Barry Schofield
Stuart Elliott
that the BS that BS sprouts is habitually derised as just out and out useless
tosh...
Rather that flood these newsgroups with further abuse aimed at this person and
his laughable "Super Eu^H" (though I must admit, I had the call to do just the
same yesterday), wouldn't it be so much easier if everyone just place him in
their kill files ?
Perhaps that should go in the FAQ...
Q. Is there anyone in demon.service.isdn that should be avoided at all costs ?
A. Yes, Barry Schofield and his website www.lxxxxom.net (I refuse to type it)
Have a nice day :-/
Stuart
Richard Townend
(Stuart Elliott) wrote:
>Pardon me for asking personal questions in a support newsgroup, but it seems
>that the BS that BS sprouts is habitually derised as just out and out useless
>tosh...
>
>Rather that flood these newsgroups with further abuse aimed at this person and
>his laughable "Super Eu^H" (though I must admit, I had the call to do just the
>same yesterday), wouldn't it be so much easier if everyone just place him in
>their kill files ?
I agree, this BS stuff really is becoming a pain.
As a relatively new subscriber to this group, I appreciate that some
people have strong views that newcomers should be warned - for which I
am grateful.
However, even with BS in one's killfile, there are all the follow-ups
quoting and answering him. The other day about half the messages I
downloaded, approx 30 out of 60, were just such posts - nothing really
useful, just contradictions to BS's postings. I appreciate that these
are posted in good faith, to "protect" others, but it's getting to the
point where finding relevant information is becoming a real trial. I
haven't actually counted, but I suspect the ratio of responses to each
BS posting is about 10:1 - overkill?
I don't know the answer, but I do know that it's becoming a real pain!
--
Regards
Richard Townend
richard(at)townend(dot)com - please replace (at) with @ and (dot) with . in address when replying.
U.K.
Trevor Austin
Townend) wrote:
>However, even with BS in one's killfile, there are all the follow-ups
>quoting and answering him. The other day about half the messages I
>downloaded, approx 30 out of 60, were just such posts - nothing really
>useful, just contradictions to BS's postings. I appreciate that these
>are posted in good faith, to "protect" others, but it's getting to the
>point where finding relevant information is becoming a real trial. I
>haven't actually counted, but I suspect the ratio of responses to each
>BS posting is about 10:1 - overkill?
>
The solution is simple, Demon withdraw posting access for blatant
contravention of AUP. From guesswork I believe a "suspension" has
recently been completed but no lessons learned.
Efforts are underway to inform Demon of the extent of AUP breaking
being carried out by Barry with hopefully permanent removal of posting
priveledges.
There is absolutely no doubt that the likes of Michael, Adrian, Peter
and Richards contradictions are essential for the ISDN newcomer. Each
time BS is challenged or accused of lying, to my knowledge he has yet
to furnish proof of ANY of his claims or even a satisfied customer.
As to suggestions that Michael or Adrian are suffering from
competetive sour grapes; they would have to lose at least one customer
to BS for this to be even considered a possibility.
Trevor
Stuart
Trevor Austin wrote in message <361b7ed6.67818773@wingate>...
>On Tue, 06 Oct 1998 14:51:30 GMT, richard at townend dot com (Richard
>Townend) wrote:
>
>The solution is simple, Demon withdraw posting access for blatant
>contravention of AUP. From guesswork I believe a "suspension" has
>recently been completed but no lessons learned.
>
Blatant contravention of AUP in what way?
Stuart
--
Lo Cost Calls to UK mobiles at www.brainsys.com/phones
BrainStorm Systems Ltd, PO Box 14308, London SE26 6ZR
Office 0870 840 6300 - Mobile 0701 070 6300
Trevor Austin
<sgr...@removethis.office.net> wrote:
>
>Trevor Austin wrote in message <361b7ed6.67818773@wingate>...
>>On Tue, 06 Oct 1998 14:51:30 GMT, richard at townend dot com (Richard
>>Townend) wrote:
>>
Advertising for personal gain. Particularly when no other content is
in the message. The sig on every one of BS messages is an advert.
There are at least 8 current occurences of this in the newsgroup at
present. A reply consisting purely of an advertisement.
I don't remember the exact terminology as I haven't checked it for a
while, but it is undoubtedly against AUP to do so.
Trevor
Richard Townend
Austin) wrote:
>As to suggestions that Michael or Adrian are suffering from
>competetive sour grapes; they would have to lose at least one customer
>to BS for this to be even considered a possibility.
