making posts unreadable for google groupers?
Anonymous
posts unreadable on google groups?
Peter J Ross
<nob...@mixmin.net> wrote:
> Is there anything like the "web tv stationery" header trick for making
> posts unreadable on google groups?
59 65 73 2c 20 79 6f 75 20 63 61 6e 20 63 6f 6e 66 75 73 65 20 74 68
65 6d 20 77 69 74 68 20 73 6f 6d 65 74 68 69 6e 67 20 6c 69 6b 65 20
74 68 69 73 2e
:-)
--
PJR :-)
m...@privacy.net
>Is there anything like the "web tv stationery" header trick for making
>posts unreadable on google groups?
Use Rot-13.
I R A Darth Aggie
m...@tadyatam.invalid <m...@tadyatam.invalid>, in
<Xns99AFAE5E3665Bmetadyataminvalid@MR-BLACK> wrote:
>+ Peter J Ross <p...@example.invalid> wrote in
>+ news:slrnff0cs...@pjr.gotdns.org:
>+
>+ > In news.software.readers on Tue, 18 Sep 2007 20:13:24
>+ > -0000, Anonymous <nob...@mixmin.net> wrote:
>+ >
>+ >> Is there anything like the "web tv stationery" header
>+ >> trick for making posts unreadable on google groups?
>+ >
>+ > 59 65 73 2c 20 79 6f 75 20 63 61 6e 20 63 6f 6e 66 75 73 65
>+ > 20 74 68 65 6d 20 77 69 74 68 20 73 6f 6d 65 74 68 69 6e 67
>+ > 20 6c 69 6b 65 20 74 68 69 73 2e
>+ >
>+ >:-)
>+ 57686572653f
42
(duh)
--
Consulting Minister for Consultants, DNRC
I can please only one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow
isn't looking good, either.
I am BOFH. Resistance is futile. Your network will be assimilated.
I R A Darth Aggie
m...@privacy.net <m...@privacy.net>, in
<fcpjr...@news3.newsguy.com> wrote:
>+ On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 20:13:24 -0000, Anonymous <nob...@mixmin.net> wrote:
>+
>+ >Is there anything like the "web tv stationery" header trick for making
>+ >posts unreadable on google groups?
>+
>+
>+ Use Rot-13.
Gung'f na njshy ybg yvxr jbex.
Ted S.
> On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 15:35:20 -0700,
> m...@privacy.net <m...@privacy.net>, in
> <fcpjr...@news3.newsguy.com> wrote:
>>+ On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 20:13:24 -0000, Anonymous <nob...@mixmin.net> wrote:
>>+
>>+ >Is there anything like the "web tv stationery" header trick for making
>>+ >posts unreadable on google groups?
>>+
>>+
>>+ Use Rot-13.
>
> Gung'f na njshy ybg yvxr jbex.
V qba'g xabj nobhg gung: vs lbh hfr n arjfernqre gung unf n Ebg-13
pbzznaq, lbh pna glcr gur grkg va cynva grkg, uvtuyvtug vg, naq gura
unir gur cebtenz pbaireg vg.
--
Ted S.
fedya at bestweb dot net
andrew
[...]
> V qba'g xabj nobhg gung: vs lbh hfr n arjfernqre gung unf n Ebg-13
> pbzznaq, lbh pna glcr gur grkg va cynva grkg, uvtuyvtug vg, naq gura
> unir gur cebtenz pbaireg vg.
Interesting. slrn can _read_ rot13 by default with toggle Esc r but
cannot _write_ it as it uses an external editor. Can anybody save me
from comp.editors and tell me if vim can write rot13?
Andrew
--
ὑπερθορὼν δὲ πύργον ὠμηστὴς λέων
ἄδην ἔλειξεν αἵματος τυραννικοῦ.
Troy Piggins
* & my replies are inline below :
> On 2007-09-19, Ted S. <fe...@bestweb.spam> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> V qba'g xabj nobhg gung: vs lbh hfr n arjfernqre gung unf n Ebg-13
>> pbzznaq, lbh pna glcr gur grkg va cynva grkg, uvtuyvtug vg, naq gura
>> unir gur cebtenz pbaireg vg.
>
> Interesting. slrn can _read_ rot13 by default with toggle Esc r but
> cannot _write_ it as it uses an external editor. Can anybody save me
> from comp.editors and tell me if vim can write rot13?
:uryc ebg13
:)
--
Troy Piggins | http://piggo.com/~troy/slrn
* NEW MACRO 16/9/07: bash.sl ___ | __ __ ,-O (o- O
* UPDATED MACROS 9/9/07: whois.sl |___ | |/ |/ | O ) //\ O
view_manuals.sl ___| | | | | `-O V_/_ OOO
andrew
> On 2007-09-19, Ted S. <fe...@bestweb.spam> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> V qba'g xabj nobhg gung: vs lbh hfr n arjfernqre gung unf n Ebg-13
>> pbzznaq, lbh pna glcr gur grkg va cynva grkg, uvtuyvtug vg, naq gura
>> unir gur cebtenz pbaireg vg.
>
> Interesting. slrn can _read_ rot13 by default with toggle Esc r but
> cannot _write_ it as it uses an external editor. Can anybody save me
> from comp.editors and tell me if vim can write rot13?
Arire zvaq V unir sbhaq vg: t?? fubhyq rapbqr gur _pheerag_ yvar juvpu
V fhfcrpg vf rabhtu sbe zl checbfrf!
Troy Piggins
* & my replies are inline below :
>> On 2007-09-19, Ted S. <fe...@bestweb.spam> wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> V qba'g xabj nobhg gung: vs lbh hfr n arjfernqre gung unf n Ebg-13
>>> pbzznaq, lbh pna glcr gur grkg va cynva grkg, uvtuyvtug vg, naq gura
>>> unir gur cebtenz pbaireg vg.
>>
>> Interesting. slrn can _read_ rot13 by default with toggle Esc r but
>> cannot _write_ it as it uses an external editor. Can anybody save me
>> from comp.editors and tell me if vim can write rot13?
>
> Arire zvaq V unir sbhaq vg: t?? fubhyq rapbqr gur _pheerag_ yvar juvpu
> V fhfcrpg vf rabhtu sbe zl checbfrf!
Rkpryyrag - V xarj lbh'q svther vg bhg ohg V'q nyernql cbfgrq n
sbyybjhc. V hfhnyyl ivfhnyyl fryrpg gur grkg, rt inc gb ivfhnyyl
fryrpg n cnentencu, gura whfg uvg t?
andrew
> * andrew is quoted
> * & my replies are inline below :
>> On 2007-09-19, Ted S. <fe...@bestweb.spam> wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> V qba'g xabj nobhg gung: vs lbh hfr n arjfernqre gung unf n Ebg-13
>>> pbzznaq, lbh pna glcr gur grkg va cynva grkg, uvtuyvtug vg, naq gura
>>> unir gur cebtenz pbaireg vg.
>>
>> Interesting. slrn can _read_ rot13 by default with toggle Esc r but
>> cannot _write_ it as it uses an external editor. Can anybody save me
>> from comp.editors and tell me if vim can write rot13?
>
>:uryc ebg13
Gunaxf Gebl! Lbh yrnea fbzrguvat arj rirel qnl, nygubhtu V fhfcrpg
gung gur novyvgl gb hfr ebg13 va ivz jvyy cebonoyl abg or gur uvtu
cbvag bs zl Yvahk yrneavat :-)
Naqerj
Troy Piggins
* & my replies are inline below :
> On 2007-09-19, Troy Piggins <usene...@piggo.com> wrote:
>> * andrew is quoted
>> * & my replies are inline below :
>>> On 2007-09-19, Ted S. <fe...@bestweb.spam> wrote:
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> V qba'g xabj nobhg gung: vs lbh hfr n arjfernqre gung unf n Ebg-13
>>>> pbzznaq, lbh pna glcr gur grkg va cynva grkg, uvtuyvtug vg, naq gura
>>>> unir gur cebtenz pbaireg vg.
>>>
>>> Interesting. slrn can _read_ rot13 by default with toggle Esc r but
>>> cannot _write_ it as it uses an external editor. Can anybody save me
>>> from comp.editors and tell me if vim can write rot13?
>>
>>:uryc ebg13
>
> Gunaxf Gebl! Lbh yrnea fbzrguvat arj rirel qnl, nygubhtu V fhfcrpg
> gung gur novyvgl gb hfr ebg13 va ivz jvyy cebonoyl abg or gur uvtu
> cbvag bs zl Yvahk yrneavat :-)
Gur abirygl jrnef bss dhvpxyl, ohg vg'f unaql gb xabj ubj gb hfr
vg vs arrqrq.
Ralph Fox
With a Rot-13 bookmarklet, one can very easily read Rot-13 in Google
groups. Simply select the Rot-13 text in the web page, click the
bookmarklet, and the text in the web page changes to/from Rot-13.
