Buggy behavior of server

[Nadegda]

With these headers:

Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.free.newsservers,sci.physics,alt.astronomy,alt.usenet.kooks
Followup-To: alt.usenet.kooks

your server incorrectly responds with "441 Forbidden Crosspost", despite
the fact that a single-group Followup-To is set. Removing
comp.os.linux.advocacy from the Newsgroups: line suffices to avoid
triggering the bug. Please look into this.

[Richard Damon]

I find it hard to imagine a post that would be on topic for all of these
groups, and setting Followup-to: to a single group doesn't make it any
more right. There is likely a rule that has been put in place blocking
cross posts between comp.os.linux.advocacy and one of the other groups
(or some combination there-of).

[Ray Banana]

W.A.D.



--
Too many ingredients in the soup, no room for a spoon.

[VanguardLH]

"Nadegda" wrote:

> With these headers:
>
> Newsgroups:
> comp.os.linux.advocacy

> alt.free.newsservers
> sci.physics,alt.astronomy
> alt.usenet.kooks

Those are unrelated newsgroups. The more groups you include in a
crosspost then the less probable that your post is on-topic to ALL of
them. It's obvious you want to add a flame in kooks and then puke it
elsewhere to insult.

So do you also crosspost an article about replacing a car alternator
into a gardening group, too? (rolls eyes)

> Followup-To: alt.usenet.kooks
>
> your server incorrectly responds with "441 Forbidden Crosspost", despite
> the fact that a single-group Followup-To is set. Removing
> comp.os.linux.advocacy from the Newsgroups: line suffices to avoid
> triggering the bug. Please look into this.

Personally I would prefer the NNTP server to refuse any article that is
crossposted when the kooks or any advocacy group is included. Keep the
kook flames in the kook group. Keep the proselytizing flames in the
advocacy groups. Keep the turds in their own toilet groups.

However, if the NNTP owner has rules about to which groups an article
can or cannot be crossposted then those rules should be posted at the
web site for that NNTP server. I didn't see any such rules listed. But
then I also didn't see a max group count mentioned regarding
crossposting, or any restrictions about crossposting. Maybe the error
messages are expected to be self-explanatory or users are expected to
learn by trial and error. Maybe the ban rules are too lengthy to list,
or they could have their own FAQ article and let users figure them out.

[Gene Wirchenko]

On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 22:55:30 +0000 (UTC), Ray Banana
<ray...@banana.shacknet.nu> wrote:

>Nadegda wrote:
>
>> With these headers:
>>
>> Newsgroups:
>>
>comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.free.newsservers,sci.physics,alt.astronomy,alt.usenet.kooks
>> Followup-To: alt.usenet.kooks
>>
>> your server incorrectly responds with "441 Forbidden Crosspost", despite
>> the fact that a single-group Followup-To is set. Removing
>> comp.os.linux.advocacy from the Newsgroups: line suffices to avoid
>> triggering the bug. Please look into this.
>
>W.A.D.

I assume this means "Working As Designed".

Mousetrap caught mouse. Mouse complains.

Do you have a general rule on number of newsgroups allowed? I
understand that four is a typical maximum, but what do you have set? I
occasionally crosspost but only to two newsgroups at once.

Happy New Year, folks.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

[Peter Boulding]

On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 21:39:18 -0800, Gene Wirchenko <ge...@telus.net> wrote
in <p9t4e89hmbkinc1kb...@4ax.com>:

The Cleanfeed filter--which I believe Ray uses--includes, by default (or did
when I downloaded a copy out of interest), a list of "meow" newsgroups and
special crosspost rules that block messages whose crosspost list includes a
"meow" group such as alt.usenet.kooks. This is in addition to the normal
crosspost maximum.

The OP would, IMO, have done better not to draw attention to Ray's unusually
generous crosspost maximum and failure--so far--to define alt.usenet.kooks
as a meow group.

> Happy New Year, folks.

Likewise (offered more as a pious hope than any expectation).

--
Regards, Peter Boulding
pjbn...@UNSPAMpboulding.co.uk (to e-mail, remove "UNSPAM")
Fractal Images and Music: http://www.pboulding.co.uk/
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=794240&content=music

[Ray Banana]

Gene Wirchenko wrote:

> Do you have a general rule on number of newsgroups allowed? I
> understand that four is a typical maximum, but what do you have set? I
> occasionally crosspost but only to two newsgroups at once.

Yes. In general, crossposting is limited to 6 groups. There is, however,
an additional limitation concerning postings to a.u.k. and a.f.n. whith
crossposts to unrelated groups.

Please see <86k3xzh...@banana.shacknet.nu> for details.

[Gene Wirchenko]

On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 12:14:13 +0000 (UTC), Ray Banana
<ray...@banana.shacknet.nu> wrote:

>Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>
>> Do you have a general rule on number of newsgroups allowed? I
>> understand that four is a typical maximum, but what do you have set? I
>> occasionally crosspost but only to two newsgroups at once.
>
>Yes. In general, crossposting is limited to 6 groups. There is, however,
>an additional limitation concerning postings to a.u.k. and a.f.n. whith
>crossposts to unrelated groups.
>
>Please see <86k3xzh...@banana.shacknet.nu> for details.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

[Adam H. Kerman]

seamus, you couldn't post on topic in an uncrossposted article to misc.misc.

[Nadegda]

On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 21:39:18 -0800, Gene Wirchenko wrote:

> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 22:55:30 +0000 (UTC), Ray Banana
> <ray...@banana.shacknet.nu> wrote:
>
>>Nadegda wrote:
>>
>>> With these headers:
>>>
>>> Newsgroups:
>>>
>>comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.free.newsservers,sci.physics,alt.astronomy,alt.usenet.kooks
>>> Followup-To: alt.usenet.kooks
>>>
>>> your server incorrectly responds with "441 Forbidden Crosspost",
>>> despite the fact that a single-group Followup-To is set. Removing
>>> comp.os.linux.advocacy from the Newsgroups: line suffices to avoid
>>> triggering the bug. Please look into this.
>>
>>W.A.D.
>
> I assume this means "Working As Designed".
>
> Mousetrap caught mouse. Mouse complains.

That presupposes that I was trying to do something naughty, acting in bad
faith. Nothing could be farther from the truth. In fact, the newsgroups
line was inherited: I was posting a followup. I followed standard
netiquette and a) avoided splitting the discussion by multiposting while
b) setting a followup to a more appropriate newsgroup. Unfortunately, the
buggy behavior observed would seem to require people to multipost replies
in these cases, forking a discussion, or else omit some newsgroups, which
could result in not being read by some of the participants. The crosspost
should be allowed as long as a followup group is set.

[Nadegda]

On Tue, 01 Jan 2013 03:05:46 -0800, She's a Witch of Trouble in Electric
China Blue wrote:

> In article <t8c5e8t2fc6oaqvnc...@4ax.com>,

> Nads is a kook

Wrong. I'm one of the currently reigning FNVWs and you are a kook. Laki
Volcano Award "winner" a month or two back, IIRC.

Nice try, though.

<snicker>

> Followup-to set.

Denied, kooky.

[Nadegda]

On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 19:28:27 -0600, VanguardLH wrote:

> "Nadegda" wrote:
>
>> With these headers:
>>
>> Newsgroups:
>> comp.os.linux.advocacy
>> alt.free.newsservers
>> sci.physics,alt.astronomy
>> alt.usenet.kooks
>
> Those are unrelated newsgroups.

