-awareness, you lack regard for others and lo: verily I counsel
thee, that my teaching unto thee wast not minded to provoke thee to a
further posting of thy erstwhile utterings.[1]

Chris

You seem to like "unto"s and other archaic language. I hope this makes
the position clearer. This could be more pithily put as "fuck off".

[Rick C. Hodgin]

On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 7:23:49 AM UTC-5, Chris Vine wrote:
> You have posted the elided text probably 100 times over the past year.

> We do understand...

You are not the only readers / regulars in clc++. The message is
given for those who will hear, not those who won't.

You have the ability to ignore anyone's posts, and add people to
filters using apps like Thunderbird and Eternal September. In Google
Groups you can mark the thread spam and you'll never see it again.

You'll note I don't generally post in other threads, but only to
address questions or some related content.

My concerns are you do not realize that without Jesus forgiving your
sin, you are literally choosing a long running leap into eternal
Hellfire. Nobody wants that end. I keep holding onto hope because
for all who believe today, there was a yesterday they didn't. And it
is God who draws men to His Son, not me. I am obedient to Him and am
here when someone does come to believe.

You are very rude, Chris, using profanity toward me. Is that really the
way you want to be? To not only deny Christ, but also amp up in anti-
Christ activities?

It's about you, sin, Jesus, and eternity, Chris. Think about your end.

--
Rick C. Hodgin

[Öö Tiib]

On Thursday, 7 December 2017 14:37:36 UTC+2, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 7:23:49 AM UTC-5, Chris Vine wrote:
> > You have posted the elided text probably 100 times over the past year.
> > We do understand...
>
> You are not the only readers / regulars in clc++. The message is
> given for those who will hear, not those who won't.

Who they actually are? I once asked you, Rick, if you did
over all these years get any followers? You said then that
none, never. Have you at least got much positive feedback
from other Christians? I trust that it is also close to none.

Somehow you are unable to take under consideration that it
is your own repulsive behavior that scares everybody away.
Away from you and away from your God. Faith is easy to
lose and hard to gather when "messenger" is behaving so
rudely and unpleasantly.

I hope that if He really exist then He can forgive that to you.

[David Brown]

On 07/12/17 13:37, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 7:23:49 AM UTC-5, Chris Vine wrote:
>> You have posted the elided text probably 100 times over the past year.
>> We do understand...
>
> You are not the only readers / regulars in clc++. The message is
> given for those who will hear, not those who won't.
>

/Nobody/ here - or in any of the other technical newsgroups - wants to
hear your "message". Some readers are atheists or agnostics - they are
not interested in your cult. Some are Christians - they will stay
Christians, and not join your cult. Others have different religions -
they will not join your cult. In all the years I have seen you post
this drivel, I have only seen two or three people reply positively to
your religious "messages". Invariably these are people that don't know
you, have not seen your behaviour, and have misunderstood you.

Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that there really is someone
out there who might be interested in your "everyone but Rick is
possessed by the Devil" cult, and is willing to worship you and praise
you for your humbleness. Do you really think they have failed to get
the idea after your first 100 messages - but will suddenly "see the
light" on message 101 ?


Now, I welcome your C++ related posts as much as I welcome any other
on-topic post. But if ever there is a moderated group made here, you
can be confident that you will be the first person banned - unless you
change your posting habits.

[Real Troll]

On 06/12/2017 23:20, Richard wrote:
> [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

No we don't have the time to email you anything because it is not worth
it!!!!!!!!

>
> so we can all get away from the spam and the
> trolls.

I would think you could "get away from the spam and the trolls" if you
bothered to learn how to kill-file known trolls like yours faithfully!!!!

The major spammers here are the ones like you who keep replying to any
crap posted here. For example, there is absolutely no need to reply to
Rick idiot or Ramine bomber or Linux junkies or Mai-Wai-Chang. Just
kill-file them and the problem is solved but people like you are so lazy
to learn how to do this.

[Rick C. Hodgin]

On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 8:34:24 AM UTC-5, Öö Tiib wrote:
> On Thursday, 7 December 2017 14:37:36 UTC+2, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> > On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 7:23:49 AM UTC-5, Chris Vine wrote:
> > > You have posted the elided text probably 100 times over the past year.
> > > We do understand...
> >
> > You are not the only readers / regulars in clc++. The message is
> > given for those who will hear, not those who won't.
>
> Who they actually are?

Any who would come.

> I once asked you, Rick, if you did
> over all these years get any followers? You said then that
> none, never. Have you at least got much positive feedback
> from other Christians? I trust that it is also close to none.

To my knowledge, nobody has ever been saved through my outreach,
teaching, evangelism, or witness. I do receive periodic and regular
emails and messages from people citing their appreciation of my posts,
positive attitude, non-confrontational replies in the midst of attacks,
and so on.

> Somehow you are unable to take under consideration that it
> is your own repulsive behavior that scares everybody away.

I recognize that's how people view it, but it's not that. They are
repulsed by Jesus, by His condemnation of their sin. It is transferred
onto me as the messenger of that message.

Nobody walks away from Christianity because of my posts. They were
already on the road walking away, and in hearing His messages re-
posted through me, it just makes them walk faster.

> Away from you and away from your God. Faith is easy to
> lose and hard to gather when "messenger" is behaving so
> rudely and unpleasantly.
>
> I hope that if He really exist then He can forgive that to you.

The born again nature gives us fellowship with Him. We are literally
guided from within on many things.

The best natural way I've ever found to describe it is from this
episode of Star Trek Voyager, where Seven received a message from
one of her cranial communication implants. She receives a message
nobody else heard, and she conveys it verbally:

Begins at 1:50s:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CE_eprf2G4E&t=1m50s

We just have "ideas" or "thoughts" which occur to us regarding how
to proceed, what to say, what to do, what not to do. It is God's
Holy Spirit guiding our spirit to move here in this world.

The whole nature of man described in the Bible is true, Öö Tiib.
It is profound and beyond imagination because it's spirit.

I urge you and everyone else to seriously investigate it. Press
in and seek the truth.

--
Rick C. Hodgin

[Rick C. Hodgin]

On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 8:51:33 AM UTC-5, Real Troll wrote:
> ...For example, there is absolutely no need to reply to Rick idiot or...

I literally weep for you, Real Troll. You have no idea what's coming.
Your rebellious arrogance will overwhelm you and you will be utterly
destroyed.