Here is a Rot-13 bookmarklet that works with Google Groups
javascript:(function(){var coding="abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzabcdefghijklmABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZABCDEFGHIJKLM";function rot13(t){var r="";for(var i=0;i<t.length;i++){var ch=t.charAt(i);var pos=coding.indexOf(ch);if(pos>-1)ch=coding.charAt(pos+13);r+=ch;}return r;}function t(N){return N.nodeType==N.TEXT_NODE;}function r(N){if(t(N))N.data=rot13(N.data);}function rot13sel(w){var S=w.getSelection();for(var j=0;j<S.rangeCount;++j){var g=S.getRangeAt(j),e=g.startContainer,f=g.endContainer,E=g.startOffset,F=g.endOffset,m=(e==f);if(!m||!t(e)){var q=document.createTreeWalker(g.commonAncestorContainer,NodeFilter.SHOW_ELEMENT|NodeFilter.SHOW_TEXT,null,false);q.currentNode=e;for(N=q.nextNode();N&&N!=f;N=q.nextNode())r(N);}if(t(f))f.splitText(F);if(!m)r(f);if(t(e)){var k;r(k=e.splitText(E));if(m)f=k;e=k;}if(t(f))g.setEnd(f,f.data.length);}}rot13sel(window);try{if(top!=window)rot13sel(top);}catch(err){;}for(var
i=0;i<top.frames.length;++i){try{if(top.frames[i]!=window)rot13sel(top.frames[i]);}catch(err){;}}})();
Many GG users aren't up to doing this sort of thing, but some are.
If the OP only wants to hide his message from many (bit not all) GG users,
then Rot-13 is fine. But if the OP wants to hide the message from every
last GG user, then Rot-13 may not be the choice.
--
Cheers,
Ralph
frydd
Googlegroupers are permanently online, so they use
http://rot13.de/index.php
--
greez
frydd(s)...the GOOGLEcat
Blinky the Shark
> On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 15:35:20 -0700, in message
> <fcpjr...@news3.newsguy.com>, m...@privacy.net wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 20:13:24 -0000, Anonymous <nob...@mixmin.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Is there anything like the "web tv stationery" header trick for
>> >making posts unreadable on google groups?
>>
>>
>> Use Rot-13.
>
>
> With a Rot-13 bookmarklet, one can very easily read Rot-13 in Google
> groups. Simply select the Rot-13 text in the web page, click the
> bookmarklet, and the text in the web page changes to/from Rot-13.
>
>
> Here is a Rot-13 bookmarklet that works with Google Groups
<snip>
> Many GG users aren't up to doing this sort of thing, but some are. If
> the OP only wants to hide his message from many (bit not all) GG
> users, then Rot-13 is fine. But if the OP wants to hide the message
> from every last GG user, then Rot-13 may not be the choice.
Unfortunately, viewing the larger picture shows this: When people use
such kludges to obscure the content of their Usenet messages, they are
handing the Google Groupers a WIN, by requiring NON-Google-Groupers to
change THEIR Usenet participation habits by adding another step.
This is a bad idea: giving Google Groupers any wins is counterproductive.
-
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://improve-usenet.org <----------- New Site Aug 28
Ralph Fox
Here are two tricks
1. If the domain part of the message-id ends with a period '.',
then the message will not even appear on Google groups.
The message might also not appear on a few NNTP news servers,
so don't use this trick if you want the best propagation.
2. Google Groups ignores the charset specified in the message
headers. Instead, GG checks whether the body appears to be
Unicode (UTF-8), and if not GG assumes the message uses the
group's default charset.
So a trick for making a post unreadable on Google Groups is
to post the message in a different 8-bit charset such as
Cyrillic ISO-8859-5 in an English-language newsgroup, and
replace as many of the ascii letters as you can with Cyrillic
letters which look the same. GG will display those characters
totally wrongly, making the post unreadable.
If an NNTP client correctly interprets the charset in the
message headers, then the post will look perfectly normal
in that NNTP client. Unfortunately, some NNTP clients are
not too hot at handling different charsets (as bad as GG).
Below is an example of what you get: Compare this in GG
vs (for example) Thunderbird.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ѕо а trісk fоr mаkіng а роѕt unrеаdаblе оn Gооglе Grоuрѕ іѕ
tо роѕt thе mеѕѕаgе іn а dіffеrеnt 8-bіt сhаrѕеt ѕuсh аѕ
Суrіllіс ІЅО-8859-5 іn аn Еnglіѕh-lаnguаgе nеwѕgrоuр, аnd
rерlасе аѕ mаnу оf thе аѕсіі lеttеrѕ аѕ уоu саn wіth Суrіllіс
lеttеrѕ whісh lооk thе ѕаmе. GG wіll dіѕрlау thоѕе сhаrасtеrѕ
tоtаllу wrоnglу, mаkіng thе роѕt unrеаdаblе.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
--
Cheers,
Ralph
Blinky the Shark
> On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 20:13:24 -0000, in message <86b7643c51832f36...@anon.mixmaster.mixmin.net>,
> Anonymous wrote:
>
>> Is there anything like the "web tv stationery" header trick for making
>> posts unreadable on google groups?
>
>
> Here are two tricks
>
>
> 1. If the domain part of the message-id ends with a period '.',
> then the message will not even appear on Google groups.
And it will be a broken MID.
> 2. Google Groups ignores the charset specified in the message
> headers. Instead, GG checks whether the body appears to be
> Unicode (UTF-8), and if not GG assumes the message uses the
> group's default charset.
>
> So a trick for making a post unreadable on Google Groups is
> to post the message in a different 8-bit charset such as
> Cyrillic ISO-8859-5 in an English-language newsgroup, and
> replace as many of the ascii letters as you can with Cyrillic
> letters which look the same. GG will display those characters
> totally wrongly, making the post unreadable.
>
> If an NNTP client correctly interprets the charset in the
> message headers, then the post will look perfectly normal
> in that NNTP client. Unfortunately, some NNTP clients are
> not too hot at handling different charsets (as bad as GG).
>
> Below is an example of what you get: Compare this in GG
> vs (for example) Thunderbird.
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ?? ? tr??k f?r m?k?ng ? ???t unr??d?bl? ?n G??gl? Gr?u?? ??
> t? ???t th? m????g? ?n ? d?ff?r?nt 8-b?t ?h?r??t ?u?h ??
> ??r?ll?? ???-8859-5 ?n ?n ?ngl??h-l?ngu?g? n?w?gr?u?, ?nd
> r??l??? ?? m?n? ?f th? ????? l?tt?r? ?? ??u ??n w?th ??r?ll??
> l?tt?r? wh??h l??k th? ??m?. GG w?ll d???l?? th??? ?h?r??t?r?
> t?t?ll? wr?ngl?, m?k?ng th? ???t unr??d?bl?.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
As I mentioned in another post on this thread a few minutes ago, all of
these kludges represent giving in to Google Groups and fucking up everyone
ELSE's Usenet experience.
--
Peter J Ross
<no....@box.invalid> wrote:
> As I mentioned in another post on this thread a few minutes ago, all of
> these kludges represent giving in to Google Groups and fucking up everyone
> ELSE's Usenet experience.
I agree. However, this kind of thing might be fun:
Subject: [free beer if you reply to this] test
GGropers should see nothing but "Subject: test", which is just as
well, since sober GGropers are bad enough.
--
PJR :-)
Paul Colquhoun
| Is there anything like the "web tv stationery" header trick for making
| posts unreadable on google groups?
Find out what the Google servers add to the "Path:" header, and pre-load
this into the "Path:" of your posts. Other NNTP servers will interpret
this as meaning that the post has already passed through the Google
servers, so they won't (or shouldn't) pass the message on.
This may not work nowdays, as servers may just rely on the "do you have
this message-id?" check instead, especially with streaming updates to
NNTP protocol.
Also, some servers don't let you pre-load your "Path:" header.
--
Reverend Paul Colquhoun, ULC. http://andor.dropbear.id.au/~paulcol
Asking for technical help in newsgroups? Read this first:
http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html#intro
Peter J Ross
Colquhoun <postm...@andor.dropbear.id.au> wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 20:13:24 -0000, Anonymous <nob...@mixmin.net> wrote:
>| Is there anything like the "web tv stationery" header trick for making
>| posts unreadable on google groups?
>
>
> Find out what the Google servers add to the "Path:" header, and pre-load
> this into the "Path:" of your posts. Other NNTP servers will interpret
> this as meaning that the post has already passed through the Google
> servers, so they won't (or shouldn't) pass the message on.
Unfortunately that would be forgery, besides possibly being filtered
by some adherents of the Usenet Improvement Project.
> This may not work nowdays, as servers may just rely on the "do you have
> this message-id?" check instead, especially with streaming updates to
> NNTP protocol.
>
> Also, some servers don't let you pre-load your "Path:" header.
This is because the #1 reason for pre-poading a Path: is to make abuse
more difficult to report.
Some, however, will at least convert an innocuous Path, such as might
be generated by Leafnode for instance, into an X-Orig-Path or similar.
--
PJR :-)
Ralph Fox
Blinky the Shark wrote:
> X-WebTV-Stationery: Standard; BGColor=black; TextColor=black
> Unfortunately, viewing the larger picture shows this: When people use
> such kludges to obscure the content of their Usenet messages, they are
> handing the Google Groupers a WIN, by requiring NON-Google-Groupers to
> change THEIR Usenet participation habits by adding another step.
> This is a bad idea: giving Google Groupers any wins is counterproductive.
Back in the DejaNews days, one could put HTML code into message
headers and have Deja interpret it as HTML. So for example
| Organization: <script type="text/javascript">top.location.replace("http://some.where.else/");</script>
That was no more an extra step than is your WebTV header.