Blame the thread starter, who wasn't me.

> The more groups you include in a crosspost then the less probable that
> your post is on-topic to ALL of them. It's obvious you want to add a
> flame in kooks and then puke it elsewhere to insult.

It's obvious that you haven't read the post in question.

> So do you also crosspost an article about replacing a car alternator
> into a gardening group, too? (rolls eyes)

Don't be ridiculous.

>> Followup-To: alt.usenet.kooks
>>
>> your server incorrectly responds with "441 Forbidden Crosspost",
>> despite the fact that a single-group Followup-To is set. Removing
>> comp.os.linux.advocacy from the Newsgroups: line suffices to avoid
>> triggering the bug. Please look into this.
>
> Personally I would prefer the NNTP server to refuse any article that is
> crossposted when the kooks or any advocacy group is included.

Personally I would prefer the NNTP server to be liberal in what it
accepts and individual usenetters to be responsible for keeping their
killfiles well-curated, including filtering on specific crosspost groups
or on number of crossposted groups if they so desire.

> Keep the kook flames in the kook group.

The *kooks* don't keep the kook flames in the kook groups. Seen
sci.physics lately? I think kensi pretty much has her hands full keeping
an eye on all the kooks there.

> Keep the proselytizing flames in the advocacy groups. Keep the turds
> in their own toilet groups.
>
> However, if the NNTP owner has rules about to which groups an article
> can or cannot be crossposted then those rules should be posted at the
> web site for that NNTP server. I didn't see any such rules listed. But
> then I also didn't see a max group count mentioned regarding
> crossposting, or any restrictions about crossposting. Maybe the error
> messages are expected to be self-explanatory

Any such expectation is woefully unjustified. The message I got didn't
even name which newsgroup combination it didn't like.

And, of course, setting a single-group followup-to should have neutered
it, regardless.

> or users are expected to learn by trial and error. Maybe the ban rules
> are too lengthy to list,

In which case they are clearly excessive. Usenet users are supposed to be
mostly self-policing via killfiles, and crossposts involving particular
groups are particularly easy to filter for those who don't wish to see
them. There's little to no reason, IMO, for a server to have *any*
crosspost restrictions beyond ones based on sheer quantity, let alone a
huge and baroque array of them.

> or they could have their own FAQ article and let users figure them out.

That would require communicating rather more information to users than
seems to be the case here.

[Ken Sims]

On Thu, 3 Jan 2013 03:17:57 +0000 (UTC), Nadegda
<nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:

>> or users are expected to learn by trial and error. Maybe the ban rules
>> are too lengthy to list,
>
>In which case they are clearly excessive. Usenet users are supposed to be
>mostly self-policing via killfiles, and crossposts involving particular
>groups are particularly easy to filter for those who don't wish to see
>them. There's little to no reason, IMO, for a server to have *any*
>crosspost restrictions beyond ones based on sheer quantity, let alone a
>huge and baroque array of them.

The old saying "My server, my rules" comes to mind. In this case it
is "Ray's server, Ray's rules". I.e. if you don't like the way he
runs Eternal September, find some other Usenet service, or start your
own.

Most of us here, including me, do very much like the way he runs E-S.

--
Ken

[Gene Wirchenko]

On Thu, 3 Jan 2013 03:09:38 +0000 (UTC), Nadegda
<nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:

>On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 21:39:18 -0800, Gene Wirchenko wrote:

[snip]

>> Mousetrap caught mouse. Mouse complains.
>
>That presupposes that I was trying to do something naughty, acting in bad
>faith. Nothing could be farther from the truth. In fact, the newsgroups
>line was inherited: I was posting a followup. I followed standard

You are responsible for what you post.

>netiquette and a) avoided splitting the discussion by multiposting while
>b) setting a followup to a more appropriate newsgroup. Unfortunately, the
>buggy behavior observed would seem to require people to multipost replies
>in these cases, forking a discussion, or else omit some newsgroups, which
>could result in not being read by some of the participants. The crosspost
>should be allowed as long as a followup group is set.

As another poster pointed out, Ray's server, Ray's rules.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

[VanguardLH]

"Nadegda" wrote:

> It's obvious that you haven't read the post in question.

Oh yes, it is so obvious what might be that article or thread ... NOT!
You think others are going to know the article number from your mention
of some error status your client got from a server?

There is no "post in question". You never identified it. No, I'm not
wasting any time foraging in newsgroups that I don't inhabit. You
decided not to identify the article or thread. You didn't even bother
to give the Subject header. I have no inclinination in pushing the
turds floating around in an unflushed toilet to find one in particular.

[Nadegda]

On Thu, 03 Jan 2013 10:06:05 -0800, Gene Wirchenko wrote:

> On Thu, 3 Jan 2013 03:09:38 +0000 (UTC), Nadegda
> <nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 21:39:18 -0800, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>>> Mousetrap caught mouse. Mouse complains.
>>
>>That presupposes that I was trying to do something naughty, acting in
>>bad faith. Nothing could be farther from the truth. In fact, the
>>newsgroups line was inherited: I was posting a followup. I followed
>>standard
>
> You are responsible for what you post.

Interrupting someone is rather rude.

>>netiquette and a) avoided splitting the discussion by multiposting while
>>b) setting a followup to a more appropriate newsgroup. Unfortunately,
>>the buggy behavior observed would seem to require people to multipost
>>replies in these cases, forking a discussion, or else omit some
>>newsgroups, which could result in not being read by some of the
>>participants. The crosspost should be allowed as long as a followup
>>group is set.
>
> As another poster pointed out, Ray's server, Ray's rules.

See my response to that other poster. Also, note how those rules, in this
instance, seem likely to cause people to fragment discussions (as opposed
to requiring a followup-to, which might tend to concentrate them in the
single most-relevant group instead).

[Nadegda]

That doesn't preclude me from advising him where those rules seem to be
sub-optimal (or where the server may have glitched outright).

> Most of us here, including me, do very much like the way he runs E-S.

So do I, for the most part. But I don't agree in this one particular
instance that the behavior I observed is desirable. Perhaps thread-
starting posts (with no References) to too-diverse groups should be
blocked, while permitting replies that have narrow enough Followup-Tos.
But then, also, who decides which combinations of groups should be
blocked? And how the heck is a user supposed to guess, *in advance*, and
avoid getting a smack in the face from the server? Unless there's a
simple and obvious three-sentence-or-so rule that can be stated that
covers all the cases, it's probably better to allow the crossposts but
require a Followup-To (as is already the case for any crosspost to more
than three groups, it seems).

[Nadegda]

On Fri, 04 Jan 2013 06:46:48 -0600, VanguardLH wrote:

> "Nadegda" wrote:
>
>> It's obvious that you haven't read the post in question.
>
> Oh yes, it is so obvious what might be that article or thread ... NOT!
> You think others are going to know the article number from your mention
> of some error status your client got from a server?

Whoosh! The point is, since you *haven't* read the post in question, your
judging it sight-unseen as worthless and making all kinds of assertions
and conclusions about it is more than a little odd. No, "odd" is the
wrong word; "laughable" might be more appropriate.

> There is no "post in question". You never identified it. No, I'm not
> wasting any time foraging in newsgroups that I don't inhabit. You
> decided not to identify the article or thread. You didn't even bother
> to give the Subject header. I have no inclinination in pushing the
> turds floating around in an unflushed toilet to find one in particular.