If anyone cares about the person posting as "Real Troll," please re-
post this message so he/she will read it. There is still hope to hear
the message before we leave this world. But after we leave this world,
if we have rejected the offer of forgiveness of sin by Jesus Christ,
then that is it for us. Our lives are ended, and our entire eternal
future is in the lake of fire because of our love of sin, and our
rejection of truth.

--
Rick C. Hodgin

[Chris Vine]

On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 04:37:08 -0800 (PST)

"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c...@gmail.com> wrote:
[snip]

> You are very rude, Chris, using profanity toward me. Is that really
> the way you want to be? To not only deny Christ, but also amp up in
> anti- Christ activities?

HOW DARE YOU say I "deny Christ". Disagreeing with your off topic
posting is not "denying Christ", nor is it "anti-Christ activities".
You are making gross assumptions based on your own self-absorption and
your conviction that only you and your narrow and obsessive version of
Christianity counts as "true".

I am rude to you, in the hope that that might break through your shell
of self-absorption. I hope not to respond to you often, but when I do I
fully intend to be rude again.

[Chris Vine]

On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 06:15:16 -0800 (PST)
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 8:34:24 AM UTC-5, Öö Tiib wrote:

[snip]

> > Somehow you are unable to take under consideration that it
> > is your own repulsive behavior that scares everybody away.
>
> I recognize that's how people view it, but it's not that. They are
> repulsed by Jesus, by His condemnation of their sin. It is
> transferred onto me as the messenger of that message.

No, people are repulsed by you and your behaviour. Most religious
people are already well aware of their shortcomings. Sadly, you are
not.

[Rick C. Hodgin]

A tree is known by its fruit. The outer behavior of the man reveals
his inner heart condition, and explicitly his regard to Jesus Christ,
and sin.

As such, it is not I who say you deny Christ ... it is you in your
public proclamation.

--
Rick C. Hodgin

[Cholo Lennon]

On 06/12/17 20:20, Richard wrote:
> [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
>
> FYI, I am working with Daveed Vandevoorde to revive moderation of
> comp.lang.c++.moderated so we can all get away from the spam and the
> trolls. Hopefully we can get moderation back online by January, 2018.
>

Kudos to you! It would be nice just to discuss C++ and programming
related topics.

Best regards

--
Cholo Lennon
Bs.As.
ARG

[Scott Lurndal]

Judge not, lest ye be judged.

Asshole.

[Rick C. Hodgin]

On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 11:17:48 AM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> Judge not, lest ye be judged.

Have you ever seen this?

https://brotylercampbell.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/judge-not-scribble.jpg

Is it like that in your Bible? If not, you should read some more
passages. The teaching is comprehensive. Ir even includes this:

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+2%3A15&version=KJV

15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he
himself is judged of no man.

The gospel message is simple to understand. The correct application
of Biblical teaching requires devotion, and study.

--
Rick C. Hodgin

[K. Frank]

Hello Richard (and Group)!

Hear, hear!

On Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 6:20:43 PM UTC-5, Richard wrote:
>
> FYI, I am working with Daveed Vandevoorde to revive moderation of
> comp.lang.c++.moderated so we can all get away from the spam and the
> trolls. Hopefully we can get moderation back online by January, 2018.
>

Thank you Richard and Daveed. I hope your efforts to resurrect comp.lang.c++.moderated come to fruition.

If I may make a suggestion: Perhaps the moderated group could be
a bit more lightly moderated than in the past. This might reduce
the burden on the moderators and speed up the moderation process.

I would be willing to help with moderation, at least to the extent
of rejecting (or eliding) obviously off-topic noise.


Best regards.


K. Frank

[James R. Kuyper]

On 12/07/2017 02:08 AM, Marcel Mueller wrote:
> On 07.12.17 00.20, Richard wrote:
>> [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
>>
>> FYI, I am working with Daveed Vandevoorde to revive moderation of
>> comp.lang.c++.moderated so we can all get away from the spam and the
>> trolls. Hopefully we can get moderation back online by January, 2018.
>
> From my experience the latency of moderated groups is more bothersome

> than the junk posts that can be mostly filtered by blacklists. ...
The people whose messages I normally want to monitor will frequently
respond to messages that I don't want to see. The filters I'm familiar
with don't make it easy to filter out those responses. A moderator who
would prevent the messages I don't want to see from ever showing up in
the first place would also incidentally eliminate the responses.

I agree that latency is the key issue. I think that getting the latency
down to no more than perhaps 3 hours is necessary to making a moderated
newsgroup an acceptable alternative to an unmoderated one - but I gather
that this would require a team of moderators working in coordinated shifts.

[Ian Collins]

On 12/07/2017 12:20 PM, Richard wrote:
> [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
>
> FYI, I am working with Daveed Vandevoorde to revive moderation of
> comp.lang.c++.moderated so we can all get away from the spam and the
> trolls. Hopefully we can get moderation back online by January, 2018.

If you need someone to cover the GMT+12 timezone, just ask.

--
Ian

[Richard]

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Marcel Mueller <news.5...@spamgourmet.org> spake the secret code
<p0apcq$p3m$1...@gwaiyur.mb-net.net> thusly:

> From my experience the latency of moderated groups is more bothersome
>than the junk posts that can be mostly filtered by blacklists.

The problem with blacklists is that the trolls and spammers keep using
new identities and for some people not *everything* they say is
worthless. I don't see how a moderation delay impacts your experience
as a reader. You see stuff show up after moderation, so how is that
different from seeing it after someone posts it? You can't predict
when someone will post.

[Richard]

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

"K. Frank" <kfran...@gmail.com> spake the secret code
<36c2f99b-3b57-42c3...@googlegroups.com> thusly:

>If I may make a suggestion: Perhaps the moderated group could be
>a bit more lightly moderated than in the past. This might reduce
>the burden on the moderators and speed up the moderation process.

Given the reduced traffic, moderation shouldn't be a heavy burden.
The point is just to keep the trolls and spam out.

[James R. Kuyper]

On 12/07/2017 01:38 PM, Richard wrote:
...

> worthless. I don't see how a moderation delay impacts your experience
> as a reader. You see stuff show up after moderation, so how is that
> different from seeing it after someone posts it? You can't predict
> when someone will post.

It's hard to maintain the proper flow of conversation when the response
is delayed 3 days from the time it was sent (which I've seen happen in
some moderated newsgroups).

