Wish: Import/Export of kill files
Alec Cawley
Due to the activities of groups of net-yobboes, the exchange of
killfiles has become of interest in some groups I inhabit. They are
exchanged in DIS format, and then have to be manually entered into
Turnpike, despite the fact that many originators and receivers are
Turnpike users. It would be useful if one Turnpike user could e-mail or
news post a killfile for the use of others.
--
Alec Cawley
Wm ...
Sun, 14 Jun 1998 13:53:05 <z1eSIHAx...@cawley.demon.co.uk>
In demon.ip.support.turnpike Alec Cawley <al...@cawley.demon.co.uk>
posted ...
^^^^^^^^^
Please don't.
This is, IMO, unlikely to be implemented by TP as there are much broader
mechanisms such as RBL (http://maps.vix.com/rbl IIRC) in existence and
if TP were to do such a thing they'd probably do it properly.
Further, I am of the opinion that one person's black-list is not
necessarily appropriate to some-one else.
I hope TP don't get involved in RBL and such for now as it seems to me
there are a number of issues that still need sorting out.
--
Wm...
address valid for at least 14 days from date of posting
Alec Cawley
In article <QAT$aIBx47...@tarrcity.demon.co.uk>, Wm ...
<tcn...@tarrcity.demon.co.uk> writes
>Sun, 14 Jun 1998 13:53:05 <z1eSIHAx...@cawley.demon.co.uk>
>In demon.ip.support.turnpike Alec Cawley <al...@cawley.demon.co.uk>
>posted ...
>
>>Due to the activities of groups of net-yobboes, the exchange of
>>killfiles has become of interest in some groups I inhabit. They are
>>exchanged in DIS format, and then have to be manually entered into
>>Turnpike, despite the fact that many originators and receivers are
>>Turnpike users. It would be useful if one Turnpike user could e-mail or
>>news post a killfile for the use of others.
> ^^^^^^^^^
>Please don't.
>
>This is, IMO, unlikely to be implemented by TP as there are much broader
>mechanisms such as RBL (http://maps.vix.com/rbl IIRC) in existence and
>if TP were to do such a thing they'd probably do it properly.
I don't know about broader mechanisms, but I would have thought it
unlikely that they would be fine-tuned to the particular individuals
plaguing a particular newsgroup at a particular time. If you try to
implement a global kill on all net-pests, it will surely take an
enormous time to process the huge list.
>Further, I am of the opinion that one person's black-list is not
>necessarily appropriate to some-one else.
That, surely, the recipient can judge for him/her self. If somebody with
whom I have corresponded for >3 years says that a certain group on
individuals belong in a killfile, I might well be willing to take his
word for it. Such killfiles are being exchanged already, but usually in
DIS format. Even when they are in TP format, it is a real pain to get
extract them, line by line, from the post and make them into TP kill
rules.
>I hope TP don't get involved in RBL and such for now as it seems to me
>there are a number of issues that still need sorting out.
But surely passing my opinions of obnoxious posters to a friend does not
require "global" solution.
--
Alec Cawley
Wm ...
Sat, 20 Jun 1998 17:37:15 <4XuwADA7...@cawley.demon.co.uk>
>In article <QAT$aIBx47...@tarrcity.demon.co.uk>, Wm ...
><tcn...@tarrcity.demon.co.uk> writes
>>Sun, 14 Jun 1998 13:53:05 <z1eSIHAx...@cawley.demon.co.uk>
>>In demon.ip.support.turnpike Alec Cawley <al...@cawley.demon.co.uk>
>>posted ...
>>
>>>Due to the activities of groups of net-yobboes, the exchange of
>>>killfiles has become of interest in some groups I inhabit. They are
>>>exchanged in DIS format, and then have to be manually entered into
>>>Turnpike, despite the fact that many originators and receivers are
>>>Turnpike users. It would be useful if one Turnpike user could e-mail or
>>>news post a killfile for the use of others.
>> ^^^^^^^^^
>>Please don't.
>>
>>This is, IMO, unlikely to be implemented by TP as there are much broader
>>mechanisms such as RBL (http://maps.vix.com/rbl IIRC) in existence and
>>if TP were to do such a thing they'd probably do it properly.
>
>I don't know about broader mechanisms,
You haven't looked at the URL I gave, have you?
> but I would have thought it
>unlikely that they would be fine-tuned to the particular individuals
>plaguing a particular newsgroup at a particular time. If you try to
>implement a global kill on all net-pests, it will surely take an
>enormous time to process the huge list.