Not something I suggested or implied at all.
Thomas Sandford
> On Tue, 06 Oct 1998 14:51:30 GMT, richard at townend dot com (Richard
> Townend) wrote:
>
>>quoting and answering him. The other day about half the messages I
> There is absolutely no doubt that the likes of Michael, Adrian, Peter
> and Richards contradictions are essential for the ISDN newcomer. Each
> time BS is challenged or accused of lying, to my knowledge he has yet
> to furnish proof of ANY of his claims or even a satisfied customer.
>
> competetive sour grapes; they would have to lose at least one customer
> to BS for this to be even considered a possibility.
It might help if M,A,P and {R} could come to an agreement that one (or
at least one at a time) would take responsibility for posting a
standard "BS spouts b***s***" response to each posting. This would
at least keep each sub-thread down to 2 articles...
(I guess it would be better if it were P or {R}, then there is no
case of "conflict of interest" to answer).
--
Thomas Sandford | $Thomas/98b$@prds-grn.demon.co.uk
Paradise Green Technical Services: S'ware/Hw design and Theatre Tech. Services
Email to this address from commercial mailing lists constitutes unauthorised
computer access, and appropriate action will be taken against offenders.
~seg.co.uk
>> wouldn't it be so much easier if everyone just
>> place him in their kill files ?
Yes, but only those who know what he's like can do
that, and they're fairly safe from misapprehension. It's
those new to ISDN that will be fooled and won't know
to have a killfile.
> Perhaps that should go in the FAQ...
> Q. Is there anyone in demon.service.isdn that should
> be avoided at all costs
Obviously I couldn't put that in myself (as a competitor)
but if you want to submit it, and there is considerable
support from other non-vested-interest parties, then
it could go in. The FAQ is meant to be the views/opinions
of the members of this group.
Michael.
Jon Plews
Thomas Sandford <$thomas/98b$@prds-grn.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
<6vff0q$iot$1...@prds-grn.demon.co.uk>...
>Trevor Austin <ne...@kimball.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On Tue, 06 Oct 1998 14:51:30 GMT, richard at townend dot com (Richard
>> Townend) wrote:
>>
>>>However, even with BS in one's killfile, there are all the follow-ups
>>>quoting and answering him. The other day about half the messages I
>....
>> There is absolutely no doubt that the likes of Michael, Adrian, Peter
>> and Richards contradictions are essential for the ISDN newcomer. Each
>> time BS is challenged or accused of lying, to my knowledge he has yet
>> to furnish proof of ANY of his claims or even a satisfied customer.
>>
>> As to suggestions that Michael or Adrian are suffering from
>> competetive sour grapes; they would have to lose at least one customer
>> to BS for this to be even considered a possibility.
>
>It might help if M,A,P and {R} could come to an agreement that one (or
>at least one at a time) would take responsibility for posting a
>standard "BS spouts b***s***" response to each posting. This would
>at least keep each sub-thread down to 2 articles...
>
>(I guess it would be better if it were P or {R}, then there is no
>case of "conflict of interest" to answer).
>
Organised Barry bashing should be avoided, IMHO.
Automatic responses usually leave me with a lower
oppinion of the sender.
If an "agreement" is made, then all those subscribing
to it put their faith in what the designated person
posts, and I don't see that happening in this reality :-)
Jon Plews.
~seg.co.uk
> (I guess it would be better if it were P or {R}, then there is no
> case of "conflict of interest" to answer).
I would be delighted if someone else would do the
honours. I'd rather do other things. The slight problem
is that all of us have different areas of expertise. My
weakness is in remembering the designations of all
the specs, which Peter is good at etc.
Michael.
Rachael Munns
>Advertising for personal gain. Particularly when no other content is
>in the message. The sig on every one of BS messages is an advert.
There is nothing wrong with placing an advert in your signature.
It's widely accepted as one of the few legitimate ways to advertise
on Usenet.
>There are at least 8 current occurences of this in the newsgroup at
>present. A reply consisting purely of an advertisement.
... and this doesn't prove anything other than that BS can't work
his newsreader.
--
Rachael
Brett Ainley
Spalter, SEG Communications) wrote:
>stu...@mailboxmouldings.co.uk (Stuart Elliott) wrote:
>
>> Perhaps that should go in the FAQ...
>> Q. Is there anyone in demon.service.isdn that should
>> be avoided at all costs
>
>Obviously I couldn't put that in myself (as a competitor)
>but if you want to submit it, and there is considerable
>support from other non-vested-interest parties, then
>it could go in.