And there you go again presuming it to be a "turd", sight-unseen! Truly
remarkable.

[VanguardĿH]

On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 05:05:18 +0000, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

41134> Newsgroups: eternal-september.support

41134> seamus, you couldn't post on topic in an uncrossposted article to
41134> misc.misc.

Who is "seamus", Kerman? There is nobody in this newsgroup using that
alias.

[Barry Margolin]

In article <kc8ame$r6d$3...@dont-email.me>,

Nadegda <nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:

> On Fri, 04 Jan 2013 06:46:48 -0600, VanguardLH wrote:
>
> > "Nadegda" wrote:
> >
> >> It's obvious that you haven't read the post in question.
> >
> > Oh yes, it is so obvious what might be that article or thread ... NOT!
> > You think others are going to know the article number from your mention
> > of some error status your client got from a server?
>
> Whoosh! The point is, since you *haven't* read the post in question, your
> judging it sight-unseen as worthless and making all kinds of assertions
> and conclusions about it is more than a little odd. No, "odd" is the
> wrong word; "laughable" might be more appropriate.

Since there's unlikely to be a legitimate reason to cross-post to those
newsgroups, one doesn't have to read the thread to know that it's
probably BS.

You said you were just following up. I've occasionally followed up to a
post without noticing that it was crossposted to unwanted groups (or had
its Followup-To set to send somewhere inappropriate). On those
occasions, I wish there were a system that would catch this stuff.

--
Barry Margolin
Arlington, MA

[VanguardLH]

"Nadegda" wrote:

> On Fri, 04 Jan 2013 06:46:48 -0600, VanguardLH wrote:
>
>> "Nadegda" wrote:
>>
>>> It's obvious that you haven't read the post in question.
>>
>> Oh yes, it is so obvious what might be that article or thread ... NOT!
>> You think others are going to know the article number from your mention
>> of some error status your client got from a server?
>
> Whoosh! The point is, since you *haven't* read the post in question, your
> judging it sight-unseen as worthless and making all kinds of assertions
> and conclusions about it is more than a little odd. No, "odd" is the
> wrong word; "laughable" might be more appropriate.

Wow, I didn't realize I was discussing the issue with a child. I didn't
see the post because YOU CHOSE NOT TO IDENTIFY IT. Duh! Neither did
anyone else here see the post in question because the post wasn't in
THIS newsgroup. Duh!

[Nadegda]

On Sun, 06 Jan 2013 00:21:20 -0500, Barry Margolin wrote:

> In article <kc8ame$r6d$3...@dont-email.me>,
> Nadegda <nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 04 Jan 2013 06:46:48 -0600, VanguardLH wrote:
>>
>> > "Nadegda" wrote:
>> >
>> >> It's obvious that you haven't read the post in question.
>> >
>> > Oh yes, it is so obvious what might be that article or thread ...
>> > NOT! You think others are going to know the article number from your
>> > mention of some error status your client got from a server?
>>
>> Whoosh! The point is, since you *haven't* read the post in question,
>> your judging it sight-unseen as worthless and making all kinds of
>> assertions and conclusions about it is more than a little odd. No,
>> "odd" is the wrong word; "laughable" might be more appropriate.
>
> Since there's unlikely to be a legitimate reason to cross-post to those
> newsgroups, one doesn't have to read the thread to know that it's
> probably BS.

"Unlikely" and "probably" are good enough when making your own personal
decision as to whether to read a post or just mark it read and move on,
but they are not generally going to be good enough when imposing a
limitation on other people. Especially in a medium like Usenet where most
such choices are, by the medium's explicitly declared philosophy,
supposed to be decided where the article meets a user's killfile and not
at the injecting server.

[Nadegda]

On Sun, 06 Jan 2013 01:51:56 -0600, VanguardLH wrote:

> "Nadegda" wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 04 Jan 2013 06:46:48 -0600, VanguardLH wrote:
>>
>>> "Nadegda" wrote:
>>>
>>>> It's obvious that you haven't read the post in question.
>>>
>>> Oh yes, it is so obvious what might be that article or thread ... NOT!
>>> You think others are going to know the article number from your
>>> mention of some error status your client got from a server?
>>
>> Whoosh! The point is, since you *haven't* read the post in question,
>> your judging it sight-unseen as worthless and making all kinds of
>> assertions and conclusions about it is more than a little odd. No,
>> "odd" is the wrong word; "laughable" might be more appropriate.
>

> Wow, I didn't realize I was discussing the issue with a child.<MUSHROOM
> CLOUD>

That you respond to being proved wrong with namecalling is noted.

[Gene Wirchenko]

On Sat, 5 Jan 2013 04:32:18 +0000 (UTC), Nadegda

<nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:

>On Thu, 03 Jan 2013 10:06:05 -0800, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 3 Jan 2013 03:09:38 +0000 (UTC), Nadegda
>> <nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 21:39:18 -0800, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>>> Mousetrap caught mouse. Mouse complains.
>>>
>>>That presupposes that I was trying to do something naughty, acting in
>>>bad faith. Nothing could be farther from the truth. In fact, the
>>>newsgroups line was inherited: I was posting a followup. I followed
>>>standard
>>
>> You are responsible for what you post.
>
>Interrupting someone is rather rude.

Say what? I replied to a piece of your post by posting my reply
at the appropriate point. I did not interrupt you. Your post was
complete before I replied.

>>>netiquette and a) avoided splitting the discussion by multiposting while
>>>b) setting a followup to a more appropriate newsgroup. Unfortunately,
>>>the buggy behavior observed would seem to require people to multipost
>>>replies in these cases, forking a discussion, or else omit some
>>>newsgroups, which could result in not being read by some of the
>>>participants. The crosspost should be allowed as long as a followup
>>>group is set.
>>
>> As another poster pointed out, Ray's server, Ray's rules.
>
>See my response to that other poster. Also, note how those rules, in this
>instance, seem likely to cause people to fragment discussions (as opposed
>to requiring a followup-to, which might tend to concentrate them in the
>single most-relevant group instead).

If it matters to you, then take it up with Ray, but be prepared
to be told that it is working as designed.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

[Joshua Cranmer]

On 1/6/2013 8:40 PM, Nadegda wrote:
> "Unlikely" and "probably" are good enough when making your own personal
> decision as to whether to read a post or just mark it read and move on,
> but they are not generally going to be good enough when imposing a
> limitation on other people. Especially in a medium like Usenet where most
> such choices are, by the medium's explicitly declared philosophy,
> supposed to be decided where the article meets a user's killfile and not
> at the injecting server.

Which is therefore grounds for you to attempt to violate the rules set
by the server maintainer, who has graciously permitted you to use his
hardware at no cost to yourself? And upon further discovery that you
could not violate the rules, to then complain that you should be allowed
to dictate the rules on someone else's property?

Now, get off of my lawn.

--
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not
tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth

[Nadegda]

On Sun, 06 Jan 2013 21:44:48 -0600, Joshua Cranmer
<Idge...@verizon.invalid> wrote:

> On 1/6/2013 8:40 PM, Nadegda wrote:
>> "Unlikely" and "probably" are good enough when making your own personal
>> decision as to whether to read a post or just mark it read and move on,
>> but they are not generally going to be good enough when imposing a
>> limitation on other people. Especially in a medium like Usenet where
>> most such choices are, by the medium's explicitly declared philosophy,
>> supposed to be decided where the article meets a user's killfile and
>> not at the injecting server.
>
> Which is therefore grounds for you to attempt to violate the rules set
> by the server maintainer, who has graciously permitted you to use his
> hardware at no cost to yourself?