See above, I didn't post the URL for fun. You might also like to search
for SCORE on UWISH where you and your pals might find an easily
transportable format.
>>Further, I am of the opinion that one person's black-list is not
>>necessarily appropriate to some-one else.
>
>That, surely, the recipient can judge for him/her self.
Nope. That is not the way black-lists work. By definition you are
accepting someone else's idea of "good" people and "bad" people or
"good" domains or "bad" domains.
> If somebody with
>whom I have corresponded for >3 years says that a certain group on
>individuals belong in a killfile, I might well be willing to take his
>word for it.
I wouldn't, I regard myself as an adult, I make my own decisions.
> Such killfiles are being exchanged already, but usually in
>DIS format. Even when they are in TP format, it is a real pain to get
>extract them, line by line, from the post and make them into TP kill
>rules.
Look at RBL, look at SCORE
>>I hope TP don't get involved in RBL and such for now as it seems to me
>>there are a number of issues that still need sorting out.
>
>But surely passing my opinions of obnoxious posters to a friend does not
>require "global" solution.
The significant words are "my opinions".
Andrew Gambier
In article <4XuwADA7...@cawley.demon.co.uk>, Alec Cawley
<al...@cawley.demon.co.uk> writes
>But surely passing my opinions of obnoxious posters to a friend does not
>require "global" solution.
>
Sounds innocent enough but perhaps a kill-rule that isn't problematic
for you could prove inappropriate for someone else. Perhaps you didn't
get the syntax quite right or somesuch.
I would posit that most people on this newsgroup, and certainly Richard,
do not want loads of "TP deleted my mail!" messages caused by the wider
spreading of kill-rules. At least under the current system you have to
go some sort of process to implement them - maybe you'll learn what they
purport to do and *exactly* what they are in fact doing.
--
"It's the British kid. He's a little limey zombie now"
mailto:and...@gambier.demon.co.uk
Alec Cawley
In article <+X0tpGAGw$i1E...@gambier.demon.co.uk>, Andrew Gambier
<and...@gambier.demon.co.uk> writes
>In article <4XuwADA7...@cawley.demon.co.uk>, Alec Cawley
><al...@cawley.demon.co.uk> writes
>
>>But surely passing my opinions of obnoxious posters to a friend does not
>>require "global" solution.
>>
>
>Sounds innocent enough but perhaps a kill-rule that isn't problematic
>for you could prove inappropriate for someone else. Perhaps you didn't
>get the syntax quite right or somesuch.
Hence the point of extracting tested rules from TP and passing them
unchanged to my friend, rather than depending upon him/her retyping
them.
>I would posit that most people on this newsgroup, and certainly Richard,
>do not want loads of "TP deleted my mail!" messages caused by the wider
>spreading of kill-rules. At least under the current system you have to
>go some sort of process to implement them - maybe you'll learn what they
>purport to do and *exactly* what they are in fact doing.
OTOH, some of the necessary rules to kill those who are, to the best of
their ability, forging headers to avoid killfiles involve a fair
understanding of regular expressions - not the best thing for the
uninitiated to tackle, and easily corrupted in the retyping process.
I am not talking about random spammers, I am talking about deliberate
and malicious attempts to disrupt a newsgroups by flooding it with
rubbish. Experience has shown that if all the regulars adopt the policy
of killfiling the vandals immediately, the newsgroup can continue nearly
as normal until the vandals disappear; if they cannot, the regulars
disappear instead.
--
Alec Cawley
Alec Cawley
In article <fkk8j1Bv4$i1E...@tarrcity.demon.co.uk>, Wm ...
<tcn...@tarrcity.demon.co.uk> writes
>>>
>>>This is, IMO, unlikely to be implemented by TP as there are much broader
>>>mechanisms such as RBL (http://maps.vix.com/rbl IIRC) in existence and
>>>if TP were to do such a thing they'd probably do it properly.
>>
>>I don't know about broader mechanisms,
>
>You haven't looked at the URL I gave, have you?
I have - now - and I don't see its relevance. I don't want to appeal for
any global effects, I just want a local peace and quiet.
>>>Further, I am of the opinion that one person's black-list is not
>>>necessarily appropriate to some-one else.
>>
>>That, surely, the recipient can judge for him/her self.
>
>Nope. That is not the way black-lists work. By definition you are
>accepting someone else's idea of "good" people and "bad" people or
>"good" domains or "bad" domains.