--
Cheers,
Ralph
m...@tadyatam.invalid
news:9bm4f3dfene3q33h6...@4ax.com:
Ralph,
I think Blinky is talking about Usenet readers. His black-on-
black is "his thing" which does not bother other Usenet folks.
IOW, I don't have to do anything in order to read his posts.
OTOH, I have to rummage through the menu (WTH is it?) for ROT-
13.
J
--
Replies to: Nherr1professor2doktor31109(at)Oyahoo(dot)Tcom
Blinky the Shark
> On 20 Sep 2007 10:32:38 GMT, in message <slrnff4j3f....@thurston.blinkynet.net>,
> Blinky the Shark wrote:
>
>> X-WebTV-Stationery: Standard; BGColor=black; TextColor=black
>
>> Unfortunately, viewing the larger picture shows this: When people use
>> such kludges to obscure the content of their Usenet messages, they are
>> handing the Google Groupers a WIN, by requiring NON-Google-Groupers to
>> change THEIR Usenet participation habits by adding another step.
>> This is a bad idea: giving Google Groupers any wins is counterproductive.
>
>
> Back in the DejaNews days, one could put HTML code into message
And still have a valid header?
> headers and have Deja interpret it as HTML. So for example
>
>| Organization: <script type="text/javascript">top.location.replace("http://some.where.else/");</script>
>
> That was no more an extra step than is your WebTV header.
Of course it's not. It's another header. What's your point? The
proposed body kludges that I pointed out are bad ideas are not headers,
so you're comparing apples to oranges. I never said automatically
inserted headers are bad.
--
Blinky the Shark
Excatly. And even if you *know* how to reform the ROT13, it's still
making you perform an extra step, and therefore to be avoided.
--
Blinky the Shark
> On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 20:13:24 -0000, Anonymous <nob...@mixmin.net> wrote:
>| Is there anything like the "web tv stationery" header trick for making
>| posts unreadable on google groups?
>
>
> Find out what the Google servers add to the "Path:" header, and pre-load
> this into the "Path:" of your posts. Other NNTP servers will interpret
Oh, great -- now we're talking about forgery. Give it up, guys -- all
these ideas are bad. Stop empowering GGers to drive *you* rogue.
Blinky the Shark
> In news.software.readers on Thu, 20 Sep 2007 11:19:03 GMT, Paul
> Colquhoun <postm...@andor.dropbear.id.au> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 20:13:24 -0000, Anonymous <nob...@mixmin.net> wrote:
>>| Is there anything like the "web tv stationery" header trick for making
>>| posts unreadable on google groups?
>>
>>
>> Find out what the Google servers add to the "Path:" header, and pre-load
>> this into the "Path:" of your posts. Other NNTP servers will interpret
>> this as meaning that the post has already passed through the Google
>> servers, so they won't (or shouldn't) pass the message on.
>
> Unfortunately that would be forgery, besides possibly being filtered
> by some adherents of the Usenet Improvement Project.
Filtering forgers probably isn't a bad idea.
Ralph Fox
Blinky the Shark wrote:
> Ralph Fox wrote:
> > On 20 Sep 2007 10:32:38 GMT, in message <slrnff4j3f....@thurston.blinkynet.net>,
> > Blinky the Shark wrote:
> >
> >> X-WebTV-Stationery: Standard; BGColor=black; TextColor=black
> >
> >> Unfortunately, viewing the larger picture shows this: When people use
> >> such kludges to obscure the content of their Usenet messages, they are
> >> handing the Google Groupers a WIN, by requiring NON-Google-Groupers to
> >> change THEIR Usenet participation habits by adding another step.
> >> This is a bad idea: giving Google Groupers any wins is counterproductive.
> >
> >
> > Back in the DejaNews days, one could put HTML code into message
> > headers
Just to clarify, using ones NNTP client.
> And still have a valid header?
Yes, it is still a valid header.
It was Deja that was mis-interpreting it.
> > and have Deja interpret it as HTML. So for example
> >
> >| Organization: <script type="text/javascript">top.location.replace("http://some.where.else/");</script>
> >
> > That was no more an extra step than is your WebTV header.
>
> Of course it's not. It's another header. What's your point?
My point is that there was a way of making posts unreadable for
DejaNews users.
Unfortunately, this no longer works with Google (the new owner of
the Deja archive)
> The
> proposed body kludges that I pointed out are bad ideas are not headers,
> so you're comparing apples to oranges. I never said automatically
> inserted headers are bad.
And why did you imply that automatically-selected charsets are a bad idea?
--
Cheers,
Ralph
Blinky the Shark
> On 20 Sep 2007 17:21:41 GMT, in message <slrnff5b2e....@thurston.blinkynet.net>,
> Blinky the Shark wrote:
>
>> Ralph Fox wrote:
>> > On 20 Sep 2007 10:32:38 GMT, in message <slrnff4j3f....@thurston.blinkynet.net>,
>> > Blinky the Shark wrote:
>> >
>> >> X-WebTV-Stationery: Standard; BGColor=black; TextColor=black
>> >
>> >> Unfortunately, viewing the larger picture shows this: When people use
>> >> such kludges to obscure the content of their Usenet messages, they are
>> >> handing the Google Groupers a WIN, by requiring NON-Google-Groupers to
>> >> change THEIR Usenet participation habits by adding another step.
>> >> This is a bad idea: giving Google Groupers any wins is counterproductive.
>> >
>> >
>> > Back in the DejaNews days, one could put HTML code into message
>> > headers
>
> Just to clarify, using ones NNTP client.
>
>> And still have a valid header?
>
> Yes, it is still a valid header.
> It was Deja that was mis-interpreting it.
Scripting in a header is legal?
>> > and have Deja interpret it as HTML. So for example
>> >
>> >| Organization: <script type="text/javascript">top.location.replace("http://some.where.else/");</script>
>> >
>> > That was no more an extra step than is your WebTV header.
>>
>> Of course it's not. It's another header. What's your point?
>
> My point is that there was a way of making posts unreadable for
> DejaNews users.
>
> Unfortunately, this no longer works with Google (the new owner of
> the Deja archive)
>
>
>> The
>> proposed body kludges that I pointed out are bad ideas are not headers,
>> so you're comparing apples to oranges. I never said automatically
>> inserted headers are bad.
>
> And why did you imply that automatically-selected charsets are a bad idea?
Automatically? I thought the stuff proposed here was about the
non-GG-user having to futz around to read them.
Peter J Ross
<no....@box.invalid> wrote:
> Scripting in a header is legal?
Why not?
Is
"begin (OE thinks this is a binary)"
at the start of an article's body illegal?
--
PJR :-)
Stan Brown
> In news.software.readers on Tue, 18 Sep 2007 20:13:24 -0000, Anonymous
> <nob...@mixmin.net> wrote:
>
> > Is there anything like the "web tv stationery" header trick for making
> > posts unreadable on google groups?
>
> 65 6d 20 77 69 74 68 20 73 6f 6d 65 74 68 69 6e 67 20 6c 69 6b 65 20
> 74 68 69 73 2e
>
> :-)
I think the OP meant, without making them unreadable by newsreader
software. :-)
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com/
"If there's one thing I know, it's men. I ought to: it's
been my life work." -- Marie Dressler, in /Dinner at Eight/
Blinky the Shark
> In news.software.readers on 21 Sep 2007 01:32:08 GMT, Blinky the Shark
><no....@box.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Scripting in a header is legal?
>
> Why not?
I don't know. That's why I asked. If I knew, I'd have cited an
authority.
> Is
> "begin (OE thinks this is a binary)"
> at the start of an article's body illegal?
No. Is the body of an article a header? No.
Got some more apples and oranges to compare? :)
Garamond
> Ralph Fox wrote:
>> On 20 Sep 2007 10:32:38 GMT, in message <slrnff4j3f....@thurston.blinkynet.net>,
>> Blinky the Shark wrote:
>>
>>> X-WebTV-Stationery: Standard; BGColor=black; TextColor=black
>>> Unfortunately, viewing the larger picture shows this: When people use
>>> such kludges to obscure the content of their Usenet messages, they are
>>> handing the Google Groupers a WIN, by requiring NON-Google-Groupers to
>>> change THEIR Usenet participation habits by adding another step.
>>> This is a bad idea: giving Google Groupers any wins is counterproductive.
>>
>> Back in the DejaNews days, one could put HTML code into message
>
> And still have a valid header?
>
Blinky the Shark
> Blinky the Shark skrev:
>
>> Scripting in a header is legal?
>
Why do I think that what? Or was that supposed to be a question?
Naturally, by "legal" I mean conforming to the RFCs pertaining to NNTP
headers. Don't try lawyering the question.
Ted S.
> Is the body of an article a header? No.
But you can put the entire body of your article in X-Headers for people
who only download the headers. ;-)
--
Ted S.
fedya at bestweb dot net
Adam Funk
> On 21 Sep 2007 03:20:05 GMT, Blinky the Shark wrote:
>
>> Is the body of an article a header? No.
>
> But you can put the entire body of your article in X-Headers for people
> who only download the headers. ;-)
He disappeared about a year ago, didn't he?
Jernej Simončič
>> Yes, it is still a valid header.