Who was intentionally attempting to circumvent any rules? I don't recall
any instance of such being presented for discussion. Only an instance
where the server rejected a post that did not violate any of the
officially-stated rules listed at the relevant server's AUP webpage,
seemingly arbitrarily.

> And upon further discovery that you could not violate the rules, to
> then complain that you should be allowed to dictate the rules on
> someone else's property?

An undocumented crosspost restriction is not the same thing as an AUP
rule -- it could quite possibly be the outcome of a bug, or even be an
oversight.

Furthermore, it's perfectly reasonable to challenge something -- rule or
otherwise -- that seems to lack a useful purpose and has become a
nuisance. Obsolete red tape often lingers past its sell-by date, so to
speak, and becomes needlessly and purely obstructionist; if you've worked
a day in your life you've probably run into likely instances of such in
the halls of one bureaucracy or another. One can easily conceive of a
situation where a temporary flood of abusive crossposts involving
comp.os.linux.advocacy and originating from eternal-september.org
prompted a "temporary" restriction on same that the admin, due to being
kept busy fixing things, forgot to lift afterward, for example.

Lastly, appealing to the philosophy on which Usenet has run since its
inception is hardly akin to suggesting some sort of radical overthrow of
an accepted regime. In fact, it's pretty much the precise opposite.

In any event, imputing nefarious intent to me where none is actually
present hardly helps to make your arguments compelling to me.

> Now, get off of my lawn.

This is a usenet newsgroup, not your private property. You can freely
disagree with my opinion here but telling me, in one way or another, to
shut up is not going to result in my doing so.

[Barry Margolin]

In article <kcdci5$9tr$1...@dont-email.me>,

"Unlikely" and "probably" are good enough when doing spam filtering, is
this really so different?

[Nadegda]

It depends on where the filtering's being done. If by the end user, it's
fine. If by the mail host, it should be "almost impossible" and "almost
certainly", or legitimate mail might get lost.

P.S. It also doesn't like the combination of alt.usenet.kooks with at
least one of comp.lang.lisp, comp.lang.java.programmer, alt.astronomy,
and sci.physics -- oddly, I could have sworn I'd crossposted between auk
and each of those on at least one previous occasion, but I guess not.

P.P.S. Before anyone suggests nothing could ever be on topic for all of
those groups, what if someone used Armed Bear Common Lisp or Clojure
(Lisp dialects that run on the Java Virtual Machine) to write software to
simulate stellar interiors (physics stuff, applied in the astronomy
domain), and someone made the kooky claim to have used that software to
prove that the Sun's core temperature was fifty below zero Farenheit? A
response to that claim pointing out that they must have used the software
wrong would be on topic in all five groups. :)

[Ken Sims]

On Tue, 8 Jan 2013 04:23:41 +0000 (UTC), Nadegda
<nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:

>P.P.S. Before anyone suggests nothing could ever be on topic for all of
>those groups, what if someone used Armed Bear Common Lisp or Clojure
>(Lisp dialects that run on the Java Virtual Machine) to write software to
>simulate stellar interiors (physics stuff, applied in the astronomy
>domain), and someone made the kooky claim to have used that software to
>prove that the Sun's core temperature was fifty below zero Farenheit? A
>response to that claim pointing out that they must have used the software
>wrong would be on topic in all five groups. :)

If the person really believed that, they wouldn't include
alt.usenet.kooks and there would be no need or point for you to add it
when responding.

If the person didn't really believe it and you respond, you're just
feeding a troll and adding to the noise level of legitimate newsgroups
in the process. Ray's rules are precisely to prevent that kind of
behavior.

--
Ken

[Nadegda]

On Mon, 07 Jan 2013 20:40:13 -0800, Ken Sims wrote:

> On Tue, 8 Jan 2013 04:23:41 +0000 (UTC), Nadegda
> <nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>
>>P.P.S. Before anyone suggests nothing could ever be on topic for all of
>>those groups, what if someone used Armed Bear Common Lisp or Clojure
>>(Lisp dialects that run on the Java Virtual Machine) to write software
>>to simulate stellar interiors (physics stuff, applied in the astronomy
>>domain), and someone made the kooky claim to have used that software to
>>prove that the Sun's core temperature was fifty below zero Farenheit? A
>>response to that claim pointing out that they must have used the
>>software wrong would be on topic in all five groups. :)
>
> If the person really believed that, they wouldn't include
> alt.usenet.kooks

True enough

> and there would be no need or point for you to add it
> when responding.

Not so. Documenting usenet kooks is one of the core duties of a
kookologist, and crossposting specimens of kookery into alt.usenet.kooks
is a key part of the documenting process.

> If the person didn't really believe it and you respond, you're just
> feeding a troll and adding to the noise level of legitimate newsgroups
> in the process. Ray's rules are precisely to prevent that kind of
> behavior.

Oh, the kooks do really believe the kooky things they say -- that's what
makes them kooks.

[Ken Sims]

Ah, now I understand why you really believe that Ray's rules are too
restrictive.

--
Ken

[Nadegda]

Oh, an IKYABWAI and calling a kookologist a kook -- like I haven't seen
*that* many times before.

It's clear that you have nothing of substance to contribute to this
discussion anymore, if you ever did.

[Mike Yetto]

In a world where Nadegda <nad31...@gmail.invalid>
posts to Usenet.

You claim the right to include auk in any discussion within any
group by shouting "archive" and yet do not consider the
consequences to the group.

That is trollish behaviour and the server rules stopping it
become a welcome filter.

If you don't like the rules imposed by e-s use a different
server.

Mike "and ask for a refund" Yetto
--
In theory, theory and practice are the same.
In practice they are not.

[kensi]

On 12/01/2013 9:53 AM, Mike Yetto wrote:
> In a world where Nadegda <nad31...@gmail.invalid>
> posts to Usenet.
>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 20:56:21 -0800, Ken Sims wrote:
>
>>> On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 03:16:19 +0000 (UTC), Nadegda
>>> <nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Oh, the kooks do really believe the kooky things they say -- that's what
>>>> makes them kooks.
>>>
>>> Ah, now I understand why you really believe that Ray's rules are too
>>> restrictive.
>
>> Oh, an IKYABWAI and calling a kookologist a kook -- like I haven't seen
>> *that* many times before.
>
>> It's clear that you have nothing of substance to contribute to this
>> discussion anymore, if you ever did.
>
> You claim the right to include auk in any discussion within any
> group by shouting "archive" and yet do not consider the
> consequences to the group.

*You* are obviously not familiar with auk, since if you were you'd
realize that there *are* no consequences to *that* group from such.

Try not jumping to conclusions in your eagerness to climb over other
people and present yourself as some sort of alpha male -- that way your
efforts will backfire less often in the future.

--
"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain
the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy." ~David Brooks
"A clue, a clue. My kingdom for a clue!!!!" ~Gweggles,
in an uncommon moment of self-awareness.

[kensi]

On 12/01/2013 7:03 PM, Rutles - China Blue Suede Schubert wrote:
> In article <kcsrah$aql$1...@news.albasani.net>,
> kensi <kkensi...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>
> How many ways do people have to tell you to go to perdition before you finally
> clue up?