But they are doing so - all I am doing is making it easier to pass over
complex, regular-experession based rules. Have you never looked in a
newsgroup on someone else's advice? Of course we will make our own
decisions - but the complexity of copying over, say, 20 regular-
expression base killfile rules is non-trivial. I am not talking about
kill-single-poster rules, I am talking about custom rules based on
References: lines etc.
>> If somebody with
>>whom I have corresponded for >3 years says that a certain group on
>>individuals belong in a killfile, I might well be willing to take his
>>word for it.
>
>I wouldn't, I regard myself as an adult, I make my own decisions.
I do not assume omniscience - I am willing to take advice from, e.g.,
those with technical skills which I lack. YMMV.
>>>I hope TP don't get involved in RBL and such for now as it seems to me
>>>there are a number of issues that still need sorting out.
>>
>>But surely passing my opinions of obnoxious posters to a friend does not
>>require "global" solution.
>
>The significant words are "my opinions".
And I would not expect the recipient to accept my opinions *blindly* -
but not to ignore the opinions of a long-time acquaintance.
Why the hell are you running UWISH if you do not expect Turnpike to
listen to the opinions expressed, and take up at least a few of them?
Perhaps Turnpike should "make its own decisions", and ignore the rest of
the world [irony warning]?
I am not proposing global blacklists - I am suggesting that I could say
"If you want to get rid of poster XYZ, import this line into your
killfile"
--
Alec Cawley
Wm ...
Sat, 20 Jun 1998 21:55:55 <vrX1fRAb...@cawley.demon.co.uk>
[RBL]
>I have - now - and I don't see its relevance. I don't want to appeal for
>any global effects, I just want a local peace and quiet.
The relevance is to TP doing it.
[black-lists]
>But they are doing so - all I am doing is making it easier to pass over
>complex, regular-experession based rules. Have you never looked in a
>newsgroup on someone else's advice? Of course we will make our own
>decisions - but the complexity of copying over, say, 20 regular-
>expression base killfile rules is non-trivial. I am not talking about
>kill-single-poster rules, I am talking about custom rules based on
>References: lines etc.
You missed the bit of my previous post that will actually help you to
achieve what you want. Go to UWISH and look for SCORE it is already
built into TP.
[snip]
>Why the hell are you running UWISH if you do not expect Turnpike to
>listen to the opinions expressed, and take up at least a few of them?
They do that anyway. I'm not in the mood to explain why UWISH exists
this evening.
>I am not proposing global blacklists - I am suggesting that I could say
>"If you want to get rid of poster XYZ, import this line into your
>killfile"
I repeat, SCORE is your friend.
Alec Cawley
In article <toHwQ5Bk...@tarrcity.demon.co.uk>, Wm ...
<tcn...@tarrcity.demon.co.uk> writes
>>But they are doing so - all I am doing is making it easier to pass over
>>complex, regular-experession based rules. Have you never looked in a
>>newsgroup on someone else's advice? Of course we will make our own
>>decisions - but the complexity of copying over, say, 20 regular-
>>expression base killfile rules is non-trivial. I am not talking about
>>kill-single-poster rules, I am talking about custom rules based on
>>References: lines etc.
>
>You missed the bit of my previous post that will actually help you to
>achieve what you want. Go to UWISH and look for SCORE it is already
>built into TP.
SCORE does not, as documented on UWISH, do what I need. Firstly, and a
lesser point, it works at sort time, so I have to download a dozen or
two maliciously overlong posts (intentionally set just below most
peoples Lines: kill) before SCORE can get to work on them. More
importantly, it appears to work on threads. The problem I have is that
the malicious posters are deliberately following up posts from people I
want to read with deliberate filth, ASCII art etc. I still want to kill
the posters, NOT the thread. But the posters are doing things like
regularly changing usernames.
>>Why the hell are you running UWISH if you do not expect Turnpike to
>>listen to the opinions expressed, and take up at least a few of them?
>
>They do that anyway. I'm not in the mood to explain why UWISH exists
>this evening.
As explicitly stated, that was intended ironically. It is perfectly
obvious why you are running UWISH, and it is well worth your doing so.
My intention was to point out that one can take someone else's opinion
without sacrificing all personal responsibility. Life is too short to
re-invent the wheel every time you want to drive to the shops.
>>I am not proposing global blacklists - I am suggesting that I could say
>>"If you want to get rid of poster XYZ, import this line into your
>>killfile"
>
>I repeat, SCORE is your friend.