Another issue is multiple responses: one person sends a message, and 20
people want to respond. In an unmoderated newsgroup, three of those
people respond quickly, and the other 17 would have posted later, but
they see that the point they wanted to make has already been made, so
they don't bother posting a response. In a moderated group, all 20 of
those people will send a response, many of them covering the same points
as other people, because none of them see anyone else's response. I've
seen this pattern many times in the moderated newsgroups I've monitored.
It's particularly common if someone makes a mistake so simple that most
of the people monitoring the newsgroup know the correct answer. A couple
of dozen responses that all say "No, it doesn't work that way because
size_t is unsigned" can get pretty boring.

[Marcel Mueller]

On 07.12.17 19.28, James R. Kuyper wrote:
> On 12/07/2017 02:08 AM, Marcel Mueller wrote:
>> From my experience the latency of moderated groups is more bothersome
>> than the junk posts that can be mostly filtered by blacklists. ...
> The people whose messages I normally want to monitor will frequently
> respond to messages that I don't want to see. The filters I'm familiar
> with don't make it easy to filter out those responses.

In my news reader (quite old Thunderbird) the relevant filter action is
called "Ignore subthread". This excludes any troll feeder as well.

> I agree that latency is the key issue. I think that getting the latency
> down to no more than perhaps 3 hours is necessary to making a moderated
> newsgroup an acceptable alternative to an unmoderated one - but I gather
> that this would require a team of moderators working in coordinated shifts.

Ack. You just argued why I unsubscribed from all moderated groups.


Marcel

[Chris Vine]

On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 18:39:52 +0000 (UTC)
legaliz...@mail.xmission.com (Richard) wrote:
> [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
>
> "K. Frank" <kfran...@gmail.com> spake the secret code
> <36c2f99b-3b57-42c3...@googlegroups.com> thusly:
>
> >If I may make a suggestion: Perhaps the moderated group could be
> >a bit more lightly moderated than in the past. This might reduce
> >the burden on the moderators and speed up the moderation process.
>
> Given the reduced traffic, moderation shouldn't be a heavy burden.
> The point is just to keep the trolls and spam out.

But it does need to happen without too much delay. 3 hours is good to
aim at. In the latter days of comp.lang.c++.moderated it could take a
day to get a post moderated.

I am happy to help if there is a shortage.

As a side note I don't think that moderators need to know a great deal
about C++. They just need to have reasonable judgement.

[Richard]

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

"James R. Kuyper" <james...@verizon.net> spake the secret code
<94d0d6f6-0bc5-295f...@verizon.net> thusly:

>It's hard to maintain the proper flow of conversation when the response
>is delayed 3 days from the time it was sent (which I've seen happen in
>some moderated newsgroups).

That's a fair point. All I can say is that we will attempt to
minimize delays in approving appropriate posts. The infrastructure is
setup to handle multiple moderators allowing for sufficient
concurrency across time zones that I don't expect there to be any
significant delays due to moderation.

After all, when you subtract out the spam and the trolling, there are
only a handfull of messages a day in this unmoderated forum.

[Richard]

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk> spake the secret code
<20171207192...@bother.homenet> thusly:

>As a side note I don't think that moderators need to know a great deal
>about C++. They just need to have reasonable judgement.

Agreed. Again, we're just talking about keeping out the spam and the
off-topic trolling.

[Richard]

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Marcel Mueller <news.5...@spamgourmet.org> spake the secret code

<p0c4ig$v2u$1...@gwaiyur.mb-net.net> thusly:

Of course reading the moderated group is totally up to the individual.

Me, I'm going to have it worse, because now I will have to see all
those junk posts as a moderator :)

"Time to take one for the team."

[James R. Kuyper]

On 12/07/2017 02:25 PM, Marcel Mueller wrote:
> On 07.12.17 19.28, James R. Kuyper wrote:
>> On 12/07/2017 02:08 AM, Marcel Mueller wrote:
>>> From my experience the latency of moderated groups is more bothersome
>>> than the junk posts that can be mostly filtered by blacklists. ...
>> The people whose messages I normally want to monitor will frequently
>> respond to messages that I don't want to see. The filters I'm familiar
>> with don't make it easy to filter out those responses.
>
> In my news reader (quite old Thunderbird) the relevant filter action is
> called "Ignore subthread". This excludes any troll feeder as well.

Thanks for pointing that out. I hadn't noticed that option before,
possibly because it doesn't quite do what I want: if someone posts a
message I don't want to see, that prompts a conversation between two
people whose messages I do want to see, I'd like to see that
conversation. "Ignore subthread" (assuming it's name means what it seems
to mean) would ignore that conversation. However, missing a small number
of messages I do want to see might be a price worth paying for skipping
a lot of messages I don't want to see. I'll give it a try.

[Jorgen Grahn]

On Thu, 2017-12-07, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 2:08:31 AM UTC-5, Marcel Mueller wrote:

>> On 07.12.17 00.20, Richard wrote:
>> > [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
>> >

>> > FYI, I am working with Daveed Vandevoorde to revive moderation of
>> > comp.lang.c++.moderated so we can all get away from the spam and the
>> > trolls. Hopefully we can get moderation back online by January, 2018.
>>

>> From my experience the latency of moderated groups is more bothersome

>> than the junk posts that can be mostly filtered by blacklists. In fact a
>> common, /moderated filter list/ would be significantly more effective.
>> Too bad that there is no standard for that.
>
> A while back I proposed us writing an add-on to Thunderbird which
> would allow connection to a central database whereby individual
> posts could be flagged as spam, as well as users, and then they
> would either not appear in Thunderbird, or they would be shown
> only in a special folder.

Make that:
- designing a file format similar to the slrn score file format
- write various converters from this score file format to whatever
actual newsreaders use
- see people set up Git repositories with such files

But I suspect that's pretty much Marcel's proposal.

> We are software developers. Such things are within our grasp.

Yes. I don't think I'd use it, though. Killfiling is, to me, mostly
a private activity. I don't trust others to do it for me, and I
wouldn't want others to trust me.

/Jorgen

--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .

[Rick C. Hodgin]

On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 4:18:31 PM UTC-5, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
> > We are software developers. Such things are within our grasp.
>
> Yes. I don't think I'd use it, though. Killfiling is, to me, mostly
> a private activity. I don't trust others to do it for me, and I
> wouldn't want others to trust me.

The idea isn't to have people auto-killfile for you, but if multiple
people mark a particular post or user, it could lend credence to the
thing being valid. We could also set it up so that you can set a
trust factor from other user's suggestions. If your colleague Bill
marks something spam, well you know Bill and if he marks it spam it
probably is spam, so you place a 90% confidence on him. But for me
marking something spam, you don't know me, you don't know if my view
for spam is correct or not, so you give me a 5% confidence, etc.

It's all workable ... just a little brainstorming.