Wow! Such a lot of vitriol, concentrated into such a tiny post, and
prompted by nothing more than the fact that I exist? You don't even have
a dog in this particular thread.

If you hate me that much, you'd be well advised to killfile me.
Alternatively, you can ignore me the old-fashioned way by simply not
choosing to respond to my posts. Or, of course, you can choose the ko0ky
option: following me around to let everyone in the world know how much
you hate me, much like your fellow k00k Shit Rot has been doing.

Of course, it's easy to guess which you'll choose. *snicker*

(auk added and followups set there as "Rutles"'s unprovoked flame
clearly has nothing whatsoever to do with E-S)

[Mike Yetto]

In a world where kensi <kkensi...@gmail.invalid>
posts to Usenet.

>On 12/01/2013 9:53 AM, Mike Yetto wrote:
>> In a world where Nadegda <nad31...@gmail.invalid>
>> posts to Usenet.
>>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 20:56:21 -0800, Ken Sims wrote:
>>
>>>> On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 03:16:19 +0000 (UTC), Nadegda
>>>> <nad31...@gmail.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Oh, the kooks do really believe the kooky things they say -- that's what
>>>>> makes them kooks.
>>>>
>>>> Ah, now I understand why you really believe that Ray's rules are too
>>>> restrictive.
>>
>>> Oh, an IKYABWAI and calling a kookologist a kook -- like I haven't seen
>>> *that* many times before.
>>
>>> It's clear that you have nothing of substance to contribute to this
>>> discussion anymore, if you ever did.
>>
>> You claim the right to include auk in any discussion within any
>> group by shouting "archive" and yet do not consider the
>> consequences to the group.

>*You* are obviously not familiar with auk, since if you were you'd
>realize that there *are* no consequences to *that* group from such.

Who gives a fuck about the consequences to auk? The group to
consider is the one whose thread was offered to auk as a target
of opportunity.

>Try not jumping to conclusions in your eagerness to climb over other
>people and present yourself as some sort of alpha male -- that way your
>efforts will backfire less often in the future.

Try reading for comprehension.

Mike "let the kooks climb over themselves" Yetto

[kensi]

Does it *really* make much of a difference to, say, sci.physics if one
of the "Einstein was wrong" nutters' pet theory threads gets crossposted
to auk? A lot of people will have killfiled the thread anyway, and the
rest will be a) kooks, b) kookologists, and c) people amused by the
antics of kooks.

> Try reading for compr<FOOM!>

Try some diplomacy, shithead.

[Mike Yetto]

Why invite your asshole friends from auk? The local assholes are
enough to deal with.

>> Try reading for compr<FOOM!>

>Try some diplomacy, shithead.

You are a waste of diplomacy. Even saying "nice doggy" isn't
worth the effort.

Mike "the big rock might be" Yetto

[kensi]

On 12/01/2013 8:03 PM, Mike Yetto wrote:
> Why invite your asshole friends from auk? The local assholes are
> enough to deal with.

Oh, the irony...

[Ray Banana]

Thus spake kensi <kkensi...@gmail.invalid>

> *You* are obviously not familiar with auk, since if you were you'd
> realize that there *are* no consequences to *that* group from such.
>
> Try not jumping to conclusions in your eagerness to climb over other
> people and present yourself as some sort of alpha male -- that way
> your efforts will backfire less often in the future.

The "lady" doth protest too much, methinks ...

Nice try, anyhow, Seamus.

--
Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a Banana.
http://www.eternal-september.org

[Kia]

kensi <kkensi...@gmail.invalid> wrote in
news:kct56c$8cp$1...@news.albasani.net

>On 12/01/2013 8:25 PM, Rutles - China Blue Suede Schubert wrote:
>>>>> How many ways do people have to tell you to go to perdition before

>>>>> your finally clue up?

>>>>
>>>> Wow! Such a lot of vitriol, concentrated into such a tiny post, and
>>>> prompted
>>

>> Brevity is the soul of wit.
>
>Irrelevant, since your comment was witless anyway.
>
Value judgements from you (seamus - Derbyshire) turn to sewage in
less than four of your keystrokes.

>*snicker*
>
liar.
we saw the video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdyBYSuqQBQ&feature=youtu.be
Luck with recruiting fresh goat of late?
haw fucking haw haw!

>>>> by nothing more than the fact that I exist? You don't even have a dog in
>>>> this particular thread.
>>

>> You're a kook. Expect to be noticed by auk.
>
>Ah, you've been studying.
>
Your fan froup?
Sure, very very interesting is alt.paul-derbyshire.fix.it.now,
alt.paul-derbyshire,alt.paul-derbyshire.fix.it

Finds include;
No, you're the liar and the criminal.
Get the fuck out of rec.arts.sf.tv, wankstain.
I am.
Do not misquote me again!
Use the shift key.
Do not misquote or insult me again.
Wrong!
Do not do any of those things again.
You're the liar.
Do not misattribute my posts again.
You are wrong about me.
Oh, my God, this guy is loco!
Seek psychiatric help!
What, you want even MORE jail time?
Have a nice day, cocksucker!
That it will. And the sooner you shut up, the sooner that will happen.

Also your reliance on Banana!
http://www.freeimagehosting.net/vyl9x

Then there is the digest of course. heh
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/bdd8656dd70238d1/6a7d08d594284624?q=

/snip
>Ohhhh, the irony. This from someone still backing nuts like Account
>Banned (not to mention Murphy) that think that *we* are all Derbyshire,
>a vast hyperdimensional conspiracy dedicated to hating *you*.
>
Do tell where you have Arne Vajh�j <ar...@vajhoej.dk> in your rocky
house of horrors? Interested parties would like to know how you view
that poster's professional ass reaming of you.
Another "kook" for your bogeyman litz, Paul Socky?

[Kia]

Ray Banana <ray...@banana.shacknet.nu> wrote in
news:m262314...@banana.shacknet.nu

>Thus spake kensi <kkensi...@gmail.invalid>
>
>> *You* are obviously not familiar with auk, since if you were you'd
>> realize that there *are* no consequences to *that* group from such.
>>
>> Try not jumping to conclusions in your eagerness to climb over other
>> people and present yourself as some sort of alpha male -- that way
>> your efforts will backfire less often in the future.
>
>The "lady" doth protest too much, methinks ...
>
>Nice try, anyhow, Seamus.

Perhaps a tag for the fair
[cough cough haw.kach.spit]
"lady" would persuade those reading your post
"seamus" is indeed known to you, Ray?

/example/
Message-ID: <kcqsik$o5j$1...@dont-email.me>
Injection-Info: Shape-Shif...@eternal-september.org////posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18O4iBrevzGPwkcwegI5PWKt3ttteJDoK8="

jus' sayin' like..

[Roedy Green]

On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 08:18:11 +0000 (UTC), Kia <k...@kmen.nie> wrote,
quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :

>>
>Value judgements from you (seamus - Derbyshire) turn to sewage in
>less than four of your keystrokes.

you are like some lunatic babbling on the street. You have nothing to
say to me, so please shut up.
--
Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products http://mindprod.com
Students who hire or con others to do their homework are as foolish
as couch potatoes who hire others to go to the gym for them.

[kensi]

On 13/01/2013 10:15 PM, Roedy Green wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Jan 2013 08:18:11 +0000 (UTC), Kia <k...@kmen.nie> wrote,
> quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>
>>>
>> Value judgements from you (seamus - Derbyshire) turn to sewage in
>> less than four of your keystrokes.
> you are like some lunatic babbling on the street. You have nothing to
> say to me, so please shut up.