See criticism above.
May I point out that I am not wanting anything novel. UNIX users have
been able to exchange killfiles since the Net began. DIS users have been
able to do so since shortly after Demon began. So if this were the key
to some great iniquity, it would have happened by now (unless, of
course, Turnpike users are a uniquely sinful lot).
Regular expressions are not friendly. I have twice written regular
expression matching routines, and I still trip over them. It is easy,
with a single keystroke error, to convert (as I have done) an expression
into a "kill all" - and the labour of recovering from that situation is
onerous.
--
Alec Cawley
Bill Jillians
After great soul searching and breast beating Alec Cawley
<al...@cawley.demon.co.uk> chose in article <TYfKTPA4...@cawley.dem
on.co.uk> to take the following policy decision:-
>OTOH, some of the necessary rules to kill those who are, to the best of
>their ability, forging headers to avoid killfiles involve a fair
>understanding of regular expressions - not the best thing for the
>uninitiated to tackle, and easily corrupted in the retyping process.
>
If somebody is forging headers then a kill file is USELESS anyway.
>I am not talking about random spammers, I am talking about deliberate
>and malicious attempts to disrupt a newsgroups by flooding it with
>rubbish. Experience has shown that if all the regulars adopt the policy
>of killfiling the vandals immediately, the newsgroup can continue nearly
>as normal until the vandals disappear; if they cannot, the regulars
>disappear instead.
>
This seems a highly blinkered view. What about newsgroups that only
acknowledge a new person's (or persons') presence after they have proved their
worth (or in some cases, lack of it). In many cases a brief period of pseudo-troll-
like activity brings this recognition about. Certainly many newsgroups that I
posted in when I first came online didn't want to respond to perfectly reasonible
and politely asked questions. Or are you talking about defending "cliques" from
hated outsiders ?
And before you reply with the stock response, this was before I had any
reputation of any kind what-so-ever (there was such a time ---- before the evil
Yakk pulled me violently from the true path of newsgroup righteousness).
--
Bill Jillians | Glos Yokel | Web: http://www.ratcake.mcmail.com
(So spam me, baby) | @Geordieland | mailto:Sam.S...@mcmail.com
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^<
> This is as strange a maze as e'er men trod, And there is in this <
> business more than nature was ever conduct of. Tmpst: 5.1.245-6 <
John Hall
In article <$rNEJJAf...@mcmail.com>,
Bill Jillians <Sam.S...@mcmail.com> writes:
>If somebody is forging headers then a kill file is USELESS anyway.
Few, if any, forgeries are perfect. One can usually find at least one
header that can be used as the basis of a rule..
--
John Hall
"I look upon it, that he who does not mind his belly,
will hardly mind anything else."
Dr Samuel Johnson (1709-84)
Alec Cawley
><al...@cawley.demon.co.uk> chose in article <TYfKTPA4...@cawley.dem
>on.co.uk> to take the following policy decision:-
>>OTOH, some of the necessary rules to kill those who are, to the best of
>>their ability, forging headers to avoid killfiles involve a fair
>>understanding of regular expressions - not the best thing for the
>>uninitiated to tackle, and easily corrupted in the retyping process.
>>
>
Not necessarily. They can change their names, but usually there is
something in the header which can be detected by the cognoscenti to
control a kill file - but not by those not versed in the intimacies of
the Net. What I am suggesting is a mechanism whereby the cognoscenti can
pass on their knowledge.
>>I am not talking about random spammers, I am talking about deliberate
>>and malicious attempts to disrupt a newsgroups by flooding it with
>>rubbish. Experience has shown that if all the regulars adopt the policy
>>of killfiling the vandals immediately, the newsgroup can continue nearly
>>as normal until the vandals disappear; if they cannot, the regulars
>>disappear instead.
>>
>
>This seems a highly blinkered view. What about newsgroups that only
>acknowledge a new person's (or persons') presence after they have proved their
>worth (or in some cases, lack of it). In many cases a brief period of pseudo-
>troll-
>like activity brings this recognition about. Certainly many newsgroups that I
>posted in when I first came online didn't want to respond to perfectly
>reasonible
>and politely asked questions. Or are you talking about defending "cliques" from
>hated outsiders ?
I am talking about hundreds of lines of sexually explicit and
scatological abuse, ASCII art, and deliberate, stated in so many words,
intention to destroy the newsgroup, while boasting of the destruction of
other newsgroups already destroyed. If you are interested, look at
recent posts in demon.local with the keyword m.e.o.w (removing the dots,
which are an anti-grepping device, because the perpetrators have boasted
about following their victims into other newsgroups and hounding them
there - and I certainly don't want them here).