--
Rick C. Hodgin

[David Brown]

Yes, that is exactly what the "ignore subthread" option does. I have it
on some filters for spam-bots, where the "poster" is clearly a program.
As you say, it will filter out threads where a unwanted poster has
inspired a more interesting conversation, usually by accident.
Personally, I am quite quick at running through the latest posts - and
if necessary, pressing "k" or "shift-k" for "kill thread" and "kill
sub-thread" manually. It's a personal choice how you want to do it, and
where you draw your lines - but the tools are there to help.

My own judgement of when a thread is off-topic or inappropriate is based
on contributions - if there are a number of people (3 at a minimum)
making posts in the thread, excluding posts complaining about
topicality, language, etc., then it is a thread of interest to members
of the group. And surely that must make it at least somewhat topical -
a Usenet group is (or should be) defined by the preferences and
interests of its members, rather than the title of the group. It is
first and foremost a community.

[Alf P. Steinbach]

On 12/7/2017 8:29 PM, Chris Vine wrote:
>
> As a side note I don't think that moderators need to know a great deal
> about C++. They just need to have reasonable judgement.

Well, good knowledge certainly helps to avoid mishaps.

One example: in a clc++m debate becoming a little heated, involving one
very well known person, another one chose to mispel his name with just
one character replaced, so that it referred to the male sexual organ.
And with that mispeling it was still a common English surname. But
apparent to all who saw that well known person's real name in the quote.

Another example: an even more well known C++ authority once had a period
of apparent stressful work load, or illness, whatever, and posted code
with a `reinterpret_cast<double>(an_int)` (or like that), plus some more
silliness, as intended to be valid code. I mailed him and asked him to
ask us to reject that posting, and that's what we did. Happy ending, but
it could e.g. have affected that person's standing vis-a-vis ignorant
students.

But in general the moderator's job is just to reduce or avoid noise, and
not judge technical content at all. I must plead guilty to sometimes
inserting a moderator's note bringing indisputable facts to the table,
such as quote from the standard. Guilty because that implicitly is a
judgment of the accuracy or completeness of the technical content, but
it's also a judgment based on experience about a probable avalanche of
correctional follow-ups citing the relevant fact, noise resulting from
letting that content be posted without a mod note of fact.

A typical sign of noise ahead, in the context of the purely technical
postings that were the norm in clc++m, is that a posting is peppered
with the word “you”; then it might be heading in a personal direction.


Cheers!,

- Alf

[James Kuyper]

On 12/07/2017 03:38 PM, Richard wrote:
...

> Me, I'm going to have it worse, because now I will have to see all
> those junk posts as a moderator :)

I would expect that you'd see far fewer such posts in a moderated
newsgroup, because many people won't bother posting them in places where
they won't be seen.

[woodb...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 8:55:06 PM UTC-6, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
> On 12/7/2017 8:29 PM, Chris Vine wrote:
> >
> > As a side note I don't think that moderators need to know a great deal
> > about C++. They just need to have reasonable judgement.
>
> Well, good knowledge certainly helps to avoid mishaps.
>
> One example: in a clc++m debate becoming a little heated, involving one
> very well known person, another one chose to mispel his name with just
> one character replaced, so that it referred to the male sexual organ.
> And with that mispeling it was still a common English surname. But
> apparent to all who saw that well known person's real name in the quote.
>
> Another example: an even more well known C++ authority once had a period
> of apparent stressful work load, or illness, whatever, and posted code
> with a `reinterpret_cast<double>(an_int)` (or like that), plus some more
> silliness, as intended to be valid code. I mailed him and asked him to
> ask us to reject that posting, and that's what we did. Happy ending, but
> it could e.g. have affected that person's standing vis-a-vis ignorant
> students.
>

Probably your example predates Github. I think newsgroup posts
mattered more before Github. Now you can refer people to your
Github projects, and it's understood that that's your best work.


Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises - In G-d we trust.
http://webEbenezer.net

[Daniel]

Unless they feel compelled to save the souls of the moderators, of course.

[Alf P. Steinbach]

On 12/8/2017 11:57 AM, Stefan Ram wrote:

> "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.stein...@gmail.com> writes:
>> A typical sign of noise ahead, in the context of the purely technical
>> postings that were the norm in clc++m, is that a posting is peppered
>> with the word “you”; then it might be heading in a personal direction.
>

> The moderation of one such group (clc++m or clcm) changed
> the contents of my posts, by changing the indentation from
> 2 to 3 in some cases. The moderation did not allow a post to
> demonstrate and discuss this in the moderated group.

Postings about the moderation policy are (or were) always on-topic in
clc++m. This was stated several times by the mods in commentary on
postings, but apparently it's not explicitly stated in ¹the online
moderation policy. I guess it would not be easy to get Herb to modify it
now, but I think that ideally it should be stated there.

That said, since 2012 I did not participate in the active moderation,
because I got too ill, moved to northern Norway with extremely low
bandwidth net access, and started on a series of surgery. Well, after an
experimental horses cure that originally was devised for tuberculosis,
and which was supposed to make me urinate blood, but failed to do that.
Amazingly that was the year, without a job and without really doing
anything for the community, that I got an MVP award from Microsoft.

Hm.


> One really should not publish something that someone did /not/
> wrote (like code with an indentation of 3) under his name.
There was always two main problems with code formatting, namely too
long lines, and – and I still do not know where the blank lines came
from – double spacing, with every second line blank. This sometimes
necessitated reformatting code. I guess someone must have done that with
your code, fixed it for posting, and inadvertently changed the indents.

The moderation policy recommends max 70 columns in a source code line,
giving some leeway for quoting.


Cheers!

- Alf

Links:
¹<url: http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm#Posting>

[leigh.v....@googlemail.com]

Someone, for example Rick C. Hodgin, who spams c.l.c++ should be automatically added to the c.l.c++.m moderation killfile.

/Leigh

[Real Troll]

The sooner that idiot called Richard goes the better it will be for the
man-kind here. He has generated more spam than Rick or his imposter has
managed in the last 7 days. In fact I haven't seen any of the posts
from Religious Rick or his imposter because my filter did its work. All
the spam I saw were from idiots and nutters responding to him or his
imposter (Mai-Wai-Chang) and, of course, Richard, who started a thread
that generated more rubbish.

I'll rather see all the nutters go to whatever moderated NG they go to
so that we can have serious discussions here.

[Rick C. Hodgin]

> Rick C. Hodgin ... should be automatically added to the c.l.c++.m
> moderation killfile.