*covers my ears*

Oh, *now* you've done it. Expect a truly *epic* ko0kout from "Kia"
(probably after nymshifting for the thousandth time) any day now.

Maybe even a tantrum as extreme as he foamed forth in
<j4js91$arp$1...@dont-email.me>, which was nearly 800 lines of k00kfroth.

You can find that here, by the way:

http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=135813583200

or by searching google groups for

I just do not fskn believe author:murphy

Just so you have an idea what to expect.

[Steve]

Ray Banana wrote:
>
> Thus spake kensi <kkensi...@gmail.invalid>
>
> > *You* are obviously not familiar with auk, since if you were you'd
> > realize that there *are* no consequences to *that* group from such.
> >
> > Try not jumping to conclusions in your eagerness to climb over other
> > people and present yourself as some sort of alpha male -- that way
> > your efforts will backfire less often in the future.
>
> The "lady" doth protest too much, methinks ...
>
> Nice try, anyhow, Seamus.

Wot, no "Proof, ko0ky?", Paul?

[Steve]

Ray Banana wrote:
>
> Thus spake kensi <kkensi...@gmail.invalid>
>
> > *You* are obviously not familiar with auk, since if you were you'd
> > realize that there *are* no consequences to *that* group from such.
> >
> > Try not jumping to conclusions in your eagerness to climb over other
> > people and present yourself as some sort of alpha male -- that way
> > your efforts will backfire less often in the future.
>
> The "lady" doth protest too much, methinks ...
>
> Nice try, anyhow, Seamus.

[kensi]

Multiposting and socking up -- you're really ko0king out these days!

I always find it amusing when one of you nutters gets so worked up over
some alleged "net abuse" that you commit ACTUAL net abuse in your ko0ky
efforts to draw more attention to your frivolous and rightly-ignored
complaints.

Now all you need to add to your routine is massive crossposting (like
"Account Banned"), really epic multiposting (like Murphy -- 30 copies on
one particular occasion, some of them crossposted), and morphing two or
three times a day (Murphy again), and you too can join the ranks of
truly epic k00kdom.

For now, though, I'll just say this.

--------
The Lodestone Award

This award is occasionally given in recognition of a ko0k whose posts
are richly veined with irony, and who as a consequence is a powerful
magnet for criticism.
--------

NOMINATION: "Steve <m...@privacy.net>" for a Lodestone Award. Besides
multiposting to harass someone because he *thinks* that someone is
"Seamus" who he *thinks*, in turn, is a net abuser, "Steve" here made a
post to auk in which he tried to frog Murphy, someone even nuttier than
he is, apparently in the mistaken expectation that doing so might
actually cause someone to take him seriously (quite the opposite, of
course).

Anyone for seconds?

*snicker*

[Steve]

Ray Banana wrote:
>
> Thus spake kensi <kkensi...@gmail.invalid>
>
> > *You* are obviously not familiar with auk, since if you were you'd
> > realize that there *are* no consequences to *that* group from such.
> >
> > Try not jumping to conclusions in your eagerness to climb over other
> > people and present yourself as some sort of alpha male -- that way
> > your efforts will backfire less often in the future.
>
> The "lady" doth protest too much, methinks ...
>
> Nice try, anyhow, Seamus.

That shut him up.

[Kia]

Rutles - China Blue Suede Schubert <chine...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>In article <5faf4086-f237-452c...@n5g2000vbk.googlegroups.com>,
> Andrew Wilson <awils...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> A) I don't post via his server, only Mixmin and Google Groups and only
>> using Tor. Even Mixmin and Google Groups can't confirm or disprove
>> that I'm any particular person. Ray Banana certainly can't;
>> 2) Since I'm NOT Derbyshire, he couldn't prove it even if I did post
>> through his server; and
>> D) K00K!!!!1!
>
>A, 2, D?

get used to the bloopers, Derbyshire is famous for his
insistence on perfection� all the while fucking over whole
examples himself. The root fault (pun) is causal to why his
efforts in writing code produce his own brand of bugs
{EFG}
Tonight.
That nutter has some serious coord problems.
Or he is experiencing SOK again. haw haw!

--
SOK ^ sexual ownership konfuzion

[Kia]

kensi <Derbyshire> <kkensi...@gmail.invalid> whined:

>On 14/01/2013 10:17 AM, Steve wrote:
>> Ray Banana wrote:
>>>
>>> Thus spake kensi <kkensi...@gmail.invalid>
>>>
>>>> *You* are obviously not familiar with auk, since if you were you'd
>>>> realize that there *are* no consequences to *that* group from such.
>>>>
>>>> Try not jumping to conclusions in your eagerness to climb over other
>>>> people and present yourself as some sort of alpha male -- that way
>>>> your efforts will backfire less often in the future.
>>>
>>> The "lady" doth protest too much, methinks ...
>>>
>>> Nice try, anyhow, Seamus.
>>
>> Wot, no "Proof, ko0ky?", Paul?
>
>Multiposting and socking up -- you're really ko0king out these days!
>
>I always find it amusing when one

of the ghosts of your past rise before you, Derbyshire... that carleton cabal
of your imaginings may just prove fruitful in your future.
/haak-spit

>some alleged "net abuse" that you commit ACTUAL net abuse in your ko0ky
>efforts to draw more attention to your frivolous and rightly-ignored
>complaints.
>

falling back to the chicken and egg line? Derbyshire.
What I find (in reading excerpts) is YOU being the egg.
No new news there.

>Now all you need to add to your routine is massive crossposting (like
>"Account Banned"), really epic multiposting (like Murphy -- 30 copies on
>one particular occasion, some of them crossposted), and morphing two or
>three times a day (Murphy again), and you too can join the ranks of
>truly epic k00kdom.
>

The ignorance level you maintain around Usenet operations is
directly proportional to your forensic header abilities. //snuckle

That ignorance generates your need to lie to audience and
yourself alike.
One example of what is the truth I found here.
<j0jmo9$mu2$1ATdont-email.me> contains:
^^frankly guys.. it is maybe time past ol' murphy here "sold
^^the farm" and joined the WidowMakers on the Dark Side??
^^
^^'Cos my skills in building profiles for jerks that abuse the
^^generosity of servers, and the complaints of others being
^^ignored.. "others" I would add who _freely_ serve up data
^^when servers are having problems.. is obviously a whole
^^heap of wasted fskn TIME.
^^TIME I know I _could_ better use kicking the arse of the
^^likes of Jack "WheelBarrowName" - and a few others I know
^^of - and have a lot of 'fun' doing so, using the abuse
^^methods those abusers employ, and effecting same a whole
^^lot more skillfully.
^^
^^It is no accident that Derbyshire has deflected all 'traffic'
^^away from his original complaint which was directly aimed
^^at AIOE "filters", obstructions to his trolling which Derbyshire
^^disagreed with and wanted changed.
^^A proven pathological liar
^^("I am a decorated Vietnam veteran")
^^,having his arse handed to him on a plate, he has now - today -
^^with the help of the gullible dickheads he aims his shit at,
^^brought AFN, which is enjoying its best time in terms of
^^"lack of server problems", down to a playpen for his repetitive
^^snipes at "tholen".
^^
^^Bottom line?
^^If Ray Banana and Paolo Amoroso are going to play
^^"cutsie-pie" with this lunatic...?.. then , hey, you won me.
^^I am outa here.

another . . . the bit you will not publish in your "murphy" sig..
is this discovery.
[note - I have added the "From" as "murphy" did not
supply those lines.

/begin
From: murphy <murph...@eternal.september.invalid>
Newsgroups: alt.free.newsservers
Subject: I just do not fskn believe...!
Followup-To: alt.free.newsservers
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2011 12:03:02 +1000
Organization: Galactic Gatherer INC
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <j16bcp$33t$1...@dont-email.me>

From: Deeyana <d.awlbergAThotmail.invalid>
Message-ID: <j15aqs$9lf$2ATdont-email.me>
Injection-Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2011 04:42:04 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org;
posting-host="nWgYBzPiz8NHWqVFL3Lc/Q";

From: Movable Hype <mhype101ATsnortwad.net>
Message-ID: <j15qj4$rsi$1ATdont-email.me>
Injection-Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2011 09:11:00 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org;
posting-host="nWgYBzPiz8NHWqVFL3Lc/Q"

From: Mister Scott <m_scott.19477bATnoggles.corn>
Message-ID: <j160qm$mta$1ATsperanza.aioe.org>
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2011 06:57:25 -0400
NNTP-Posting-Host: yifYu5jjQd240fPnOtRJZg.user.speranza.aioe.org

From: thoolen <thoolenATtholenbot.thorium>
Message-ID: <j14v1i$3pv$1ATsperanza.aioe.org>
Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2011 21:20:51 -0400
NNTP-Posting-Host: yifYu5jjQd240fPnOtRJZg.user.speranza.aioe.org

Paolo AND Ray!

--
murphy

/rolls over - dead
_________________________________________________
/end

take note of the timing of the name switches, Derbyshire.
take note of the dates of the name switches, Derbyshire.

Is there any point to asking you just who it was back then
that was "morphing two or three times a day", and doing so
blatantly under the noses of the two server owners you
suck up to now?

You bring a fast paced dimension to the morph act, Derbyshire.
Pity for you you now can not say who is whom. haw fooking haw!

[Kia]

Andrew Wilson Derbyshire<awils...@gmail.com>burbled:
>On Jan 15, 2:06�pm, Steve <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>> Andrew Wilson an "illucid", "ironic", autistic Paul Derbyshire sock
>>
much foam'd verbiage deleted
>> >
>> > Your own recent instance of being caught socking up AS MURPHY also
>> > bears noting.
>>
[murphy'd snortle]
>>
>> Good, take note of this, Paul; I don't sock up as Murphy or frog
>> him.
>
>Liar: <kd2edo$enh$1...@speranza.aioe.org> followed hard on the heels of
><MPG.2b5e2de2...@nntp.aioe.org> and had basically the same
>content, written the same way. But you turned off "Microplanet Gravity
>supplies message-ID" and socked up as "that Murphy" for the second
>article.
>
oH Rilly.. rilly Paulie Waulie Wailer.
Ye protesth too mostest methinks!

haw fooking haw!
>>
>> Murphy is quite capable of nym-shifting without my help.
>
>Your admission that your team-mate Murphy morphs is accepted and
>recorded.
>
Yer browzza requires a new certificate, luzer.
But you go right ahead sprouting old news, so cute on the ankles
(are you) dodging your spittle, freak!


--
this post formats nonexistent blank lines

[Andrew Wilson]

On Jan 17, 4:00 am, Kia <spooks...@derbyshire-crania.org> wrote:
> kensi <Derbyshire> <kkensingto...@gmail.invalid>

Proof?

> >On 14/01/2013 10:17 AM, Steve wrote:
> >> Ray Banana wrote:
>

> >>> Thus spake kensi <kkensingto...@gmail.invalid>

> From: murphy <murphy5-...@eternal.september.invalid>

> Newsgroups: alt.free.newsservers
> Subject: I just do not fskn believe...!
> Followup-To: alt.free.newsservers
> Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2011 12:03:02 +1000
> Organization: Galactic Gatherer INC
> Lines: 24

> Message-ID: <j16bcp$33...@dont-email.me>

I can't think of much specific to say in response to yon monument
Murphy erected to his own madness. Really, it speaks for itself. In
fact, it sounds just like one of those guys with cardboard signs at
street corners that you cross the street to avoid walking past, or one
of those people you'd stand hanging onto a strap rather than sit next
to on the bus, and if HE sat next to YOU, you'd promptly get up.

But I will note this bit of irony:

> of the ghosts of your past rise before you, Derbyshire

Derbyshire, of course, being a ghost from your past (if he's not
ENTIRELY a figment of your imagination).

For this, and for admitting above to several varieties of net abuse
that he says he used to "fight fire with fire" against an IMAGINARY
OPPONENT, I have to nominate you for a Lodestone Award, kooky. You can
contend with Steve for this new and illustrious award.

[Fred the Pembrokian]

Paul Derbyshire socked up as <awils...@gmail.com> to confess:
>On Jan 16, 8:21 pm, Steve <m...@privacy.net> wrote:

>> Perhaps you can explain why Kensi is running from the question?
>
>I am not a telepath. I'm not privy to the contents of kensi's mind.

try hypnosis Paula.

WOW!!
<53689065-386f-4b74-80a8-ab34ac11ec7b @ fw2g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>
Meanwhile those deluded 300+ lines of true kookspew
will suffice as evidence you're riding the edge of total collapse!

. that and your sad mad inventions played out as space filler in
pure rhetorical "look at me in my google soot!" verbal diarrhea
motions. "Andrew". LOL

[kensi]

Similar comparisons have been drawn before, by myself, Nadegda, that
Roedy guy that responded to one of his recent go0fy crossposts, Ray
Banana ...

Speaking of whom, *someone* seems to be foaming about how I ignored some
question he supposedly asked. The question post's headers are suspect
and the question itself is not even addressed to any name that I'll
answer to, so it's amazing anyone thought I'd do anything else *but*
ignore it.

Then again, the one who apparently expected me to respond is quite a
k00k, so ...

> But I will note this bit of irony:
>
>> of the ghosts of your past rise before you, Derbyshire
>
> Derbyshire, of course, being a ghost from your past (if he's not
> ENTIRELY a figment of your imagination).
>
> For this, and for admitting above to several varieties of net abuse
> that he says he used to "fight fire with fire" against an IMAGINARY
> OPPONENT, I have to nominate you for a Lodestone Award, kooky. You can
> contend with Steve for this new and illustrious award.

Seconded. Let's watch these two ko0ks try to out-irony each other.
Anyone got microwave popcorn packets?

[Red Blade 7]

Paul has most conveniently now provided a denial, of sorts.
Propping up his "Wilson" googleG sock with a not so feminine
social finger wagging, "kensi" has a double dip and dodge
attempt with;
<kd9j99$ki1$1...@news.albasani.net>

"Ray
Banana ...
Speaking of whom, *someone* seems to be foaming about how I ignored some
question he supposedly asked. The question post's headers are suspect
and the question itself is not even addressed to any name that I'll
answer to, so it's amazing anyone thought I'd do anything else *but*
ignore it.
Then again, the one who apparently expected me to respond is quite a
k00k, so ..."