--
Alec Cawley
Bill Jillians
After great soul searching and breast beating Alec Cawley
>SCORE does not, as documented on UWISH, do what I need. Firstly, and a
>lesser point, it works at sort time, so I have to download a dozen or
>two maliciously overlong posts (intentionally set just below most
>peoples Lines: kill) before SCORE can get to work on them. More
>importantly, it appears to work on threads. The problem I have is that
>the malicious posters are deliberately following up posts from people I
>want to read with deliberate filth, ASCII art etc. I still want to kill
>the posters, NOT the thread. But the posters are doing things like
>regularly changing usernames.
>
>
Why don't you just not read them ??? Do not read any poster with a suspicious
or unfamiliar name.
Or is some form of dismissal, segregation or retribution de rigeour in your fine
newsgroups ?
Alec Cawley
In article <k4$ytZAWG...@mcmail.com>, Bill Jillians
<Sam.S...@mcmail.com> writes
>After great soul searching and breast beating Alec Cawley
><al...@cawley.demon.co.uk> chose in article <fnW5MBAf...@cawley.dem
>on.co.uk> to take the following policy decision:-
>>In article <toHwQ5Bk...@tarrcity.demon.co.uk>, Wm ...
>><tcn...@tarrcity.demon.co.uk> writes
>
>>SCORE does not, as documented on UWISH, do what I need. Firstly, and a
>>lesser point, it works at sort time, so I have to download a dozen or
>>two maliciously overlong posts (intentionally set just below most
>>peoples Lines: kill) before SCORE can get to work on them. More
>>importantly, it appears to work on threads. The problem I have is that
>>the malicious posters are deliberately following up posts from people I
>>want to read with deliberate filth, ASCII art etc. I still want to kill
>>the posters, NOT the thread. But the posters are doing things like
>>regularly changing usernames.
>>
>>
>
>Why don't you just not read them ??? Do not read any poster with a suspicious
>or unfamiliar name.
>
>Or is some form of dismissal, segregation or retribution de rigeour in your fine
>newsgroups ?
Life is too short to read deliberately malicious, obscene and
repetitive posts. Reading them would take about as much time as I have
available for reading all the newsgroups I take - to no gain. I would
have either to drop all my other groups or to drop Real Life.
Of course I don't *want* to read posters with "suspicious and unfamiliar
names". However, computers are *meant* to save us work. If Turnpike can
do the job for me, that is valuable seconds of my time returned to my
personal use.
When I first took Usenet, I had fine ideas about not resorting to
killfiles, because they were in some way self-censorship. I now think
that there is no way that I can read 30,000 newsgroups, and the best way
to handle the overload is to strip out *anything* that can safely be
removed. Each dross post read is losing the opportunity to read a useful
post in another group. *Not* using a killfile (carefully) is, IMO,
intellectual self-mutilation.
--
Alec Cawley
Wm ...
Sun, 21 Jun 1998 12:22:07 <fnW5MBAf...@cawley.demon.co.uk>
[swopping news kill rules]
>SCORE does not, as documented on UWISH, do what I need. Firstly, and a
>lesser point, it works at sort time, so I have to download a dozen or
>two maliciously overlong posts (intentionally set just below most
>peoples Lines: kill) before SCORE can get to work on them.
True. I was trying to help out now rather than you having to wait for a
wish that may or may not appear in some future version of TP and even
then may not appear in the way you'd like to see it.
>More
>importantly, it appears to work on threads.
I'm pleased to say this is not entirely true. Some of the actions (of
particular reference in this case is ':i' -- no that is not a strange
smile :) work on articles. A further benefit is that SCORE can work
across more than one ng which news kill rules don't do at present.
Alec:
>>>Why the hell are you running UWISH if you do not expect Turnpike to
>>>listen to the opinions expressed, and take up at least a few of them?
Wm:
>>They do that anyway. I'm not in the mood to explain why UWISH exists
>>this evening.
>
>As explicitly stated, that was intended ironically.
My apologies. I read the irony warning as applying to the last sentence
in the para (which I snipped) rather than the whole para.
>May I point out that I am not wanting anything novel. UNIX users have
>been able to exchange killfiles since the Net began. DIS users have been
>able to do so since shortly after Demon began. So if this were the key
>to some great iniquity, it would have happened by now (unless, of
>course, Turnpike users are a uniquely sinful lot).