I do not post religious messages to moderated lists. You can verify
this by contacting Frank Kotler from comp.lang.asm.x86. I had me on
his whitelist for many months, and while I post other places I do not
post there because he's asked me explicitly not to previously as the
moderator. I honored that request as he is the moderator of the group.

It was not until the recent attacks against me (by Peter Cheung and by
you) that Peter posted under my identity to that group, which caused a
huge uproar and a call for me being banned from the group.

Fortunately Frank Kotler was knowledgeable enough to look at the
headers and he knew it didn't come from me. You can read about it
here:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.asm.x86/05o5L5YTHXQ/82DQgjBeAAAJ

People do not seem to understand my purpose in teaching about Jesus
Christ. Jesus came to this Earth to offer us something. When born,
we're headed to Hell for sin, both original sin and our own sin.

Jesus came here so we could have a way out of that end. The enemy of
God, Satan -- who is also on his way to Hell, works very hard to keep
us from that knowledge. He makes Christianity look undesirable by
encouraging people to do horrible things in Christ's name, so that we
short-sighted, non-truth-seeking people will take a quick glance, look
only at the surface, and conclude that those heinous things done in
Christ's name are what Christianity is all about. We will then have
ample reason to run as far away from those heinous things as possible.
Of course, we were fooled by the liar Satan into believing a lie be-
cause Jesus Christ is not those things. What Jesus offers people is
not those things. What Jesus teaches us is not those things. What
He offers us is what we need, and it is far far far better.

Only born again Christians will teach you the truth, and even then
you have to go to scripture yourself to verify that we're also not
making mistakes because that spiritual wicked enemy Satan is real,
and he does not stop his attacks. For born again Christians, he even
steps them up many notches.

We all have the opportunity to be saved. That is the message. There
are no rituals to undergo, no mountains to climb, valleys to traverse.
We simply come to Jesus acknowledging you are a sinner and ask forgive-
ness. He does the rest.

The message is not to be forced upon people. It's offered. It's off-
ered to anyone and everyone who will hear. The Bible even says, "Who-
soever will, let him/her come and partake..."

People are free to blacklist me, move from this group to a moderated
group so they can escape the message... or whatever else they choose.
The offer has been made. The teaching has gone forth. My work here
to each of you has been completed. And where I continue, it is for
the next guy that happens into the group.

But if each of you who have heard this message never read another thing
I write, then I'm fine with that because I will stand before God having
warned you. I will be innocent of your blood.

--
Rick C. Hodgin

[Mr Flibble]

On 08/12/2017 14:57, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
>> Rick C. Hodgin ... should be automatically added to the c.l.c++.m
>> moderation killfile.
>
> I do not post religious messages to moderated lists. You can verify

You conveniently snipped part of that post so I will repeat the message
here:

You should be banned from moderated newsgroups due to your off-topic
spamming of the non-moderated equivalents of those newsgroups (such as
this newsgroup).

Saying you don't spam moderated newsgroups isn't saying much because the
spam wouldn't get past the moderation anyway.

I hope you mean what you say and that you have finished spamming this
newsgroup. Either way: piss off mate.

[snip;tldr]

/Flibble

[Rick C. Hodgin]

On Friday, December 8, 2017 at 10:24:42 AM UTC-5, Mr Flibble wrote:
> [snip]

I apologize. I didn't mean to reply to you, Leigh.

I began the reply to you, but then I remembered you asked me to
not be a part of your life. So, I edited my post and tried to make
it a neutral reply, taking out all references to you. But, I missed
one. For that, I apologize, and I now write this reply to correct
that oversight, and remind you of our relationship.

I am free of your blood, Leigh. I have brought you the message
of Jesus Christ and you have rejected both Him, and me.

I wish you well in your life, Leigh. I will not be replying to
you any further after this post.

--
Rick C. Hodgin

[james...@verizon.net]

On Friday, December 8, 2017 at 9:57:30 AM UTC-5, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> > Rick C. Hodgin ... should be automatically added to the c.l.c++.m
> > moderation killfile.
>
> I do not post religious messages to moderated lists.

Well, that makes sense. My previous Google Group searches have suggested (Google
Groups searches are too flaky to "confirm" anything) that you only post to
newsgroups where religious messages are off-topic. In particular, that implies
that you never post religious messages to moderated newsgroups where they would
be on-topic. And if you posted such messages to a moderated newsgroup where
they'd be off-topic, the moderators would have rejected them, which would be a
waste of your time. So I find that claim to be entirely believable.

> People do not seem to understand my purpose in teaching about Jesus
> Christ.

You're confusing the fact that people disagree with you with a failure of those
people to understand you. If you think you're infallible, that's a logical
conclusion to make - but thinking that you're infallible would be a sign of
insanity. You're not even the Pope, much less God Himself, and it's presumptuous
of you to think that you perfectly understand the truth about Him, and therefore
that anyone who disagrees with you must not have understood you.

Most of us, I suspect, understand your purpose perfectly well. However, some of
us don't believe in any God, and consider you mistaken on those grounds. Others
believe in a different God or Gods than you do, and consider you mistaken by
reason of your belief in a false God. Others believe in a God that you might
both identify as the same God, but have a different understanding than you have
about what that God wants us to do, and consider you mistaken on those grounds.
And still others might even share exactly your beliefs, except for realizing, as
you do not, that your promotion of those beliefs in inappropriate forums is
counter-productive. However, most of us are united in our belief that discussion
of such issues should occur only in appropriate forums, and this isn't one of
them.

[fir]

W dniu piątek, 8 grudnia 2017 14:41:44 UTC+1 użytkownik leigh.v....@googlemail.com napisał:
> Someone, for example Rick C. Hodgin, who spams c.l.c++ should be automatically added to the c.l.c++.m moderation killfile.
>
> /Leigh

thats rght, group dont need a constand moderation, it just need the option to killfile 2 spammers: idiot hodgin and idiot ramine.. no need for any other work

[Rick C. Hodgin]

On Friday, December 8, 2017 at 11:42:13 AM UTC-5, james...@verizon.net wrote:
> On Friday, December 8, 2017 at 9:57:30 AM UTC-5, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> > > Rick C. Hodgin ... should be automatically added to the c.l.c++.m
> > > moderation killfile.
> >
> > I do not post religious messages to moderated lists.
>
> Well, that makes sense. My previous Google Group searches have suggested (Google
> Groups searches are too flaky to "confirm" anything) that you only post to
> newsgroups where religious messages are off-topic. In particular, that implies
> that you never post religious messages to moderated newsgroups where they would
> be on-topic.