>> It was Deja that was mis-interpreting it.
> Scripting in a header is legal?
It's not scripting - at least not as far ar Usenet is concerned. If anybody
does execute the script anyway, that's his own fault.
--
begin .sig
< Jernej Simončič ><>◊<>< jernej simoncic at isg si >
end
XS11E
> Is there anything like the "web tv stationery" header trick for
> making posts unreadable on google groups?
I've been following this thread hoping someone will explain *WHY*
anyone wants to make posts unreadable to GGers, can someone clue me in
please?
--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
Blinky the Shark
> Anonymous <nob...@mixmin.net> wrote:
>
>> Is there anything like the "web tv stationery" header trick for
>> making posts unreadable on google groups?
>
> I've been following this thread hoping someone will explain *WHY*
> anyone wants to make posts unreadable to GGers, can someone clue me in
> please?
To bug them.
Wanna change the link in your sig to the one in mine? Thanks!
--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
XS11E
> Wanna change the link in your sig to the one in mine? Thanks!
No.
--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
Blinky the Shark
> Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Wanna change the link in your sig to the one in mine? Thanks!
>
> No.
Bitch. ;)
Thanks.
--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
Adam Funk
> on 21 Sep 2007 01:32:08 GMT, Blinky the Shark wrote:
>
>>> Yes, it is still a valid header.
>>> It was Deja that was mis-interpreting it.
>> Scripting in a header is legal?
>
> It's not scripting - at least not as far ar Usenet is concerned. If anybody
> does execute the script anyway, that's his own fault.
You mean like this one?
X-Dodgy: rm -fr *
(Don't try it!)
Jeffrey Goldberg
> XS11E wrote:
>> I've been following this thread hoping someone will explain *WHY*
>> anyone wants to make posts unreadable to GGers, can someone clue me in
>> please?
> To bug them.
Blinky,
I'm a bit confused by your position. If I recall correctly, you described
XNA as "anti-community" in a recent posting, yet at the same time you
don't seem to mind borking the archives.
Doesn't making posts unreadable for google groups affect all users of the
archives and not just those who post through Google?
Cheers,
-j
--
Jeffrey Goldberg http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/
I rarely read top-posted, over-quoting or HTML postings.
http://improve-usenet.org/
Jernej Simončič
> You mean like this one?
> X-Dodgy: rm -fr *
rm -fr / is a better choice. Adding a nohup in front isn't bad either :)
Blinky the Shark
> On Fri, 21 Sep 2007 in
> <slrnff820v....@thurston.blinkynet.net>,...:
>
>> XS11E wrote:
>
>>> I've been following this thread hoping someone will explain *WHY*
>>> anyone wants to make posts unreadable to GGers, can someone clue me
>>> in please?
>
>> To bug them.
>
> Blinky,
>
> I'm a bit confused by your position. If I recall correctly, you
> described
No, you obviously don't KNOW my position.
> XNA as "anti-community" in a recent posting, yet at the same time you
> don't seem to mind borking the archives.
>
> Doesn't making posts unreadable for google groups affect all users of
> the archives and not just those who post through Google?
Try reading more of this group, or reading it with more comprehension.
I've been posting AGAINST fucking up posts for everyone just to make
them unreadable by Google Gropers. That I answered XS11E's question,
above, with the relevant answer does not mean that I SUPPORT that
activity. He wasn't asking if it was good practice; he was asking why
some people were proposing such measures. If he'd asked "why do people
rob convenience stores?" and I'd answered "they want money", would that
indicate to you that I SUPPORTED robbing convenience stores? Especially
if I'd been posting right along that I did NOT support robbing
convenience stores?
Jeffrey Goldberg
> Try reading more of this group, or reading it with more comprehension.
>
> I've been posting AGAINST fucking up posts for everyone just to make
> them unreadable by Google Gropers.
OK. Thanks. For what it's worth, I agree with you.
Wolfgang Schelongowski
>Find out what the Google servers add to the "Path:" header, and pre-load
>this into the "Path:" of your posts. Other NNTP servers will interpret
>this as meaning that the post has already passed through the Google
>servers, so they won't (or shouldn't) pass the message on.
>
>This may not work nowdays, as servers may just rely on the "do you have
...
It's proven that it didn't work even a dozen years ago.
--
The first entry of Sin into the mind occurs when, out of cowardice or
conformity or vanity, the Real is replaced by a comforting lie.
-- Integritas, Consonantia, Claritas
Blinky the Shark
> On Fri, 21 Sep 2007 in
> <slrnff87h0....@thurston.blinkynet.net>,...:
>
>> Try reading more of this group, or reading it with more
>> comprehension.
>>
>> I've been posting AGAINST fucking up posts for everyone just to make
>> them unreadable by Google Gropers.
>
> OK. Thanks. For what it's worth, I agree with you.
You're welcome. And thanks for the link to the UIP in your sig.
Hey, I just put two and two together. Perhaps you missed my comments
*against* that kind of fuckery by a day or two because you *just*
subscribed to this group. Perhaps you're the Jeffrey that a couple days
ago left a nice comment at the UIP, which is now on the Feedback page.
And perhaps you dropped by here because of the UIP recommendation of the
group.
Am I on the right scent, or did someone drag a herring (I like herrings,
too!) across the trail? :)
SINNER
I guess he got eaten by a bear.
--
David
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org/
Made with real ingredients.
SINNER
> on Fri, 21 Sep 2007 19:19:35 +0100, Adam Funk wrote:
>> You mean like this one?
>> X-Dodgy: rm -fr *
> rm -fr / is a better choice. Adding a nohup in front isn't bad either :)
Ouch!
--
David
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org/
"I'd love to go out with you, but I have to floss my cat."
Mike Yetto
Read Mail follow references?
Mike "where's the problem with that?" Yetto
--
"There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free
government ought to be to trust no man living with power to
endanger the public liberty."
- John Adams
Jeffrey Goldberg
> Hey, I just put two and two together. Perhaps you missed my comments
> *against* that kind of fuckery by a day or two because you *just*
> subscribed to this group.
Yup. I should have lurked longer before jumping into what is obviously
part of a long running debate.
> Perhaps you're the Jeffrey that a couple days
> ago left a nice comment at the UIP, which is now on the Feedback page.
> And perhaps you dropped by here because of the UIP recommendation of the
> group.
Correct on almost all counts. You personally recommended to me that I
subscribe to this group. It may have come up after I mentioned that I
actually switched clients (Thunderbird to alpine) to have the necessary
filtering ability.
Anyway, the UIP and XNA have been actively discussed on comp.sys.mac.apps
where many of the regulars have become fed up with GG. At least among the
vocal people in that crowd, their rationale for XNA is part of general,
and IMO poorly focused, hostility to Google. So your explanation of "it
bugs them" as the reason behind talk of borking Google is something I
should have understood properly, without misattributing that sentiment to
you.
Cheers,
Blinky the Shark
> On Fri, 21 Sep 2007 in
> <slrnff8g90....@thurston.blinkynet.net>,...:
>
>> Hey, I just put two and two together. Perhaps you missed my comments
>> *against* that kind of fuckery by a day or two because you *just*
>> subscribed to this group.
>
> Yup. I should have lurked longer before jumping into what is
> obviously part of a long running debate.
Not a problem. Good plan, but I'm not bagging you for not. I was just
rolling with what I though was unfolding in front of me once the light
bulb came on above my sleek and salt-watery head. :)
>> Perhaps you're the Jeffrey that a couple days ago left a nice
>> comment at the UIP, which is now on the Feedback page. And perhaps
>> you dropped by here because of the UIP recommendation of the group.
>
> Correct on almost all counts. You personally recommended to me that I
> subscribe to this group. It may have come up after I mentioned that I
> actually switched clients (Thunderbird to alpine) to have the
> necessary filtering ability.
Ah! Right...in my reply. I didn't see a response to my question about
which clients you moved from or to; my "from" guess was Thunderbird
since you were in search of decent filtering. I've never heard of
alpine. And I notice it's not setting a User-Agent (or X-Newsreader, or
similar) header, so not many other people are going to know of it,
either.
> Anyway, the UIP and XNA have been actively discussed on
> comp.sys.mac.apps
Ah! Alpine must be for Mac; without the User-Agent (or similar header)
your operating system is not shown, either. <clickety> Wait -- I see
both in your Message-ID header. That's better, but not optimal; I think
many people do what I do and include User-Agent and equivalent headers
in their normal, partial headers view, but not Message-ID; we won't see
your UA and OS in your MID header unless we go looking for it.
> where many of the regulars have become fed up with GG. At least among
> the
Great! Always glad to hear when the folks in other groups are waking
up. And being not a Mac-head myself, that's a place I'd not reach
myself. Keep the faith; spread the faith. :)
> vocal people in that crowd, their rationale for XNA is part of
> general, and IMO poorly focused, hostility to Google. So your
> explanation of "it
XNA just diminishes the archive, and the archive itself is not the
problem. GG posting is. Well, and the archive's user interface just
keeps going downhill. http://blinkynet.net/comp/gggui.html
> bugs them" as the reason behind talk of borking Google is something I
Remember, the "it" there was about Google Groupers, not about Google
itself.
> should have understood properly, without misattributing that sentiment
> to you.