The FAQ is meant to be the views/opinions
>of the members of this group.
>
>Michael.
Hi, Again sorry to correct you but FAQ`s are meant to be answers on
subject to the group in question -NOT "views/opinions" on various
contributors (be they good,bad or indifferent) to the group.
If you don't want to put any of BS `s knowledge or lack of it in the
FAQ that is fine,but to actually name him as a person to be ignored is
verging on the very fine line between opinion and legal action IMHO :}
Again I am finding it extremely difficult to separate the fact that
you are a commercial competitor to BS and are apparently trying to
compose an unbiased FAQ ?
Your quote "Obviously I couldn't put that in myself" is an obvious cop
out that a ten year old could see through and as the FAQ composer you
will be totally responsible for ANYTHING that you accept or "ALLOW"
to put in - no ?
My own opinion of BS is that .... is he really important enough to be
mentioned in the FAQ ??
Hope this helps,
It is not meant to offend,
All the best Brett :}
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The First Mobile Mechanics On The Net
Home Pages And Free Email Advice On Any Car Problem
At
http://www.webweavers.co.uk/homeservice/
Or
Email : br...@homeservice.co.uk
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Samuel Liddicott
>Townend) wrote:
>There is absolutely no doubt that the likes of Michael, Adrian, Peter
>and Richards contradictions are essential for the ISDN newcomer. Each
>time BS is challenged or accused of lying, to my knowledge he has yet
>to furnish proof of ANY of his claims or even a satisfied customer.
Despite my past defence of Barry you are quite right on this point, and I
find it very annoying.
Still...
Sam
Richard Townend
I don't wish to be pedantic here, but my details seem to have got
attached to follow-up postings without any of my original text. The
details of my posting on 6th Oct are correct, but my whole posting has
been removed and a follow up post appears (by the number of chevrons
on the left) to be mine - not so.
Just thought I'd like to make it clear that the above is not my
posting.
--
Regards
Richard Townend
~seg.co.uk
> sorry to correct you but FAQ`s are meant to be answers
> on subject to the group in question
Well, yes, you're right really....but ...however, it would be nice
to have a 'bit' of flexibility with the answers. Hard facts are
good, but there are sometimes 'caveats' which are very
useful in addition.
~seg.co.uk
> to actually name him as a person to be ignored is
> verging on the very fine line between opinion
Don't worry, it's not going to happen. Frankly it would
serve him right but it would be unprofessional and
degrade the quality of the FAQ. There is a comment
in there about "super E I " not existing though.
> I am finding it extremely difficult to separate the
> fact that you are a commercial competitor to BS and
> are apparently trying to compose an unbiased FAQ ?
Well try harder :-) You have not given an examples
of where you fell my questions/answers in the FAQ
are biased in any way.
> My own opinion of BS is that .... is he really important enough
> to be mentioned in the FAQ ??
No, he's not.
Brett Ainley
wrote:
>I see the fuckwit is at it again. *Any* FAQ shoud not only answer
>frequent questions, but put them in context and warn of conflicts,
>catches and other relevant useful material.
>
>Someone has nominated BS as a Fuckwit, perhaps Brett should visit
>www.fuckwit.tm and read the FAQ.
>
>{R}
IF YOU DO NOT STOP ADDRESSING ME WITH YOUR FAVOURITE ADJECTIVE -YOU DO
KNOW WHAT AN ADJECTIVE IS DONT YOU ?
Then i will take further action against you !
All the very best Brett :}
John Winters
Brett Ainley <m...@homeservice.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>On Thu, 08 Oct 98 14:38:58 GMT, {R}@sunshine.tm (Richard Ashton)
>wrote:
>
>>I see the fuckwit is at it again. *Any* FAQ shoud not only answer
>>frequent questions, but put them in context and warn of conflicts,
>>catches and other relevant useful material.
>>
>>Someone has nominated BS as a Fuckwit, perhaps Brett should visit
>>www.fuckwit.tm and read the FAQ.
>>
>>{R}
>IF YOU DO NOT STOP ADDRESSING ME WITH YOUR FAVOURITE ADJECTIVE -YOU DO
>KNOW WHAT AN ADJECTIVE IS DONT YOU ?
You obviously don't. The epither R so aptly applies to you is a noun.
HTH
John
(And fix the sig)
--
John Winters. Wallingford, Oxon, England.
The Linux Emporium - a source for Linux CDs in the UK
See <http://www.polo.demon.co.uk/emporium.html>
Adrian Kennard
>...