I have never posted in religion-oriented groups.

> And if you posted such messages to a moderated newsgroup where
> they'd be off-topic, the moderators would have rejected them, which would be a
> waste of your time. So I find that claim to be entirely believable.

If you'd try to understand me then it would be made clear to you:

I am a Christian.
I was transformed from the inside out by God in 2004 when I was saved.
I was unprepared for what would happen to me. I didn't expect it.
I sat in awe as I watched my life change over many months.
I am still in awe to this day 13+ years later.

Because I've been changed, my polarity is now toward God, toward His
teachings, toward truth, toward righteousness. I still have to fight
the "old man" of my flesh, which wars against me constantly. But from
within, only a new Rick exists now.

As such, where I am I am teaching people about Christ. At work. At
home. At the grocery store. In line at the Post Office. At the
hardware store. Oh, and when I go to the areas I have some personal
interest in online, which are exclusively C, C++, assembly, hardware
architecture, and FPGA groups. I also have interests in Visual
FoxPro, but I don't post there often as I don't really frequent the
groups any longer, and my own projects, which are naturally teaching
about Jesus Christ in all aspects.

My life is not a mystery. People just won't take the time to get an
understanding of me. They cast summary conclusions upon me and my
actions based on what they've seen in other people before.

I am not other people. I am me. And I testify to the change which took
place within me. I made a video about it almost 10 years ago:

Seeing Jesus' Eyes in November, 2003 (it was actually the
night of October 31, 2003 into November 1, 2003):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ivvvs8ZqPUA

The message I teach is this:

(1) You (generic) have sin.
(2) You will be judged by God for your sin, be found guilty, and
cast into Hellfire for all eternity because sin is that heinous.
(3) God does not want that end for you, so He sent His Son to come
and take away your sin.
(4) All who come to Him asking forgiveness are forgiven, and will
not enter in to judgment, but have passed (past tense) into
eternal life.

The message is there for all to receive. It is important. It is more
important than other things. It's why I teach it.

--
Rick C. Hodgin

[Mr Flibble]

On 08/12/2017 16:55, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> Because I've been changed, my polarity is now toward God, toward His
> teachings, toward truth, toward righteousness. I still have to fight

Toward *self-righteousness* you mean.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ks7AwE3Xpfk

[snip]

/Flibble

[Gareth Owen]

Mr Flibble <flibbleREM...@i42.co.uk> writes:

> On 08/12/2017 14:57, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
>>> Rick C. Hodgin ... should be automatically added to the c.l.c++.m
>>> moderation killfile.
>>
>> I do not post religious messages to moderated lists. You can verify
>
> You conveniently snipped part of that post so I will repeat the
> message here:

Also, doesn't Rick's restraint in that regard offer evidence that he
knows that what he's doing is wrong? Shouldn't someone who truly
believe they were doing God's work spam everywhere equally strongly?

[Rick C. Hodgin]

On Friday, December 8, 2017 at 11:56:05 AM UTC-5, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> Because I've been changed, my polarity is now toward God, toward His
> teachings, toward truth, toward righteousness. I still have to fight
> the "old man" of my flesh, which wars against me constantly. But from
> within, only a new Rick exists now.

Anyone who purports some degree of self-righteousness coming from Rick
is sadly mistaken. I am not self-righteous. I am a flawed person.

In November, 2007 I went to go spend Thanksgiving with a group of
missionaries in Missouri (I'm from Indiana). We prepared a rental
property, made food, and served around 200 meals to local people who
had no opportunity to have a Thanksgiving with family or friends.

It was the most moving thing I've ever been a part of. I was in
tears there in the rental property watching it all transpire. I
had never been so moved with an outpouring of love by all the vol-
unteers.

I went to go and visit them again near New Year's, and in my full
zealousness to be righteous Rick, God let me go through a painful
lesson.

As it turned out the group I was with were a cult. I was only there
a few weeks off and on over three months, but it was enough to get
my thinking so twisted around. My wife and I separated, I went to
go and live with another woman telling everyone she was my wife, and
even believing in my heart she was because I told myself, "It doesn't
matter if you have a piece of paper or not. My wife had a piece of
paper, and she was no wife. Just because you call yourself a Christ-
ian even, it doesn't mean you are one. And this woman I'm with now
loves me more than my wife did, and she loves God."

I continued in that adulterous relationship for 15 months off-and-on
as she and I would separate from time to time.

It was so hurtful. That time of my life took its toll on me and I
am still, approaching 10 years on, in recovery from those events. My
life is still impacted in every way by what took place during that
time. But, I was a true and faithful servant of God before I went
out there for that Thanksgiving, and I have been a true and faithful
servant of God since then. But during that time I let my pride and
personal lusts get ahead of my walk with God, and it cost me dearly.

Since then (June 2009) I have been back on the road to recovery. Still
harmed, still hurting, still even harming other people I later learned.
But my focus has been upon the Lord, upon a true and proper walk before
Him. I spend a great deal of time studying the Bible, listening to a
wide variety of teachers, going to church and Bible Study groups, and
so on. And my life lived is in purposeful, conscious choices toward
service to Him.

-----
You will not ever see me pointing people to me. I can testify to you
that I need Jesus as much as anyone, and even more, for I am riddled
with sin and guilt and without Christ I too would be cast into the
eternal Lake of Fire. But because of who He is, because He came to
save us, because I sought the truth, and even in my later folly,
fumbles, mis-steps, and outright collapses, yet has He held on to me,
and carried me in my life.

I owe Him everything, and then some. And I teach everyone about Him
because I am no better than anyone else. I need Him just as much as
everyone does. And since I have found Him, I know what it means to
be on that side (before faith) and this side of faith, and the change
is real ... for all who are born again.

We can still stumble. We can still fall. But if we are born again,
we will not remain down in the muck, and the Lord will come for us
and bring us back (you should ask me about my testimony of how the
Lord rescued me from the 15 month affair ... it was amazing in that
I could not have even gone back if I wanted to. He separated me long
enough to come back to my senses).

-----
In any event, I need Jesus just like everyone else. I have found Him,
which is why I now teach about Him. He is what all people need world-
wide.

Other religions are tools of the enemy designed to appeal to our flesh,
to give us rituals and works to do. Only Christ can take away our sin
and make us born again.

Napoleon discovered the true nature of Christ, and wrote about it:

(About half way down where it starts in English again)
http://biblehub.com/library/schaff/the_person_of_christ/napoleon_bonaparte.htm

--
Rick C. Hodgin

[Rick C. Hodgin]

On Friday, December 8, 2017 at 12:11:42 PM UTC-5, gwowen wrote:
> Also, doesn't Rick's restraint in that regard offer evidence that he
> knows that what he's doing is wrong? Shouldn't someone who truly
> believe they were doing God's work spam everywhere equally strongly?

I honor people who have control over something, as that control was not
given them by accident. But the voices of those who are lost shouting,
"No! Stop! Don't teach that!" in the open forums ... I will not listen
to those voices because they are raising their voices for one purpose:
to prevent people from hearing the gospel message.

The message will go forth. People are free to ignore it. But, and not
just here on clc++, but indeed in all the Earth, Christians will raise
their voices and teach people of their sin, their need to be forgiven
for that sin, lest they enter in to eternal Hellfire after they die,
being found guilty of their sin before a Holy, Holy, Holy God.

The message is important. It's more important than other things. It
will not be stopped from being spoken by born again Christians ... at
least not until they are taken from this Earth.

--
Rick C. Hodgin

[fir]

dick is idiot, his brain dont work well (euphamistically speaking), (he is also "bad idiot" he is not so good he declares (i mean someone could belive he is idiot but goodwill idiot, in my opinion he is
not quite even goodwill idiot, he more pretends being goodwill idiot but he has brain of a some value of dickhead internally; even if he would be pure goodwill idiot obviously he trolls smaps shares stupidity which make him bad idiot (even goodwill idiot is bad idiot (if dares to fight with sanity)))

[bartc]

On 08/12/2017 16:41, james...@verizon.net wrote:
> On Friday, December 8, 2017 at 9:57:30 AM UTC-5, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
>>> Rick C. Hodgin ... should be automatically added to the c.l.c++.m
>>> moderation killfile.
>>
>> I do not post religious messages to moderated lists.

(Sometimes you [Rick] do! And posts (the first ones anyway) get through
because of 'whilelists'. Although recently it's been your impersonator
doing it.)

> However, some of
> us don't believe ...

You're making the classic mistake of engaging with a poster in a
discussion about religion, even if it's a long-winded way of saying
they're off-topic.

I'm surprised that someone of your experience is doing it actually.


--
bartc

[fir]

note rematks of this goodwill,
dick as many catholics declares hi is 'goodwill' but when it comes to a test : "youre goodwill? act like a goodwill"
they i guess mostly all just fails showing that this goodwill is more of an empty
blabling (blah-blah) - the
priests usually just use it to make money for themselves (big easy money often)

small amount of them is really better than those who not blahblah about being goodwill
at all and do not make money from it

this is side digression in the context of hodgin whose problem is he is simply just heavy hopeless idiot

[Rick C. Hodgin]

On Friday, December 8, 2017 at 12:31:41 PM UTC-5, bartc wrote:
> On 08/12/2017 16:41, james...@verizon.net wrote:
> > On Friday, December 8, 2017 at 9:57:30 AM UTC-5, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> >>> Rick C. Hodgin ... should be automatically added to the c.l.c++.m
> >>> moderation killfile.
> >>
> >> I do not post religious messages to moderated lists.
>
> (Sometimes you [Rick] do! And posts (the first ones anyway) get through
> because of 'whilelists'. Although recently it's been your impersonator
> doing it.)

I don't think that's true, except for one period of time.

It would've been when I posted something in/around/after September
23, 2015 to comp.lang.asm.x86. It was near that time in 2015 that a
day filled with many signs all pointing to the day of the rapture was
at hand. I was concerned about people who would be left behind and I
tried to warn everybody. I even put things up on my web server, paid
for six months in advance, left printed pages on my table tops at my
house, etc.

When that time period came and went, and other similar time periods
have come and gone... I began to re-evaluate my actions, But in the
immediate time after September 2015, I still wasn't sure what to do.
My concerns were on reaching people left behind, and I was prepared
to err on the side of getting the message to as many people as possible.
And truth be told, if I saw clear Biblical signs that we were approaching
a Biblically prophesied event like the rapture, or the beginning of
Daniel's 70th week, then I would post to those groups again. But, it
would take something like that for me to do it.

My concerns are for the souls of men and women. I want everyone to be
given the information they need to bypass judgment for sin and to enter
in to eternal life.

After posting then to clax, Frank Kotler un-whitelisted me. He and I
had a fairly lengthy exchange of emails. I resolved at that point to
not post to that moderated group about Jesus. And within a few months I
resolved to not post to any moderated group because I began to recognize
that the rights of the individual in charge of that group were given
that person by God (whether they be Christian or not). And if they
determine for their group a course of action, that is their right and
the ramifications of that choice are upon them. I am not in a position
to usurp that authority away from them, though I would probably reach
out to the moderator personally with the gospel message if I had some
reason to approach the group.

But in a public forum like these I post to which are not moderated...
I will continue to post periodic teaching messages, and to write
messages which correct mistakes made by people in misunderstanding,
false doctrine, etc. I can do no other for conscience's sake.

--
Rick C. Hodgin

[Rick C. Hodgin]

On Friday, December 8, 2017 at 12:53:10 PM UTC-5, fir wrote:
> note rematks of this goodwill,

> .. as many catholics declares hi is 'goodwill' but when it comes to a test : "youre goodwill? act like a goodwill"

> they i guess mostly all just fails showing that this goodwill is more of an empty
> blabling (blah-blah) - the
> priests usually just use it to make money for themselves (big easy money often)

I do not declare my good will. I declare all of our need, myself in-
cluded, for Jesus Christ to forgive our sin and make us whole.

I am not other people, fir. You are casting them upon me, but I am
not them. I am distinctly me, and my fruit is before you for you to
fully examine. I do not have hidden things or secret things. I am
this person you see here online at all times, whether I'm by myself,
around people, at church, or at any other place.

I am one unified Rick, and it is that way I teach all people to be.
It's why I teach people that we are not to separate our lives into
categories, with "religion" over here, and "non-religion" over there.

We are always to be one.

-----
I would like to ask you to please stop calling me disparaging names,
fir. As I've told you before, I think you are very intelligent, very
creative, and have a lot of good qualities in technology. I have not
given you any cause for you to treat me the way you do. And you are
also free to ignore my posts if you find them offensive.

--
Rick C. Hodgin

[asetof...@gmail.com]

White list are better than black list

[bartc]

On 08/12/2017 17:57, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> On Friday, December 8, 2017 at 12:31:41 PM UTC-5, bartc wrote:
>> On 08/12/2017 16:41, james...@verizon.net wrote:
>>> On Friday, December 8, 2017 at 9:57:30 AM UTC-5, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
>>>>> Rick C. Hodgin ... should be automatically added to the c.l.c++.m
>>>>> moderation killfile.
>>>>
>>>> I do not post religious messages to moderated lists.
>>
>> (Sometimes you [Rick] do! And posts (the first ones anyway) get through
>> because of 'whilelists'. Although recently it's been your impersonator
>> doing it.)
>
> I don't think that's true, except for one period of time.
> It would've been when I posted something in/around/after September
> 23, 2015 to comp.lang.asm.x86.

The most recent I can see in the x86 group is on 22nd April 2016
(looking only at original posts). Time flies.

> I will continue to post periodic teaching messages

How about putting all that stuff in your sig, or posting a link there to
it? Then it could potentially reach a wider audience because it will
accompany all your technical and on-topic posts.


--
bart

[Mr Flibble]

Put it in your sig! What a great idea! +1

/Flibble

--
"Suppose it’s all true, and you walk up to the pearly gates, and are
confronted by God," Bryne asked on his show The Meaning of Life. "What
will Stephen Fry say to him, her, or it?"
"I’d say, bone cancer in children? What’s that about?" Fry replied.
"How dare you? How dare you create a world to which there is such misery
that is not our fault. It’s not right, it’s utterly, utterly evil."
"Why should I respect a capricious, mean-minded, stupid God who creates
a world that is so full of injustice and pain. That’s what I would say."

[Rick C. Hodgin]

On Friday, December 8, 2017 at 2:05:51 PM UTC-5, bartc wrote:
> On 08/12/2017 17:57, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> > I don't think that's true, except for one period of time.
> > It would've been when I posted something in/around/after September
> > 23, 2015 to comp.lang.asm.x86.
>
> The most recent I can see in the x86 group is on 22nd April 2016
> (looking only at original posts). Time flies.

Where do you see it? The only ones I see are 9/8/16 and 9/18/15, both
times when there were beliefs the rapture would happen on/about that
time.

It was after 9/8/16 that Frank and I had our email exchange, not 2015.

Nonetheless, I have not posted since that email exchange, and I have
no intention to do so again, save something like an absolute imminent
sign, which I saw in 2015 and 2016, though less so in 2016. The one
in 2015 had literally about 30 things pointing to it, including a
Jubilee year since the 1967 Six Day War, something that filled Biblical
prophecy.

> > I will continue to post periodic teaching messages
>
> How about putting all that stuff in your sig, or posting a link there to
> it? Then it could potentially reach a wider audience because it will
> accompany all your technical and on-topic posts.

I have considered doing that as well. I am moved from time to time
to teach on specific things. It's why I post varying messages. They
are each crafted by hand, and each written based on something that
has moved within my spirit, the result of reading a Bible passage, or
watching a Bible Study, or the message at a church service, etc.

The cadence with which I've rolled out posts over the years is like
that of a weekly church service, with the occasional Bible Study in
there as well.

--
Rick C. Hodgin

[Mr Flibble]

Just. Fuck. Off.

[Rick C. Hodgin]

> "Suppose it’s all true, and you walk up to the pearly gates, and are
> confronted by God," Bryne asked on his show The Meaning of Life. "What
> will Stephen Fry say to him, her, or it?"
> "I’d say, bone cancer in children? What’s that about?" Fry replied.
> "How dare you? How dare you create a world to which there is such misery
> that is not our fault. It’s not right, it’s utterly, utterly evil."
> "Why should I respect a capricious, mean-minded, stupid God who creates
> a world that is so full of injustice and pain. That’s what I would say."

Sin is the cause of the issues we have in this world. God has come into
the world to take sin away and restore all things.

God created man in a perfect paradise, gave man free will.
Man chose to sin, and sin separated man from God.
God directly intervened entering this world, separating sin from man.
God restored man to His intention. Sin is now wholly defeated.

It's why we need Jesus to forgive us. He makes all things new:

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+21&version=KJV

5 And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things
new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and
faithful.
6 And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the
beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of
the fountain of the water of life freely.
7 He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his
God, and he shall be my son.

8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and
murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and
all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with
fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

As Stephen Frye points out, sin is so heinous in what it steals. It's
like a cancer. It's so heinous God created a special place of confine-
ment for all sin, a place called Hell. Those who enter in to Hell will
be consumed by ongoing agony and torment so that sin can never again
have any influence upon His universe.

God extends the FREE OFFER of salvation to everyone. The only people
who wind up in Hell are those who reject His offer because they choose
sin over truth, sin over forgiveness, sin's end of Hellfire over His
free gift of eternal life in Heaven's paradise.

--
Rick C. Hodgin

[Mr Flibble]

FUCK OFF YOU OBTUSE EGREGIOUS CUNT.

/Flibble
--

[Vir Campestris]

On 07/12/2017 07:08, Marcel Mueller wrote:
> On 07.12.17 00.20, Richard wrote:
>> [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
>>
>> FYI, I am working with Daveed Vandevoorde to revive moderation of
>> comp.lang.c++.moderated so we can all get away from the spam and the
>> trolls.  Hopefully we can get moderation back online by January, 2018.
>
> From my experience the latency of moderated groups is more bothersome
> than the junk posts that can be mostly filtered by blacklists. In fact a
> common, /moderated filter list/ would be significantly more effective.
> Too bad that there is no standard for that.
>
I believe uk.legal.moderated operate such a system.

Andy

[fir]

dont make moderated group:
just make another group with options to ban hodgin ramine and this kind regular bulk spammers and not toy with any other kind of moderation

[fir]

note otherwise all probably know how it would end:

some programming medicores will grasp for moderation, then all people who not share a
point of view that those new 'glorious moderators' (which are in fact simple medicores) are so glorious will become banned by this medicores becouse they will
felt in rgiht to ban their opponents

it always just end this way - i seen it
enough times.. some call it 'anal retentive' moderators (if i remember this
naming correctli, i seen when better more knowledgable and intelligent people was banned by medicores just becouse thise inteligent ones dont respected moedicore moderators as beinh higher than that
(in opinions, feel of the rules, feel what is good what is right).. more to say even myself (i am a moderator in some places, feelt and urge to ban some people who
i just dsliked, (eben though i think i
got in fact better feel for human rights,
'constitution' and overall open attitude) - its just human nature even if moderator is higher kind of persons, usually people are only medicore)

this leads me to conclusion thet only massive evident spammers should be banned and there should be no personal based moderation)