The difference is that TP does not keep its news kill rules in a plain
file (I think they're in usernnn/usernews).
>Regular expressions are not friendly. I have twice written regular
>expression matching routines, and I still trip over them. It is easy,
>with a single keystroke error, to convert (as I have done) an expression
>into a "kill all" - and the labour of recovering from that situation is
>onerous.
There are a few of us here that don't mind helping with regexps, it is a
good idea to provide an example header when asking for help about such.
HTH -- you are, of course, welcome to add your wish to UWISH.
Tim Willets
In article <$rNEJJAf...@mcmail.com>, Bill Jillians
<Sam.S...@mcmail.com> writes
>
>If somebody is forging headers then a kill file is USELESS anyway.
Not entirely - on fact, far from it. For example - I've been filtering
out UCE faked to look like (at first glance) to look like it comes from
hotmail.com users, based on elements in the headers from genuine
hotmail.com email that are missing in the faked ones for months now. The
logs indicate it works, and no forgeries of that kind have got through.
Many header forgers are not as clever as they think they are, and
spamming software also sometimes leaves characteristic traces in headers
that point to the mail being UCE with a very high chance of accuracy
(and no, I don't just mean things as simple as an X -Advertisement:
header).
Remember as well that while you can not control who sends mail to you,
you can control who you receive mail *for*.
>This seems a highly blinkered view. What about newsgroups that only
>acknowledge a new person's (or persons') presence after they have proved their
>worth (or in some cases, lack of it).
In my experience if you act sensibly you will be treated sensibly in
most newsgroups.
> In many cases a brief period of pseudo-
>troll-
>like activity brings this recognition about.
Recognition of some form, certainly. However, would you want your early
postings to a newsgroup to lead the existing denizens of that newsgroup
to conclude you are either a pseud or troll and respond accordingly?
> Certainly many newsgroups that I
>posted in when I first came online didn't want to respond to perfectly
>reasonible
>and politely asked questions.
I am sorry that your experience differed from mine. Perhaps usenet has
become less friendly over the last few years.
> Or are you talking about defending "cliques" from
>hated outsiders ?
I thought Alec was talking about killfiling trolls and deliberate
disrupters - which it is his right to do if he wishes. Come to that he
can killfile anyone he wants to for any reason, as can we all.
--
Tim Willets
Bill Jillians
After great soul searching and breast beating Alec Cawley
n.co.uk> to take the following policy decision:-
>I am talking about hundreds of lines of sexually explicit and
>scatological abuse, ASCII art, and deliberate, stated in so many words,
>intention to destroy the newsgroup, while boasting of the destruction of
>other newsgroups already destroyed. If you are interested, look at
>recent posts in demon.local with the keyword m.e.o.w (removing the dots,
>which are an anti-grepping device, because the perpetrators have boasted
>about following their victims into other newsgroups and hounding them
>there - and I certainly don't want them here).
>
You'll hopefully pardon my ignorance in this matter. I have just spent a very
confusing time in nanau. I naively thought that meowers were "netcops" with the
power to cancel articles (mostly spam) within usenet.
I am not deliberately doubting you, but I am very confused about exactly what
status and powers these people have (or maybe only claim to have).
Bill Jillians
After great soul searching and breast beating Bill Jillians
<Sam.S...@mcmail.com> chose in article <k4$ytZAWG...@mcmail.com
> to take the following policy decision:-
>Or is some form of dismissal, segregation or retribution de rigeour in your fine
>newsgroups ?
>
>
Please pardon this outburst. As usual the worst was being assumed.
Alec Cawley
In article <C2Ube7A6...@mcmail.com>, Bill Jillians
<Sam.S...@mcmail.com> writes
>After great soul searching and breast beating Alec Cawley
><al...@cawley.demon.co.uk> chose in article <h65m7KAj...@cawley.demo
>n.co.uk> to take the following policy decision:-
>
>>I am talking about hundreds of lines of sexually explicit and
>>scatological abuse, ASCII art, and deliberate, stated in so many words,
>>intention to destroy the newsgroup, while boasting of the destruction of
>>other newsgroups already destroyed. If you are interested, look at
>>recent posts in demon.local with the keyword m.e.o.w (removing the dots,
>>which are an anti-grepping device, because the perpetrators have boasted
>>about following their victims into other newsgroups and hounding them
>>there - and I certainly don't want them here).