No problem. We've cleared it up.
And welcome to n.s.r -- I hope you like the group enough to stick
around, even though I doubt you're going to get any alpine action here.
Mike Yetto
> And welcome to n.s.r -- I hope you like the group enough to stick
> around, even though I doubt you're going to get any alpine action here.
>
>
Why don't you show him how to compile slrn?
Mike "I think I need a bigger boat" Yetto
Blinky the Shark
> Bada bing Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> bada bang:
>> And welcome to n.s.r -- I hope you like the group enough to stick
>> around, even though I doubt you're going to get any alpine action here.
>
> Why don't you show him how to compile slrn?
>
> Mike "I think I need a bigger boat" Yetto
:)
With this new-fangled version, I'm now seeing posts that *won't open*
and "Can't convert X to Y" errors on them.
The latest is, in fact, from Jeffrey's mac group:
Can't convert x-mac-roman -> ISO-8859-1
I posted a link to a screen cap of another one, a little while ago; that
was about 8859-something to 8859-something, so that could happen
anywhere real PCs live. :)
Never saw this with the gold versions.
Jeffrey Goldberg
> Ah! Right...in my reply. I didn't see a response to my question about
> which clients you moved from or to;
Odd. Let me check my sent mail and bounces folders... I did respond to
your message with a fairly long and detailed message. And I don't see any
bounces. Maybe you'd like to check your junk folder.
> my "from" guess was Thunderbird
> since you were in search of decent filtering. I've never heard of
> alpine. And I notice it's not setting a User-Agent (or X-Newsreader, or
> similar) header, so not many other people are going to know of it,
> either.
Alpine is the yet to be released successor of Pine. It doesn't set a
User-Agent header, but can always be identified by the message-id.
>> Anyway, the UIP and XNA have been actively discussed on
>> comp.sys.mac.apps
> Ah! Alpine must be for Mac; without the User-Agent (or similar header)
> your operating system is not shown, either. <clickety> Wait -- I see
> both in your Message-ID header. That's better, but not optimal; I think
> many people do what I do and include User-Agent and equivalent headers
> in their normal, partial headers view, but not Message-ID; we won't see
> your UA and OS in your MID header unless we go looking for it.
I don't know why the Pine team have always done things this way. Knowing
them, I suspect that they have passionately held reasons for not setting a
User-Agent header.
> And welcome to n.s.r -- I hope you like the group enough to stick
> around, even though I doubt you're going to get any alpine action here.
Thanks.
Blinky the Shark
> On Fri, 22 Sep 2007 in <slrnff8peb....@thurston.blinkynet.net>,...:
>
>> Ah! Right...in my reply. I didn't see a response to my question about
>> which clients you moved from or to;
>
> Odd. Let me check my sent mail and bounces folders... I did respond to
> your message with a fairly long and detailed message. And I don't see any
> bounces. Maybe you'd like to check your junk folder.
MY BAD. Sorry. It was in a box that doesn't get scheduled mail
runs and is only accessed when I click "get all". I'll change that when
I finish this post.
I just responded to that email.
>> my "from" guess was Thunderbird
>> since you were in search of decent filtering. I've never heard of
>> alpine. And I notice it's not setting a User-Agent (or X-Newsreader, or
>> similar) header, so not many other people are going to know of it,
>> either.
>
> Alpine is the yet to be released successor of Pine. It doesn't set a
> User-Agent header, but can always be identified by the message-id.
Alpine. pine. I get it! :)
I use pine at a university shell account I still have.
>>> Anyway, the UIP and XNA have been actively discussed on
>>> comp.sys.mac.apps
>
>> Ah! Alpine must be for Mac; without the User-Agent (or similar header)
>> your operating system is not shown, either. <clickety> Wait -- I see
>> both in your Message-ID header. That's better, but not optimal; I think
>> many people do what I do and include User-Agent and equivalent headers
>> in their normal, partial headers view, but not Message-ID; we won't see
>> your UA and OS in your MID header unless we go looking for it.
>
> I don't know why the Pine team have always done things this way. Knowing
> them, I suspect that they have passionately held reasons for not setting a
> User-Agent header.
They're just...[wait for it]...wooden. I kill me! ;)
Meanwhile, can the *user* set one?
Peter J Ross
<no....@box.invalid> wrote:
> Peter J Ross wrote:
>> In news.software.readers on 21 Sep 2007 01:32:08 GMT, Blinky the Shark
>><no....@box.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> Scripting in a header is legal?
>>
>> Why not?
>
> I don't know. That's why I asked. If I knew, I'd have cited an
> authority.
I know of no RFC that envisages the possibility that Usenet headers
could contain scripts. A string that would be a script in another
context isn't a script in a Usenet header. It's just a string of
characters.
Similarly, if I included the EICAR test string in a header, it
wouldn't be a binary.
If a "script" is otherwise valid as a header field, I don't see how it
could be illegal.
>> Is
>> "begin (OE thinks this is a binary)"
>> at the start of an article's body illegal?
>
> No. Is the body of an article a header? No.
>
> Got some more apples and oranges to compare? :)
The examples are similar in that they both contain ordinary text that
might be misinterpreted by a bad newsreader as something else.
Similarly, if "X-Google-Command: sudo shutdown -h now" had the implied
effect when attempting to reply to a post in Google Groups, it would
still be legal according to Usenet-related RFCs, It just wouldn't be a
nice thing to do.
--
PJR :-)
Jeffrey Goldberg
> The latest is, in fact, from Jeffrey's mac group:
>
> Can't convert x-mac-roman -> ISO-8859-1
Hmm. Most Mac newsreaders do UTF8 for anything that doesn't fit in
US-ASCII. I'm disappointed that there are Mac newsreaders are still
composing in mac-roman.
> I posted a link to a screen cap of another one, a little while ago; that
> was about 8859-something to 8859-something, so that could happen
> anywhere real PCs live. :)
I'm assuming that slrn uses libiconv. The man page for iconv_open(3) says
that it copes with Mac Roman. Maybe the problem is that the charset
declaration isn't exactly what slrn/iconv expects.
Can you post the Content-Type headers of the messages that are giving you
trouble?
Jeffrey Goldberg
> Meanwhile, can the *user* set [a User-Agent] header?
Yes. In (al)pine users can set headers. But of course the user would
have to manually update that with each version change.
SINNER
> Jeffrey Goldberg wrote:
[...]
> And welcome to n.s.r -- I hope you like the group enough to stick
> around, even though I doubt you're going to get any alpine action here.
Wondering out loud if the mac 'Alpine' is the same as the updated *nix
version of pine, coincidentally now called alpine:
http://www.linux.com/articles/58720?theme=print
--
David
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org/
Suggest you just sit there and wait till life gets easier.
Blinky the Shark
> On Fri, 22 Sep 2007 in <slrnff8u7l....@thurston.blinkynet.net>,...:
>
>> The latest is, in fact, from Jeffrey's mac group:
>>
>> Can't convert x-mac-roman -> ISO-8859-1
>
> Hmm. Most Mac newsreaders do UTF8 for anything that doesn't fit in
> US-ASCII. I'm disappointed that there are Mac newsreaders are still
> composing in mac-roman.
>
>> I posted a link to a screen cap of another one, a little while ago; that
>> was about 8859-something to 8859-something, so that could happen
>> anywhere real PCs live. :)
>
> I'm assuming that slrn uses libiconv. The man page for iconv_open(3) says
> that it copes with Mac Roman. Maybe the problem is that the charset
> declaration isn't exactly what slrn/iconv expects.
>
> Can you post the Content-Type headers of the messages that are giving you
> trouble?
I don't even know what group the 8859 conversion failure was in, but
I'll go hunting for the mac-roman posts. Dammit! Should've starred
them with my sticky-tag macro. :)
<leaves>
<finds those two posts in the GG threads in comp.sys.mac.apps with slrn>
<reads those posts with Pan>
<returns>
Here ya go. Same author.
(my line wrap on UA header)
Message-ID: <JoL59...@news.boeing.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.0.9)
Gecko/20061215 Red Hat/1.0.7-0.1.el4 SeaMonkey/1.0.7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=x-mac-roman; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Blinky the Shark
> On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 in <slrnff9a7g....@thurston.blinkynet.net>,...:
>
>> Meanwhile, can the *user* set [a User-Agent] header?
>
> Yes. In (al)pine users can set headers. But of course the user would
> have to manually update that with each version change.
It's not like one updates every day.
Moe Trin
<p7tds4x...@news.gates-of-hell.com>, SINNER wrote:
>* Adam Funk wrote in news.software.readers:
>> On 2007-09-21, Ted S. wrote:
>>> But you can put the entire body of your article in X-Headers for people
>>> who only download the headers. ;-)
>
>> He disappeared about a year ago, didn't he?
Did he? Not only is he in the kill file by full name and by username,
but there's also an entry that killed _replies_ to his useless crap,
and another few to kill posts where those names are in the Subject:.
Towards the end, I was only seeing his nonsense in replies by others
to replies to his posts, and I was about to add another regex to fix
that problem.
>I guess he got eaten by a bear.
I haven't heard or seen any reports about bears getting sick.
Old guy
Moe Trin
=?utf-8?Q?Simon=C4=8Di=C4=8D?= wrote:
>Adam Funk wrote:
>
>> You mean like this one?