> Rather that flood these newsgroups with further abuse aimed at this person and
> his laughable "Super Eu^H" (though I must admit, I had the call to do just the
> their kill files ?
>...
It has been discussed before at great length, and filled the group
with almost as must dross as Barry generated. It seems to take a
week for the group to recover from Barry. Ignoring him is not
really an option. I think it was tried to some extent when he
first arrived and his claims became more outrageous, and he
started personal attacks.
One concellation is that he tends to vanish for prolonged periods,
usually during the week, and sometimes for several weeks. Whether
this is his mum turning off the computer, the care in the community
failing and him being locked up again, or whether it is posting
rights being pulled (please!) is unclear.
As for never finding a satisfied customer, I dont think we have
found any customer, satisfied or not.
--
_ Andrews & Arnold Ltd, Bracknell, Berks, RG42 1ZZ
(_) _| _ . _ _ Domains/WWW, ISDN/V.90 dialup http://aaisp.net/
( )(_|( |(_|| ) Professional Office telecoms/ISDN http://aa.nu/
*** Dealers wanted for ISDN cards *** http://www.sedlbauer.aa.nu/
Unknown
True. But the original poster referred to a question
Q: Is there anybody on d.s.i who should be avoided?
Well, having seen this group blow up from a relatively low traffic
group up to the the monstrosity it is now, in all that time, I have
never actually seen that question asked. Hardly "frequently" or even
"asked".
~seg.co.uk
> I see......
Richard, whilst we seem to agree on many things,
I personally find your colourful language unnecessary and
vulgar. I'm not a prude - there's a time and a place
for all types of language - but here it seems
inappropriate and not conducive to the friendly,
welcoming atmosphere which I think we'd want !
Michael.
Stuart Elliott
Communications) replied to m...@homeservice.freeserve.co.uk (Brett Ainley)'s
question:
>> My own opinion of BS is that .... is he really important enough
>> to be mentioned in the FAQ ??
>
>No, he's not.
Ok, so my question about him appearing in the FAQ was actually not meant to be
taken too seriously, and to be honest my original post has back fired, rather
tahn trying to cut down on the Barry bashing, it seems 20 more messages have
hit the group doing just that...
As a kind request.. Please kill this thread now...
Regards,
Stuart
~seg.co.uk
> I am a warm cuddly helpfull person, with an aversion
> to clueless fuckwits, like Brett
So, you want to offend HIM......why do you have
to offend others and sour the atmosphere ? You have email !
Brett Ainley
Hi, Excellent thinking please Email me your opinion of me Richard and
then you will find out what retribution REALLY means !
It will also save wasted posts in this group.
(Posted and Emailed)
All the best Brett :}
Rage
> The First Mobile Mechanics On The Net
> Home Pages And Free Email Advice On Any Car Problem At
> http://www.webweavers.co.uk/homeservice/
>xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fix your sig m8 like this...please?
Peter G. Strangman
wrote:
> There is nothing wrong with placing an advert in your signature.
> It's widely accepted as one of the few legitimate ways to advertise
> on Usenet.
A *correctly* *delimited* sig.!!!! Which BS never does!!!
> ... and this doesn't prove anything other than that BS can't work
> his newsreader.
It proves, to those of us who have been here long to know,
that his only interest is advertising and lying.
NOTE: I do not sell anything and I derive no benefit, either
directly or indirectly, from the information on my pages.
--
Peter G. Strangman | Willst du immer weiter schweifen?
Pe...@adelheid.demon.co.uk | Sieh, das Gut liegt so nah.
http://www.adelheid.demon.co.uk | Lerne nur das Glueck zu greifen,
XLIV-DCCCII-CCXII-DCCCXXXI | Denn das Gut ist immer da.
| (J. W. v. Goethe)
Peter G. Strangman
Ainley) wrote:
> IF YOU DO NOT STOP ADDRESSING ME WITH YOUR FAVOURITE ADJECTIVE -YOU DO
> KNOW WHAT AN ADJECTIVE IS DONT YOU ?
> Then i will take further action against you !
ROFL.
--
Peter G. Strangman | Fuer d' Floeh gibts a Pulver
Pe...@adelheid.demon.co.uk | fuer d' Schuach gibts a Wix,
http://www.adelheid.demon.co.uk | fuer'n Durst gibts a Wasser -
XLIV-DCCCII-CCXII-DCCCXXXI | bloss fuer d' Dummheit gibts nix.
| (Anon. aus Bayern)
Adrian Kennard
>
>...