>>
>
>You'll hopefully pardon my ignorance in this matter. I have just spent a very
>confusing time in nanau. I naively thought that meowers were "netcops" with the
>power to cancel articles (mostly spam) within usenet.
>
>I am not deliberately doubting you, but I am very confused about exactly what
>status and powers these people have (or maybe only claim to have).
Well, this lot are certainly not netcops in any constructive use of the
word. It would not, however, surprise me to find that they had stolen
the name from some other group who might be doing something positive.
Apparently their "home" ng, rec dot music dot m.e.o.w, has just been
rmgrouped.
--
Alec Cawley
Alec Cawley
In article <xzFH29Bs...@tarrcity.demon.co.uk>, Wm ...
<tcn...@tarrcity.demon.co.uk> writes
>Sun, 21 Jun 1998 12:22:07 <fnW5MBAf...@cawley.demon.co.uk>
>In demon.ip.support.turnpike Alec Cawley <al...@cawley.demon.co.uk>
>posted ...
>
<Re SCORE>
>>More
>>importantly, it appears to work on threads.
>
>I'm pleased to say this is not entirely true. Some of the actions (of
>particular reference in this case is ':i' -- no that is not a strange
>smile :) work on articles. A further benefit is that SCORE can work
>across more than one ng which news kill rules don't do at present.
In that case, I will reconsider.
>>May I point out that I am not wanting anything novel. UNIX users have
>>been able to exchange killfiles since the Net began. DIS users have been
>>able to do so since shortly after Demon began. So if this were the key
>>to some great iniquity, it would have happened by now (unless, of
>>course, Turnpike users are a uniquely sinful lot).
>
>The difference is that TP does not keep its news kill rules in a plain
>file (I think they're in usernnn/usernews).
Indeed. Hence the wish for an import/export, like the Address Book,
which I think is similarly not in text format.
>>Regular expressions are not friendly. I have twice written regular
>>expression matching routines, and I still trip over them. It is easy,
>>with a single keystroke error, to convert (as I have done) an expression
>>into a "kill all" - and the labour of recovering from that situation is
>>onerous.
>
>There are a few of us here that don't mind helping with regexps, it is a
>good idea to provide an example header when asking for help about such.
>
>HTH -- you are, of course, welcome to add your wish to UWISH.
I don't have great hopes of TP implementing it - unless it happens to be
easy, a fact which is not visible from the outside. The point I was
making was that it is a legitimate request (in the light of current net
life) and if you don't ask, you won't get. But it just *might* be that
the facility is already inside, for development use, and just needs
buttons putting on to enable it.
I had experience of this myself recently, when I implemented something
in an hour which users said (when they saw it) that they had wanted for
years, but hadn't asked for because they thought it was difficult.
--
Alec Cawley
Mike Barnes
In article <xzFH29Bs...@tarrcity.demon.co.uk>, Wm ...
<tcn...@tarrcity.demon.co.uk> writes
>Sun, 21 Jun 1998 12:22:07 <fnW5MBAf...@cawley.demon.co.uk>
>In demon.ip.support.turnpike Alec Cawley <al...@cawley.demon.co.uk>
>posted ...
>>expression matching routines, and I still trip over them. It is easy,
>>with a single keystroke error, to convert (as I have done) an expression
>>into a "kill all" - and the labour of recovering from that situation is
>>onerous.
>
>There are a few of us here that don't mind helping with regexps, it is a
>good idea to provide an example header when asking for help about such.
There is one simple mechanism which IMO could do a lot to dispel the
mysteries of regexps and help all newcomers. That is a "test" facility
in Turnpike.
Imagine a dialogue box with two text fields ("Header" and "Regular
Expression", which you could cut and paste to/from), a "Test" button,
and a "Pass/Fail" indicator. Oh, and I forgot, the "Help" button, of
course.
--
-- Mike Barnes, Owner, Exodus Computer Systems, Stockport, England.
--
-- Get more out of Turnpike with "TP Assistant". For details and a free
-- 30-day evaluation copy, go to http://www.exodus.demon.co.uk/tpassist/
Bill Jillians
After great soul searching and breast beating Alec Cawley
on.co.uk> to take the following policy decision:-
>When I first took Usenet, I had fine ideas about not resorting to
>killfiles, because they were in some way self-censorship. I now think
>that there is no way that I can read 30,000 newsgroups, and the best way
>to handle the overload is to strip out *anything* that can safely be
>removed. Each dross post read is losing the opportunity to read a useful
>post in another group. *Not* using a killfile (carefully) is, IMO,
>intellectual self-mutilation.
>
I'm sorry if you found the post you were replying to provocative.
I have never been under any impression that I might be able to read 30,000
newsgroups. In fact I can't even fully read the 10 or so newsgroups that I do
download because there is just so much in them.
However if somebody were "dragging my name and my reputation through the
mud" I would want to know about it.
I inform people that their posts will be read but no longer acknowledged. This
serves as a ***PLONK*** posting only I feel it to be just a bit more crushing
because it still leaves me the option of talking about that person or taking action
on something damaging that they say.
Richard Herring
In article <3jOyZaCB...@exodus.co.uk>, Mike Barnes
<mi...@exodus.co.uk> wrote
>There is one simple mechanism which IMO could do a lot to dispel the
>mysteries of regexps and help all newcomers. That is a "test" facility
>in Turnpike.
>
>Imagine a dialogue box with two text fields ("Header" and "Regular
>Expression", which you could cut and paste to/from), a "Test" button,
>and a "Pass/Fail" indicator. Oh, and I forgot, the "Help" button, of
>course.
>
it) matched - and perhaps which part of the RE, if it had alternatives.
And perhaps as an alternative to pasting in a header, a more user-
friendly way to select an article whose header is to be tested.
I might even throw a little utility together to do just that (apart from
the article-selection, of course.)
--
Richard Herring <mailto:ric...@clupeid.demon.co.uk>
Dave Bird---St Hippo of Augustine
In article <tD81lPA3Cqj1EwQ$@cawley.demon.co.uk>, Alec Cawley
<al...@cawley.demon.co.uk> writes
>>You'll hopefully pardon my ignorance in this matter. I have just spent a very
>>confusing time in nanau. I naively thought that meowers were "netcops" with
>the
>>power to cancel articles (mostly spam) within usenet.
>>I am not deliberately doubting you, but I am very confused about exactly what
>>status and powers these people have (or maybe only claim to have).
>
>Well, this lot are certainly not netcops in any constructive use of the
>word.
The word "net-cop" is almost always used derogatively, of people trying
to enfroce silly or invented rules. Though I suppose it could apply to
myself or others telling the author of a brand new 50K interpretation of
the book of revelations which of several orifices they can stick it up,
rather than posting it on newsgroups to which it bears no relevance.
Nobody is authorised to enforce anything on the internet in general.
Some people are recognised by (almost) universal consensus to be
carrying out rules accepted by that same consensus in a sensible way,
as regards cancellable spam.
|~/ |~/
~~|;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;'^';-._.-;||';-._.-;'^';||_.-;'^'0-|~~
P | Woof Woof, Glug Glug ||____________|| 0 | P
O | Who Drowned the Judge's Dog? | . . . . . . . '----. 0 | O
O | answers on *---|_______________ @__o0 | O
L |{a href="news:alt.religion.scientology"}{/a}_____________|/_______| L
and{a href="http://www.xemu.demon.co.uk/clam/lynx/q0.html"}{/a}XemuSP4(:)
Malcolm Ogilvie
In article <m2zNzsAx...@xemu.demon.co.uk>, Dave Bird---St Hippo of
Augustine <da...@xemu.demon.co.uk> writes
>In article <tD81lPA3Cqj1EwQ$@cawley.demon.co.uk>, Alec Cawley
><al...@cawley.demon.co.uk> writes
>>>You'll hopefully pardon my ignorance in this matter. I have just spent a very
>>>confusing time in nanau. I naively thought that meowers were "netcops" with
>>the
>>>power to cancel articles (mostly spam) within usenet.
>>>I am not deliberately doubting you, but I am very confused about exactly what
>>>status and powers these people have (or maybe only claim to have).
>>
>>Well, this lot are certainly not netcops in any constructive use of the
>>word.
>
>The word "net-cop" is almost always used derogatively, of people trying
>to enfroce silly or invented rules. Though I suppose it could apply to
>myself or others telling the author of a brand new 50K interpretation of
>the book of revelations which of several orifices they can stick it up,
>rather than posting it on newsgroups to which it bears no relevance.
>
\netcop mode on\
You aren't using the conventional dash-dash-space before your signature
to allow automatic stripping of it AND your signature exceeds the
conventional 4-line maximum (fun though it is!)
\netcop mode off\
Cheers;-))
Malcolm
--
Malcolm Ogilvie, Isle of Islay, Scotland, U.K.