>> X-Dodgy: rm -fr *
>
>rm -fr / is a better choice. Adding a nohup in front isn't bad either :)
except all it does _if_ it were able to run is to give thousands of
rm: /<mumble/rumble/fratz>: Permission denied
messages, because most *nix users don't run as r00t, while the wankers
running windoze don't have an 'rm' command. You might nail more
luser running *nix if you redirected 'stderr' to /dave/null - but then
ypu're playing the odds that they're running some P.O.S. software that
passes the redirection character to the shell - not all do.
Old guy
Jeffrey Goldberg
> Jeffrey Goldberg wrote:
>> I'm disappointed that there are Mac newsreaders are still
>> composing in mac-roman.
>> Can you post the Content-Type headers of the messages that are giving you
>> trouble?
> Here ya go. Same author.
>
> (my line wrap on UA header)
>
> Message-ID: <JoL59...@news.boeing.com>
> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.0.9)
> Gecko/20061215 Red Hat/1.0.7-0.1.el4 SeaMonkey/1.0.7
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=x-mac-roman; format=flowed
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Well, why someone apparently using SeaMonkey on Linux is posting with
that charset is beyond me. But chances are if he'd used
charset=mac-roman
then that would have been recognized. It's probably the "x-" that is
messing things up.
I suppose that it wouldn't be too hard to patch slrn so that when a
charset lookup fails it would strip off a leading "x-" and try again.
But I don't know if this "x-" convention in charset names is widespread
enough for such a patch to be worth it.
Blinky the Shark
> On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 in <slrnffajij....@thurston.blinkynet.net>,...:
>
>> Jeffrey Goldberg wrote:
>
>>> I'm disappointed that there are Mac newsreaders are still
>>> composing in mac-roman.
>
>>> Can you post the Content-Type headers of the messages that are giving you
>>> trouble?
>
>> Here ya go. Same author.
>>
>> (my line wrap on UA header)
>>
>> Message-ID: <JoL59...@news.boeing.com>
>> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.0.9)
>> Gecko/20061215 Red Hat/1.0.7-0.1.el4 SeaMonkey/1.0.7
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=x-mac-roman; format=flowed
>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> Well, why someone apparently using SeaMonkey on Linux is posting with
> that charset is beyond me. But chances are if he'd used
He just upgraded from Google Groups. :)
> charset=mac-roman
>
> then that would have been recognized. It's probably the "x-" that is
> messing things up.
Well, he's your Mac Buddy... ;)
> I suppose that it wouldn't be too hard to patch slrn so that when a
> charset lookup fails it would strip off a leading "x-" and try again.
> But I don't know if this "x-" convention in charset names is widespread
> enough for such a patch to be worth it.
I think it's probably like making clients recognize all kinds of invalid
sig delimiters and unconventional quote indicators: we shouldn't have to
break our news clients into being able to read broken stuff.
Jeffrey Goldberg
> Jeffrey Goldberg wrote:
>> Yes. In (al)pine users can set headers. But of course the user would
>> have to manually update that with each version change.
>
> It's not like one updates every day.
You're not an alpine alpha tester.
And of course if the updates aren't frequent enough, it would be very easy
to forget to do it. Though I haven't checked to see if alpine's token (or
_TOKEN_) expansion happens in custom headers. Hold on let me check the
help pages ... Nope.
Blinky the Shark
> On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 in <slrnffajjm....@thurston.blinkynet.net>,...:
>
>> Jeffrey Goldberg wrote:
>
>>> Yes. In (al)pine users can set headers. But of course the user would
>>> have to manually update that with each version change.
>>
>> It's not like one updates every day.
>
> You're not an alpine alpha tester.
Good point.
Peter J Ross
Goldberg <nob...@goldmark.org> wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 in <slrnffajij....@thurston.blinkynet.net>,...:
>
>> Jeffrey Goldberg wrote:
>
>>> I'm disappointed that there are Mac newsreaders are still
>>> composing in mac-roman.
>
>>> Can you post the Content-Type headers of the messages that are giving you
>>> trouble?
>
>> Here ya go. Same author.
>>
>> (my line wrap on UA header)
>>
>> Message-ID: <JoL59...@news.boeing.com>
>> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.0.9)
>> Gecko/20061215 Red Hat/1.0.7-0.1.el4 SeaMonkey/1.0.7
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=x-mac-roman; format=flowed
>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> Well, why someone apparently using SeaMonkey on Linux is posting with
> that charset is beyond me. But chances are if he'd used
>
> charset=mac-roman
>
> then that would have been recognized. It's probably the "x-" that is
> messing things up.
"mac-roman" is also unknown to IANA, as is "roman".
The proper name for the charset used in such posts is "macintosh",
alias "mac". But in fact most of them could easily be expressed in
iso-8859-*, if not us-ascii.
> I suppose that it wouldn't be too hard to patch slrn so that when a
> charset lookup fails it would strip off a leading "x-" and try again.
> But I don't know if this "x-" convention in charset names is widespread
> enough for such a patch to be worth it.
This "x- convention" is totally made-up and silly and unknown to IANA.
<http://www.iana.org/assignments/character-sets>
If it's not listed there, it's not allowed outside an Intranet.
If it's listed there but not supported by libiconv, libiconv hasn't
caught up with the standards yet, and somebody ought to file a bug
report.
--
PJR :-)
Peter J Ross
<no....@box.invalid> wrote:
> I think it's probably like making clients recognize all kinds of invalid
> sig delimiters and unconventional quote indicators: we shouldn't have to
> break our news clients into being able to read broken stuff.
Abso-bleedin'-lutely!
However, the x-mac-roman posts are broken, but the iso-8859-8-i posts
aren't. The latter ought to be properly supported.
--
PJR :-)
Jernej Simončič
> messages, because most *nix users don't run as r00t, while the wankers
> running windoze don't have an 'rm' command. You might nail more
> luser running *nix if you redirected 'stderr' to /dave/null - but then
> ypu're playing the odds that they're running some P.O.S. software that
> passes the redirection character to the shell - not all do.
In that case, how about
:() { :|:& };:
--
begin .sig
< Jernej Simončič ><>◊<>< jernej simoncic at isg si >
end
Jeffrey Goldberg
> I think it's probably like making clients recognize all kinds of invalid
> sig delimiters and unconventional quote indicators: we shouldn't have to
> break our news clients into being able to read broken stuff.
Well, you may not have known what alpine is, but otherwise you seem to be
channeling Mark Crispin.
On the whole, I agree with you, but using iconv in many cases is already
doing that. By designing our clients to read mac-roman or Windows-52?? we
are already doing that. Otherwise we should configure our clients to only
cope with standard track charsets.
Blinky the Shark
> In <slrnffavjn....@thurston.blinkynet.net>, Blinky the Shark wrote:
>
>> I think it's probably like making clients recognize all kinds of invalid
>> sig delimiters and unconventional quote indicators: we shouldn't have to
>> break our news clients into being able to read broken stuff.
>
> Well, you may not have known what alpine is, but otherwise you seem to be
> channeling Mark Crispin.
I don't know who he is, but apparently he has the right idea about
breaking unbroken things as a response to broken things that should be
fixed. :)
> On the whole, I agree with you, but using iconv in many cases is already
> doing that. By designing our clients to read mac-roman or Windows-52?? we
> are already doing that. Otherwise we should configure our clients to only
Bummer.
> cope with standard track charsets.
Where do I sign up? :)
Jeffrey Goldberg
> Wondering out loud if the mac 'Alpine' is the same as the updated *nix
> version of pine, coincidentally now called alpine:
Yes. It is precisely the same thing. Apple OS X is Unix so you shouldn't
be surprised to find people using familiar Unix software on Macs.
Ralph Fox
Anonymous wrote:
> Is there anything like the "web tv stationery" header trick for making
> posts unreadable on google groups?
Here is a technique which IIRC used to make posts hard to read on GG.
But on testing today, it doesn't work any more. (All it does is give
your post a false high line count, which may get it filtered by some
people.)
GG's handling of quoted-printable used to have one flaw. GG
correctly handled QP =XX, but GG at one time treated QP 'soft'
line breaks as 'hard' line breaks (see RFC2045 section 6.7).
See this message source / raw message to understand the technique.
--
Cheers,
Ralph
Ralph Fox
m...@tadyatam.invalid wrote:
> Ralph Fox <-rf-nz-@-.invalid> wrote in
> news:9bm4f3dfene3q33h6...@4ax.com:
>
> > On 20 Sep 2007 10:32:38 GMT, in message
> > <slrnff4j3f....@thurston.blinkynet.net>, Blinky the
> > Shark wrote:
> >
> >> X-WebTV-Stationery: Standard; BGColor=black;
> >> TextColor=black
> >
> >> Unfortunately, viewing the larger picture shows this:
> >> When people use such kludges to obscure the content of
> >> their Usenet messages, they are handing the Google
> >> Groupers a WIN, by requiring NON-Google-Groupers to change
> >> THEIR Usenet participation habits by adding another step.
> >> This is a bad idea: giving Google Groupers any wins is
> >> counterproductive.
> >
> >
> > Back in the DejaNews days, one could put HTML code into
> > message headers and have Deja interpret it as HTML. So for
> > example
> >
> >| Organization: <script
> >| type="text/javascript">top.location.replace("http://some.