> Again I am finding it extremely difficult to separate the fact that
> you are a commercial competitor to BS and are apparently trying to
> compose an unbiased FAQ ?
I am not convinced that BS is a commercial competitor to anyone.
He would have to have customers to represent any competition.
Adrian Kennard
>
>...
> I wonder what would happen if I called Adrian or Michael the same
> thing ? Something that's for certain.
I don't know about solicitors, but you would certainly get
evidence to back up claims.
Brian {Hamilton Kelly}
m...@homeservice.freeserve.co.uk "Brett Ainley" writes:
> On Thu, 08 Oct 98 14:38:58 GMT, {R}@sunshine.tm (Richard Ashton)
> wrote:
>
> >I see the fuckwit is at it again. *Any* FAQ shoud not only answer
> >frequent questions, but put them in context and warn of conflicts,
> >catches and other relevant useful material.
> >
> >Someone has nominated BS as a Fuckwit, perhaps Brett should visit
> >www.fuckwit.tm and read the FAQ.
> >
> IF YOU DO NOT STOP ADDRESSING ME WITH YOUR FAVOURITE ADJECTIVE -YOU DO
> KNOW WHAT AN ADJECTIVE IS DONT YOU ?
Errm; "fuckwit" is a noun, not an adjective. You *do* know what an
adjective is, don't you?
[When are you going to trim that massive .sig, which flies in the face of
all acceptable standards?]
--
Brian {Hamilton Kelly} b...@dsl.co.uk
"You're one of the very rare few who can argue ad hominem, ad absurdum
and ad nauseam simultaneously...worse still it looks like you want to
carry on ad infinitum..." WPSM on alt.config 1998/06/27
Brett Ainley
wrote:
>> IF YOU DO NOT STOP ADDRESSING ME WITH YOUR FAVOURITE ADJECTIVE -YOU DO
>> KNOW WHAT AN ADJECTIVE IS DONT YOU ?
>
>Errm; "fuckwit" is a noun, not an adjective. You *do* know what an
>adjective is, don't you?
Actually it is either both or neither (unless you can point to a
dictionary with the word in ?
>
>
>[When are you going to trim that massive .sig, which flies in the face of
>all acceptable standards?]
Never,and I have posted the reasons why not many times ;}
All the best Brett :}
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The First Mobile Mechanics On The Net
Home Pages And Free Email Advice On Any Car Problem
At
http://www.webweavers.co.uk/homeservice/
Or
Email : br...@homeservice.co.uk
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Malcolm Ogilvie
<m...@homeservice.freeserve.co.uk> writes
>>all acceptable standards?]
>
>Never,and I have posted the reasons why not many times ;}
>
>All the best Brett :}
>
>
>
>xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> The First Mobile Mechanics On The Net
for someone who thinks that fuckwit is an adjective. Another unusual
> Home Pages And Free Email Advice On Any Car Problem
> At
spaces. He didn't just hit the Enter key between each line but, weirdly,
> http://www.webweavers.co.uk/homeservice/
must have used the space key for a whole line. I guess that his only
> Or
reason for refusing to trim this ridiculously long signature is that he
> Email : br...@homeservice.co.uk
tried, but it didn't work because all he was deleting was a few spaces.
>xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
--
Malcolm
Bill Muskett
wrote:
>On Wed, 28 Oct 1998 01:19:35 GMT, m...@homeservice.freeserve.co.uk (Brett
>Ainley) used 39 lines to say...
>
>>On Tue, 27 Oct 98 22:57:08 GMT, b...@dsl.co.uk (Brian {Hamilton Kelly})
>>wrote:
>
>>>Errm; "fuckwit" is a noun, not an adjective. You *do* know what an
>>>adjective is, don't you?
>>
>>Actually it is either both or neither (unless you can point to a
>>dictionary with the word in ?
>
>It is both - depending on its usage, whether it is in a dictionary is
>immaterial. The terms 'noun' and 'adjective' are ways of describing what
>a word does, a dictionary describes what a word means.
>
Well, I would have said that the adjective was "fuckwitted". But the
real reason I'm following up to this is that I was watching Drop the
Dead Donkey last night, taped from the previous night. In it, Henry
the newsreader launched a long tirade at Gus, consisting of lots of
bleeped out adjectives, and ending in the noun "fuckwit". Another
nomination for {R}'s web site?
Bill
B.E.Newsam
>Never,and I have posted the reasons why not many times ;}
Fuckwit.
--
Ben