So. Message/article <m262314...@banana.shacknet.nu> carries
"suspect" headers - according to the Pembroke guru of NNTP forensics.
And. "kensi" denies his "Seamus" posting's... bringing direct conflict to
Rays' desk. Ray is wrong? Ray is a kook? Ray is homophobic?

Paul will not run his "kensi" act through ES as that notion would
contaminate his "Nagada" floor show. Paul can however run
"<ray...@banana.shacknet.nu>" through any test group (carried
by ES) to discover what error code is generated.

Worth noting too is Paul's change in using Albasini.net as a carriage
in having his full articles quoted. One conclusion which is drawn
is the one that says Paul has finally exhausted error code generating
exploits of the AIOE.org server... a task which has sure kept that
Paolo est...@aioe.org klutz well busy these past 12 months and
more.
The question now is, is Roman Racine <roman.racine @gmail.com>
up to the task of managing one individual hell bent on exploiting
"free" news servers.

Not forgetting Paul's deeming of Ray Banana as a homophobic kook.


jus' sayin' like..

[Red Blade 7]

On Mon, 14 Jan 2013 15:00:20 -0000, Steve wrote:

[Andrew Wilson]

On Jan 17, 9:52 pm, Red Blade 7 <a...@azz.invalid> wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Jan 2013 15:00:20 -0000, Steve wrote:
> >Ray Banana wrote:
>

> >> Thus spake kensi <kkensingto...@gmail.invalid>

>
> >> > *You* are obviously not familiar with auk, since if you were you'd
> >> > realize that there *are* no consequences to *that* group from such.
>
> >> > Try not jumping to conclusions in your eagerness to climb over other
> >> > people and present yourself as some sort of alpha male -- that way
> >> > your efforts will backfire less often in the future.
>
> >> The "lady" doth protest too much, methinks ...
>
> >> Nice try, anyhow, Seamus.
>
> >Wot, no "Proof, ko0ky?", Paul?
>
> Paul has most conveniently now provided a denial, of sorts.
> Propping up his "Wilson" googleG sock with a not so feminine
> social finger wagging, "kensi" has a double dip and dodge
> attempt with;

> <kd9j99$ki...@news.albasani.net>

> "Ray
> Banana ...
> Speaking of whom, *someone* seems to be foaming about how I ignored some
> question he supposedly asked. The question post's headers are suspect
> and the question itself is not even addressed to any name that I'll
> answer to, so it's amazing anyone thought I'd do anything else *but*
> ignore it.
> Then again, the one who apparently expected me to respond is quite a
> k00k, so ..."
>

> So. Message/article <m262314mut....@banana.shacknet.nu> carries

> "suspect" headers - according to the Pembroke guru of NNTP forensics.
> And. "kensi" denies his "Seamus" posting's... bringing direct conflict to
> Rays' desk. Ray is wrong?

Ray has nothing to do with kensi, since kensi doesn't use Ray's
server.

> Ray is a kook? Ray is homophobic?

Where did you get that crazy idea? Why are you bringing homophobia up
out of context?

Oh, yeah, that's right, BECAUSE YOU'RE A FUCKING KOOK! Now you've got
what, THREE sock puppets active in this thread? How many does one kook
even need?

> Paul will not run his "kensi" act through ES as that notion would
> contaminate his "Nagada" floor show.

"Nagada"? Isn't that the city Ra's slaves lived in in the Stargate
movie? What does that have to do with anything here?

Oh, yeah, right, YOU'RE A KOOK.

> Worth noting too is Paul's change in using Albasini.net as a carriage
> in having his full articles quoted. One conclusion which is drawn
> is the one that says Paul has finally exhausted error code generating
> exploits of the AIOE.org server... a task which has sure kept that
> Paolo est...@aioe.org klutz well busy these past 12 months and
> more.

Are you even capable of stringing together a coherent paragraph? And
not infusing it heavily with your insane paranoia?

And what, exactly, is "Albasini" anyway?

Oh, yeah, right, YOU'RE A KOOK.

> The question now is, is Roman Racine <roman.racine @gmail.com>

Syntax error, kooky.

> up to the task of managing one individual hell bent on exploiting
> "free" news servers.

Where is your evidence that kensi has done anything that counts as
"exploiting" over at Albasani?

Oh, that's right, YOU'RE A KOOK. Who needs evidence when you've got
the certainty of a religious prophet, both of your kooky beliefs and
of the rightness of your kooky cause?

Oh, yeah, Roman Racine would need evidence, and you don't have any.
KOOK.

On top of that, you're rather well known for biting the newsadmin hand
that feeds you, as evidenced by your slur against AIOE's admin quoted
above. Not exactly a trait that would endear you to Roman or anyone
else. I wouldn't be surprised if every new sock you create is
killfiled by him on sight. In fact, I WOULD be surprised if that were
NOT the case, unless he found your clowning antics mildly amusing.

> Not forgetting Paul's deeming of Ray Banana as a homophobic kook.

MID, kooky?

> jus' sayin' like..

Jus' kooking out, you mean. I think you're on a buildup to another
massive meltdown, and I think it needs to be documented. So, I'm
adding auk and nominating you for a Chernobyl Award for January, based
not so much on just the one quoted post above but on the general
escalation of your activity lately -- lots of foamy rants, multiple
new sockpuppets (you introduced two more IN A SINGLE DAY yesterday),
and fresh netkkkopping attempts aimed at kensi, which are sure to
backfire.

Seconds?

[TOSEM]

Paul risks contaminating his image (internet number) at
helpdesks in committing to such largesse. Paul is
self censoring [grins]


--

TOSEM

[Series Expansion]

Aye.

[kensi]

Recorded and snickered at. Just a month or so ago, it looked like
Murphy's career as a kOok was winding down, but now I think it may have
only just begun in earnest, as he not only has the 2012 Ko0k of the Year
Award pretty much sewn up but is on a streak getting nominated for
various things for the month of January 2013 as well.

[Red Blade 7]

sn...@spambin.fsnet.co.uk (Sn!pe) made a note of:

>Red Blade 7 <a...@azz.invalid> wrote:
>

>[...]

>
>> So. Message/article <m262314...@banana.shacknet.nu> carries
>> "suspect" headers - according to the Pembroke guru of NNTP forensics.
>> And. "kensi" denies his "Seamus" posting's... bringing direct conflict to
>> Rays' desk. Ray is wrong? Ray is a kook? Ray is homophobic?
>>
>> Paul will not run his "kensi" act through ES as that notion would
>> contaminate his "Nagada" floor show. Paul can however run
>> "<ray...@banana.shacknet.nu>" through any test group (carried
>> by ES) to discover what error code is generated.
>

>[...]
>
>If I have correctly understood Ray Banana's explanation to me of
>his server's "Injection-Info" header: that header is unforgeable
>on Eternal-September as it derives from E-S's register of FQDNs.
>
>see:-
>
>"
>Injection-Info: raybanana.eternal-september.org;
>posting-host="85f58bed6345d526855363492e3917de";
> logging-data="31962";
>mail-complaints-to="ab...@eternal-september.org";
>posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18eAzltdpGI+pdk5KpNiyT7+VhLPyySoSs="
>"
>
>- as per the article referenced above.
>
>This validates the article in question as being genuinely from Ray.

Your attentiveness melds with my knowledge of the "tell" properties
of an ES post.
Unfortunately the silence around this issue now leaves a gap in
the provenance, one which the "kensi" sock revels in exploiting
whilst the "Nadegda" sock dances with each key windup.

--

xpost preserved