> >| where.else/");</script>
> >
> > That was no more an extra step than is your WebTV header.
> >
>
> Ralph,
>
> I think Blinky is talking about Usenet readers.
And I was also talking about Usenet readers. One uses an NNTP Usenet
reader to add the Organization header quoted above.
> His black-on-
> black is "his thing" which does not bother other Usenet folks.
And likewise. The Organization header quoted above also does not
bother other Usenet folks.
> IOW, I don't have to do anything in order to read his posts.
> OTOH, I have to rummage through the menu (WTH is it?) for ROT-
> 13.
I am well aware that one has to rummage through stuff to decode Rot-13.
If that was your point, then you should have replied to "m...@privacy.net".
It was "m...@privacy.net" who advocated Rot-13, in message news:fcpjr...@news3.newsguy.com.
If you were referring to my earlier post about Rot-13, then here are
two points for you to go away and think about.
1. Quote and reply to the post which you are referring to.
Don't quote and reply to a different post.
2. If you want to point out problems with Rot-13, reply to the
post which advocated Rot-13.
My post about Rot-13 did not advocate Rot-13.
My post was a reply to "m...@privacy.net", to point out that
Rot-13 does not make posts unreadable to Google Group users.
I think you may have failed to grasp this.
--
Cheers,
Ralph
Ralph Fox
Blinky the Shark wrote:
> Ralph Fox wrote:
> > On 20 Sep 2007 17:21:41 GMT, in message <slrnff5b2e....@thurston.blinkynet.net>,
> > Blinky the Shark wrote:
> >
> >> Ralph Fox wrote:
> >> > On 20 Sep 2007 10:32:38 GMT, in message <slrnff4j3f....@thurston.blinkynet.net>,
> >> > Blinky the Shark wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> X-WebTV-Stationery: Standard; BGColor=black; TextColor=black
> >> >
> >> >> Unfortunately, viewing the larger picture shows this: When people use
> >> >> such kludges to obscure the content of their Usenet messages, they are
> >> >> handing the Google Groupers a WIN, by requiring NON-Google-Groupers to
> >> >> change THEIR Usenet participation habits by adding another step.
> >> >> This is a bad idea: giving Google Groupers any wins is counterproductive.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Back in the DejaNews days, one could put HTML code into message
> >> > headers
> >
> > Just to clarify, using ones NNTP client.
> >
> >> And still have a valid header?
> >
> > Yes, it is still a valid header.
> > It was Deja that was mis-interpreting it.
>
> Scripting in a header is legal?
The Organization header is plain text.
_Any_ string of us-ascii characters in the range ' ' (0x20) to '~' (0x7E)
is a legal value.
Any system that interprets it as scripting is buggy.
> >> > and have Deja interpret it as HTML. So for example
> >> >
> >> >| Organization: <script type="text/javascript">top.location.replace("http://some.where.else/");</script>
> >> >
> >> > That was no more an extra step than is your WebTV header.
> >>
> >> Of course it's not. It's another header. What's your point?
> >
> > My point is that there was a way of making posts unreadable for
> > DejaNews users.
> >
> > Unfortunately, this no longer works with Google (the new owner of
> > the Deja archive)
> >
> >
> >> The
> >> proposed body kludges that I pointed out are bad ideas are not headers,
> >> so you're comparing apples to oranges. I never said automatically
> >> inserted headers are bad.
> >
> > And why did you imply that automatically-selected charsets are a bad idea?
>
> Automatically? I thought the stuff proposed here was about the
> non-GG-user having to futz around to read them.
Any scheme that requires the *reader* to futz around is not good.
OTOH if the *poster* wants to futz around, that is his/her own choice.
Nothing forces the *poster* to use the scheme to post.
As for charsets. A number of clients automatically interpret
the charset specified in the Content-Type header, so the *reader*
does not have to do any futzing around. [See RFC 1521 section 7.1.1
and RFC 2046 section 4.1.2.]
If the poster's audience are all using such readers, then your
comments do not apply to the charset scheme which I posted in
news:v2i4f316rtgnbassb...@4ax.com . The reader
does not have to futz around.
If the poster's audience are using readers which do not
automatically handle this standard header parameter, then
the poster should not use this technique.
--
Cheers,
Ralph
Blinky the Shark
That's been my point all along (other than for GGers, of course).
> OTOH if the *poster* wants to futz around, that is his/her own choice.
Of course.
> Nothing forces the *poster* to use the scheme to post.
Of course.
> As for charsets. A number of clients automatically interpret the
> charset specified in the Content-Type header, so the *reader* does not
> have to do any futzing around. [See RFC 1521 section 7.1.1 and RFC
> 2046 section 4.1.2.]
>
> If the poster's audience are all using such readers, then your
> comments do not apply to the charset scheme which I posted in
> news:v2i4f316rtgnbassb...@4ax.com . The reader does not
> have to futz around.
Then it's okay.
Thanks for that clarification that it's automatic, which was my
question.
> If the poster's audience are using readers which do not automatically
> handle this standard header parameter, then the poster should not use
> this technique.
That's been my point all along.
Ralph Fox
Blinky the Shark wrote:
> Ralph Fox wrote:
> > 2. Google Groups ignores the charset specified in the message
> > headers. Instead, GG checks whether the body appears to be
> > Unicode (UTF-8), and if not GG assumes the message uses the
> > group's default charset.
> >
> > So a trick for making a post unreadable on Google Groups is
> > to post the message in a different 8-bit charset such as
> > Cyrillic ISO-8859-5 in an English-language newsgroup, and
> > replace as many of the ascii letters as you can with Cyrillic
> > letters which look the same. GG will display those characters
> > totally wrongly, making the post unreadable.
> >
> > If an NNTP client correctly interprets the charset in the
> > message headers, then the post will look perfectly normal
> > in that NNTP client. Unfortunately, some NNTP clients are
> > not too hot at handling different charsets (as bad as GG).
> >
> > Below is an example of what you get: Compare this in GG
> > vs (for example) Thunderbird.
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > ?? ? tr??k f?r m?k?ng ? ???t unr??d?bl? ?n G??gl? Gr?u?? ??
> > t? ???t th? m????g? ?n ? d?ff?r?nt 8-b?t ?h?r??t ?u?h ??
> > ??r?ll?? ???-8859-5 ?n ?n ?ngl??h-l?ngu?g? n?w?gr?u?, ?nd
> > r??l??? ?? m?n? ?f th? ????? l?tt?r? ?? ??u ??n w?th ??r?ll??
> > l?tt?r? wh??h l??k th? ??m?. GG w?ll d???l?? th??? ?h?r??t?r?
> > t?t?ll? wr?ngl?, m?k?ng th? ???t unr??d?bl?.
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> As I mentioned in another post on this thread a few minutes ago, all of
> these kludges represent giving in to Google Groups and fucking up everyone
> ELSE's Usenet experience.
What you *actually* said was "by requiring NON-Google-Groupers to
change THEIR Usenet participation habits by adding another step."
Your words should only apply to the *reader*.
There is no extra step for the *reader* who is using a client which
automatically handles the charset parameter in the Content-Type header.
As one example of such a client, I mentioned Thunderbird.
If *readers* are using clients which do not automatically
handle this standard header parameter [RFC 1521 section 7.1.1
and RFC 2046 section 4.1.2], then the poster should not
use this technique.
Nothing requires the *poster* to add extra steps. Nothing forces
the poster to post using Cyrillic homographs. It is the poster's
own time if he/she chooses to.
--
Cheers,
Ralph
Blinky the Shark
I did not use quotation marks around my paraphrase of what I'd said
elsewhere; I represented it as a paraphrase and nothing more.
> Your words should only apply to the *reader*.
>
> There is no extra step for the *reader* who is using a client which
> automatically handles the charset parameter in the Content-Type header.
> As one example of such a client, I mentioned Thunderbird.
WE JUST HAD THIS CONVERSATION.
Ralph, I'm really tired of your lawyering. Good bye.
Ralph Fox
Blinky the Shark wrote:
> Ralph Fox wrote:
> > 1. If the domain part of the message-id ends with a period '.',
> > then the message will not even appear on Google groups.
>
> And it will be a broken MID.
That is an interesting question.
A. It is actually legal for a domain name to end in a period.
See RFC 1034 and RFC1035.
Such domain names are "absolute", meaning that DNS resolution
is not to append a suffix (like ".MEGANET.COM") if needed for
DNS resolution.
B. And many NNTP clients set the domain name part of the MID
to be the configured domain name of the server.
So what happens if the user has configured an absolute domain
name for the server?
--
Cheers,
Ralph
Ralph Fox
Peter J Ross wrote:
> This "x- convention" is totally made-up and silly and unknown to IANA.
The RFCs reserve this for private character sets.
> <http://www.iana.org/assignments/character-sets>
>
> If it's not listed there, it's not allowed outside an Intranet.
Character sets not registered at IANA *are* allowed on the
Internet, by private agreement between the parties, provided
the charset name begins with "X-".
RFC 1521 section 7.1.1, also RFC2046 section 4.1.2 ...
| No character set name other than those defined above may be used in
| Internet mail without the publication of a formal specification and
| its registration with IANA, or by private agreement, in which case
| the character set name must begin with "X-".
> If it's listed there but not supported by libiconv, libiconv hasn't
> caught up with the standards yet, and somebody ought to file a bug
> report.
I doubt it will ever be registered with the "x-", at IANA.
--
Cheers,
Ralph
SINNER
> In <36ofs4x...@news.gates-of-hell.com>, SINNER wrote:
>> Wondering out loud if the mac 'Alpine' is the same as the updated *nix
>> version of pine, coincidentally now called alpine:
> Yes. It is precisely the same thing. Apple OS X is Unix so you shouldn't
> be surprised to find people using familiar Unix software on Macs.
I know OS X is Unix but software can sometimes be named the same as
other packages with totally different functionality. Thanks for the
confirmation.
--
David
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org/
You know you have a small apartment when Rice Krispies echo.
-- S. Rickly Christian
Moe Trin
<1qejphdua5l0e$.d...@deepthought.ena.si>, Jernej =?utf-8?Q?Simon=C4=8Di=C4=8D?=
wrote:
>Moe Trin wrote:
>> You might nail more luser running *nix if you redirected 'stderr' to
>> /dave/null - but then ypu're playing the odds that they're running
>> some P.O.S. software that passes the redirection character to the
>> shell - not all do.
>
>In that case, how about
> :() { :|:& };:
Simple fork bomb - again does the P.O.S. software you are running pass
the pipe to the shell, or not?
Even if it did, this would merely D.O.S. the one user. It has virtually
no effect on the O/S of a properly configured *nix box. 'fork bombs'
have been around since the 1980s, and any user whose administrator or
distribution failed to set user limits should probably take a pitch
fork to that administrator.
[compton ~]$ uptime
8:24am up 27 days, 17:45, 20 users, load average: 0.90, 0.35, 0.11
[compton ~]$
You figure out how I was able to handle that - the clue is obvious.
Now I'll admit that if you are running one of the more recently formed
Linux distributions tailored for windoze wankers, you could run into a
problem if you are unskilled or stupid (a given with those distros),
and don't have a second functional user account. But even in that
circumstance, there are simple solutions to recover. More experienced
users wouldn't have a problem with a fork bomb.
Old guy
Mike Yetto
> Ralph Fox wrote
<something or other>
> WE JUST HAD THIS CONVERSATION.
>
> Ralph, I'm really tired of your lawyering. Good bye.
>
>
He is Frank Slootweg and I claim my two-fifty.
Mike "does that work in this froup?" Yetto
--
"There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free
government ought to be to trust no man living with power to
endanger the public liberty."
- John Adams
Blinky the Shark
> Bada bing Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> bada bang:
>> Ralph Fox wrote
>
><something or other>
>
>> WE JUST HAD THIS CONVERSATION.
>>
>> Ralph, I'm really tired of your lawyering. Good bye.
>>
>>
>
> He is Frank Slootweg and I claim my two-fifty.
Perhaps. They now sleep together in my Quiet Bin.[1]
> Mike "does that work in this froup?" Yetto
No, but I'll sell you a swell recipe for that.
[1] I like "Quiet Bin". I think I'll keep it.
--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project moved to this site August 28th:
http://improve-usenet.org
XS11E
> Is there anything like the "web tv stationery" header trick for
> making posts unreadable on google groups?
Still no answer to my question, WHY does anyone want to make posts
unreadable for GGers? WHY would anyone give a rat's rear end if a GGer
read their post?
--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://improve-usenet.org
Mike Yetto
> Anonymous <nob...@mixmin.net> wrote:
>
>> Is there anything like the "web tv stationery" header trick for
>> making posts unreadable on google groups?
>
> Still no answer to my question, WHY does anyone want to make posts
> unreadable for GGers? WHY would anyone give a rat's rear end if a GGer
> read their post?
>
I've thought about this, although not that much. Be that as it may,
if we don't allow GGers to see how usenet works they'll never
know that they are missing something, making the practice of
hiding from them counter-productive.
Mike "not much product to counter, however" Yetto
Blinky the Shark
> Anonymous <nob...@mixmin.net> wrote:
>
>> Is there anything like the "web tv stationery" header trick for
>> making posts unreadable on google groups?
>
> Still no answer to my question, WHY does anyone want to make posts
> unreadable for GGers? WHY would anyone give a rat's rear end if a
> GGer read their post?
I believe I answered you. I believe I said it's just to bug them.
Then a whole discussion ensued about that being a bad idea if the
tactics used require *normal* (non-GG) users to take any action to read
those messages -- with which I certainly agree. Then someone proposed
one or two tactics that *don't* require action by *normal* (non-GG)
users to read those messages. I don't remember if they work.
--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
Ted S.
> Still no answer to my question, WHY does anyone want to make posts
> unreadable for GGers? WHY would anyone give a rat's rear end if a GGer
> read their post?
My guess is that they want to make using GG a bad experience, and get
the GGers to switch to a real newsreader.
--
Ted S.
fedya at bestweb dot net
XS11E
> XS11E wrote:
>> Still no answer to my question, WHY does anyone want to make
>> posts unreadable for GGers? WHY would anyone give a rat's rear
>> end if a GGer read their post?
>
> I believe I answered you. I believe I said it's just to bug them.
Sorry, that wasn't an applicable answer so I ignored it.
"Anonymous" believed (or pretended to believe) that it was something
needed enough to ask how to do it.
Since then the thread has dragged on and on with no practical answer
and, since "Anonymous" posted through an anonymous remailer, it appears
he/she/it was merely trolling so I'd say he/she/it was very successful
in his/her/it's endeavors and you all took the bait....
--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://improve-usenet.org
Jeffrey Goldberg
> Still no answer to my question, WHY does anyone want to make posts
> unreadable for GGers? WHY would anyone give a rat's rear end if a GGer
> read their post?
In another newsgroup where the UIP came up, one person announced that he
was also using X-No-Archive. He basically argued that Google is Evil and
should be punished.
I can't do justice to his position because I thought it not only was
wrong, but also wasn't very coherent.
XS11E
> In <Xns99B48E13A5DDAx...@69.28.173.184>, XS11E
> wrote:
>
>> Still no answer to my question, WHY does anyone want to make
>> posts unreadable for GGers? WHY would anyone give a rat's rear
>> end if a GGer read their post?
>
> In another newsgroup where the UIP came up, one person announced
> that he was also using X-No-Archive.
That's not really going to do what the OP wanted.
> He basically argued that Google is Evil and should be punished.
One of those nuts, eh?
When will people wake up and realize that the cause of ALL human
suffering is the control of many of the population by cats! Talk about
evil..... "CATS ARE EVIL, THEY MUST BE STOPPED!!!!"
FWIW, the quoted is a very old BBS tagline. One person who was a
regular on the same boards I was on was a cat fan and had several so I
accumulated a large store of cat taglines and used them when replying
to him.
"Missing your cat? Look under my tire...."
> I can't do justice to his position because I thought it not only
> was wrong, but also wasn't very coherent.
Incoherency is fairly normal on usenet.
Blinky the Shark
XS11E wrote:
> Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> wrote:
>
>> XS11E wrote:
>>> Still no answer to my question, WHY does anyone want to make
>>> posts unreadable for GGers? WHY would anyone give a rat's rear
>>> end if a GGer read their post?
>> I believe I answered you. I believe I said it's just to bug them.
>
> Sorry, that wasn't an applicable answer so I ignored it.
Help me out, here. Why is that not applicable?
--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
XS11E
>
>
> XS11E wrote:
>> Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> XS11E wrote:
>>>> Still no answer to my question, WHY does anyone want to make
>>>> posts unreadable for GGers? WHY would anyone give a rat's rear
>>>> end if a GGer read their post? I believe I answered you. I
>>>> believe I said it's just to bug them.
>>
>> Sorry, that wasn't an applicable answer so I ignored it.
>
> Help me out, here. Why is that not applicable?
Because it's not an answer to the question that was posed. It seemed
from the OPs post that he/she/it was seriously concerned about hiding
posts from GGers, not "just to bug them."
My personal guess as to why anyone would want to hide posts from GGers
is so there could be no replies from GGers but w/o confirmation from
the OP that's only a guess and if GGers are filtered why would
he/she/it care if they replied?
It's a mystery to me and I'm curious but it appears the OP was just a
troll...
--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://improve-usenet.org
Blinky the Shark
> Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> XS11E wrote:
>>> Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> XS11E wrote:
>>>>> Still no answer to my question, WHY does anyone want to make
>>>>> posts unreadable for GGers? WHY would anyone give a rat's rear
>>>>> end if a GGer read their post? I believe I answered you. I
>>>>> believe I said it's just to bug them.
>>>
>>> Sorry, that wasn't an applicable answer so I ignored it.
>>
>> Help me out, here. Why is that not applicable?
>
> Because it's not an answer to the question that was posed. It seemed
> from the OPs post that he/she/it was seriously concerned about hiding
> posts from GGers, not "just to bug them."
Okay, then. You think it was *wrong*. I get *that*. "Applicable"
didn't make any sense to me in that context.
> My personal guess as to why anyone would want to hide posts from GGers
> is so there could be no replies from GGers but w/o confirmation from
> the OP that's only a guess and if GGers are filtered why would
> he/she/it care if they replied?
Or maybe the answer *is* simpler... :)
--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups