Charter
Philip Deitiker
for some reason belongs here, I though I would actually find this
groups charter. Amazingly simple it was.
I have a copy stored in sci.arch.aux for future reference.
"
Name: sci.archaeology
Type: unmoderated
Charter:
1 ) To exchange information on various corcerns in
archaeology, including method and theory, pot
hunting, egyptology, typology, dating, and
other related topics.
2 ) To facilitate ongoing debates and comments on
ideas or research that may not necessarily be
in a publishable form.
3 ) To query other interested archaeologists about
resources which could be made generally available.
( e.g. programs, images, data, references, but not
exact site locations)
4 ) To keep each other informed on upcoming events of interest
to social science researchers and computing in the field
of archaeology.
"
--
Philip
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
____Groups_____
Mol Anthro http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DNAanthro/
Pal Anthro http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Paleoanthro/
Arch. Aux http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sciarchauxilliary/
Gliadin Sci http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/GliadinScience/
____Sites_____
Mol. Evol. Hominids http://home.att.net/~DNAPaleoAnth/
Evol. of Xchrom. http://home.att.net/~DNAPaleoAnth/xlinked.htm
Seppo Renfors
Philip Deitiker wrote:
>
> With this sort of confused debate over moderated charter, which
> for some reason belongs here, I though I would actually find this
> groups charter. Amazingly simple it was.
Only this is not it! It is MISSING many parts.
>
> I have a copy stored in sci.arch.aux for future reference.
>
> "
> Name: sci.archaeology
>
> Type: unmoderated
>
> Charter:
>
> 1 ) To exchange information on various corcerns in
> archaeology, including method and theory, pot
> hunting, egyptology, typology, dating, and
> other related topics.
>
> 2 ) To facilitate ongoing debates and comments on
> ideas or research that may not necessarily be
> in a publishable form.
>
> 3 ) To query other interested archaeologists about
> resources which could be made generally available.
> ( e.g. programs, images, data, references, but not
> exact site locations)
>
> 4 ) To keep each other informed on upcoming events of interest
> to social science researchers and computing in the field
> of archaeology.
Interesting as it is, one cannot know this is the REAL charter. It
requires the inclusion of a URL to where it is stored - that URL will
have a DATE on it when it was created, at least when looking at the
source code. It is NOT in control of any moderators, other than as a
copy so it cannot be altered at a later date, other than according to
the charter.
The real one is to be found incorporated with the CFV - being the one
that went to the vote and was accepted. It also includes the
"rationale" part and the methods of moderation that are consistent
with the charter (being the prime document, and anything inconsistent
with the charter is inadmissible). It must include the method of
removing so called "moderators" and replacing those - the minimum -
maximum number of moderators. It should have something concerning,
cross-posting, binary files and commercial announcements. These all
form part of the "rules".
The above charter CANNOT be used to CENSOR any discussion at all, as
long as it involves archaeology or "other related topics" which is
almost anything. It includes "ongoing debate" and "research that may
not necessarily be in a publishable form" - meaning the truth OR
falsity is not a reason for censorship - nor is any controversial
issues. The above charter looks very good -as far as it goes, but it
is clearly incomplete as a moderated news group charter.
--
SIR - Philosopher unauthorised
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is
misled.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Searles O'Dubhain
"Philip Deitiker" <Donev...@worlnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:vOknf.272146$zb5.2...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> With this sort of confused debate over moderated charter, which
> for some reason belongs here, I though I would actually find this
> groups charter. Amazingly simple it was.
>
> I have a copy stored in sci.arch.aux for future reference.
>
> "
> Name: sci.archaeology
>
> Type: unmoderated
>
> Charter:
>
> 1 ) To exchange information on various corcerns in
> archaeology, including method and theory, pot
> hunting, egyptology, typology, dating, and
> other related topics.
concerns
Tedd Jacobs
"Seppo Renfors" wrote...
> Philip Deitiker wrote:
[...]
>> [...] I though I would actually find this
>> groups charter. Amazingly simple it was.
> [...] The above charter looks very good -as far as it goes, but it
> is clearly incomplete as a moderated news group charter.
not much on 'reading for content', is he.
Philip Deitiker
"Tedd Jacobs" <Jac...@mail.boisestate.edu> . . . :
>
> "Seppo Renfors" wrote...
>> Philip Deitiker wrote:
> [...]
>>> [...] I though I would actually find this
>>> groups charter. Amazingly simple it was.
> <snip charter>
>> [...] The above charter looks very good -as far as it goes, but it
>> is clearly incomplete as a moderated news group charter.
lol. I almost wish I hadn't killfiled the basturd.
> not much on 'reading for content', is he.
Really? [still laughing]
Michael Kuettner
"Tedd Jacobs" <Jac...@mail.boisestate.edu> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:dnl30...@enews2.newsguy.com...
Cheers,
Michael Kuettner
Tom McDonald
No, he is not.
Seppo Renfors
This is what one gets in response to a NON abusive, ON TOPIC, well
reasoned, carefully considered reply. Pffffttt...... bloody vermin....
Nor are certain people shy at resorting to "creative editing" alias
"forgeries" either.
> >
>
> No, he is not.
So now we see ANOTHER of the so called "moderators" applaud and
participate in activities that are ALLEGEDLY not allowed in the
moderated group - and hence they come here to destroy this place
instead. Tom (the empty in the head) resorts to participating (again)
in childish gang attacks in concert with other nappy wetters - how can
anyone that THAT prejudiced be trusted as a so called "moderator"??
The charter doesn't exist, does it - the full version attached to the
CFV!
Doug Weller
ROTFL. Typical.
The sci.archaeology charter is an example of a charter from the early days
of the Big 8 -- Big 7 then -- and I think it may even pre-date the
consultation mechanism.
Doug
--
Doug Weller -- exorcise the demon to reply
Doug & Helen's Dogs http://www.dougandhelen.com
A Director and Moderator of The Hall of Ma'at http://www.hallofmaat.com
Doug's Archaeology Site: http://www.ramtops.co.uk
Philip Deitiker
news:05psp11okek57560q...@4ax.com by Doug Weller
<dwe...@ramtops.removethis.co.uk> . . . :
> On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 17:02:51 -0700, in sci.archaeology, Tedd
> Jacobs wrote:
>
>>
>>"Seppo Renfors" wrote...
>>> Philip Deitiker wrote:
>>[...]
>>>> [...] I though I would actually find this
>>>> groups charter. Amazingly simple it was.
>><snip charter>
>>> [...] The above charter looks very good -as far as it goes,
>>> but it is clearly incomplete as a moderated news group
>>> charter.
>>
>>not much on 'reading for content', is he.
>
> ROTFL. Typical.
>
> The sci.archaeology charter is an example of a charter from the
> early days of the Big 8 -- Big 7 then -- and I think it may even
> pre-date the consultation mechanism.
Indeed, sci.* groups came forth like babies before TV was invented.
Some appeared on the scene out of the blue, your ISP suddenly after a
year decides to carry a group. Sci.aquaria was my favorite, for a
while, heh-heh. I think it may be because of Sci.Aquaria that a
'consultation' structure was created, for some reason the UVV did not
want a repeat of the RS affair. lol.
BTW, we can rewrite the charter for the group and resubmit it. Add a
few things about hyperdiffusionism or excessive reference to
historical material not cited, or materials not cited period. Danny
Yee wrote rewrote the charter for S.a.p. with our discussion, and its
has done some good when kooks came flooding in.
I would have a section in their describing the difference betweeen
the scientific method and Inger's Theory of Scam-de-Gluteus Science.
JMB
news:439E667F...@not.com.au...
>
>
> Tom McDonald wrote:
>>
>> Tedd Jacobs wrote:
>> > "Seppo Renfors" wrote...
>> >
>> >>Philip Deitiker wrote:
>> >
>> > [...]
>> >
>> >>>[...] I though I would actually find this
>> >>>groups charter. Amazingly simple it was.
>> >
>> > <snip charter>
>> >
>> >>[...] The above charter looks very good -as far as it goes, but it
>> >>is clearly incomplete as a moderated news group charter.
>> >
>> >
>> > not much on 'reading for content', is he.
>
> This is what one gets in response to a NON abusive, ON TOPIC, well
> reasoned, carefully considered reply. Pffffttt...... bloody vermin....
> Nor are certain people shy at resorting to "creative editing" alias
> "forgeries" either.
The Seppo strikes again. The charter quoted is the one for **this**
newsgroup, not a moderated group. Therefore, it would be highly unlikely to
contain most of the stuff you say it should (specifically regarding
moderators). Most normal people would have re-read the original post once
they seen a comment like Tedd's, but not The Seppo, he just ignores
everything else, invents his own discussion, and goes with it. As for the
failure to provide a link/reference, I agree that one should have been
provided, but then Philip could always take a leaf from another regular
posters book (if it has been published yet) and tell you that the link has
already been posted here several years ago, and if you were really
interested, you could find it! But here's a starter for you:
http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:vaDVMWgWgVcJ:www.landfield.com/usenet/control/sci/sci.archaeology+sci.archaeology+charter&hl=en
Or you could check what appears to be the original call for votes with a
Google search for message ID: rcl...@rpi.edu
--SNIP--
>
>
>
--
John Byrne
Peter Alaca
> Tom McDonald wrote:
>>
>> Tedd Jacobs wrote:
>>> "Seppo Renfors" wrote...
>>>> [...] The above charter looks very good -as far as it goes, but
>>>> it
>>>> is clearly incomplete as a moderated news group charter.
>>>
>>>
>>> not much on 'reading for content', is he.
>
> This is what one gets in response to a NON abusive, ON TOPIC, well
> reasoned, carefully considered reply. Pffffttt...... bloody
> vermin....
> Nor are certain people shy at resorting to "creative editing"
> alias
> "forgeries" either.
"well reasoned, carefully considered reply" ?!
I wonder ...
--
p.a.
Seppo Renfors
JMB wrote:
>
> "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.com.au> wrote in message
> news:439E667F...@not.com.au...
> >
> >
> > Tom McDonald wrote:
> >>
> >> Tedd Jacobs wrote:
> >> > "Seppo Renfors" wrote...
> >> >
> >> >>Philip Deitiker wrote:
> >> >
> >> > [...]
> >> >
> >> >>>[...] I though I would actually find this
> >> >>>groups charter. Amazingly simple it was.
> >> >
> >> > <snip charter>
> >> >
> >> >>[...] The above charter looks very good -as far as it goes, but it
> >> >>is clearly incomplete as a moderated news group charter.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > not much on 'reading for content', is he.
> >
> > This is what one gets in response to a NON abusive, ON TOPIC, well
> > reasoned, carefully considered reply. Pffffttt...... bloody vermin....
> > Nor are certain people shy at resorting to "creative editing" alias
> > "forgeries" either.
>
> The Seppo strikes again.
...and well struck it was too! You now confirm that the suspicions
were correct!
> The charter quoted is the one for **this**
> newsgroup, not a moderated group.
Or in other words totally IRRELEVANT to the one being sought - the one
NOBODY (of the so called "moderators" at least) can post a URL to.
> Therefore, it would be highly unlikely to
> contain most of the stuff you say it should (specifically regarding
> moderators).
Naturally, but as it was the issue of the CHARTER (the whole of it)
for sci.archaeology.moderated that has been the issue, then what I
wrote ARE relevant and SHOULD exist.
> Most normal people would have re-read the original post once
> they seen a comment like Tedd's, but not The Seppo,
Who cares what those residing of the idiot filter say - that IS what
they are IN the idiot filter for in the first place, you know. In any
event *I* knew what I had written and *I* know what had been edited
and that it was by one of the IDIOTS being filtered. *I* don't NEED to
re-read my own message, now do I, to KNOW what I said.
> he just ignores
> everything else, invents his own discussion, and goes with it.
Pull your bloody head in - this is not an "invention" it is an ongoing
issue that seems to jump from thread to thread and ALWAYS has been
about the MODERATED group and the dictatorial Censors running it. No
one has expressed interest in the charter of THIS, sci.archaeology,
group. Therefor that is NOT part of the "debate over moderated
charter" as Deitiker acknowledges is the issue. If anyone "invents his
own discussion" then it is dopey DEITIKER, nobody else!
> As for the
> failure to provide a link/reference, I agree that one should have been
> provided, but then Philip could always take a leaf from another regular
> posters book (if it has been published yet) and tell you that the link has
> already been posted here several years ago, and if you were really
> interested, you could find it! But here's a starter for you:
> http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:vaDVMWgWgVcJ:www.landfield.com/usenet/control/sci/sci.archaeology+sci.archaeology+charter&hl=en
WRONG again - it is the same charter for THIS group - no other group
and therefor IRRELEVANT. It would be fine *IF* the relevant charter
has been published as is SHOULD have been - then it should also have
a URL - that ULR that should be enclosed as a sig file by every one of
the so called "moderators" - it isn't. They have FAILED miserably in
their duties - a dereliction of their duties!
> Or you could check what appears to be the original call for votes with a
> Google search for message ID: rcl...@rpi.edu
As for your "suggestion" - stuff it. It only points to the same
irrelevant charter Deitiker already posted trying to make something of
it in relation to the moderated group - something the dopey bottle
washer was fully aware the discussions re charter related to! As per
its own words: "With this sort of confused debate over moderated
charter, which for some reason belongs here."
Like DUH..... as any such discussion there would most certainly be
CENSORED by the petty little dictators running the show. As for the
headless chooks running in circles making gurgling sounds (alias the
censors), THEY don't have the answer either - and have NO interest in
providing it despite the heavy push for it. Of course they could just
be their normal bastard selves, and be arseholes - and that is
entirely possible... NAY.... PROBABLE! THAT is why they don't post the
URL to the original source of the CFV.
JMB
This is a separate thread to the others, and the thread starter made it
clear that he was looking for **this** groups Charter (as it is a bit more
relevant to **this** group than the moderated charter, which has been posted
on the moderated group BTW)
>
>> Therefore, it would be highly unlikely to
>> contain most of the stuff you say it should (specifically regarding
>> moderators).
>
> Naturally, but as it was the issue of the CHARTER (the whole of it)
> for sci.archaeology.moderated that has been the issue, then what I
> wrote ARE relevant and SHOULD exist.
This thread was about our charter, the moderated charter has been posted to
the moderated group.
>
>> Most normal people would have re-read the original post once
>> they seen a comment like Tedd's, but not The Seppo,
>
> Who cares what those residing of the idiot filter say - that IS what
> they are IN the idiot filter for in the first place, you know. In any
> event *I* knew what I had written and *I* know what had been edited
> and that it was by one of the IDIOTS being filtered. *I* don't NEED to
> re-read my own message, now do I, to KNOW what I said.
This thread is titled "Charter", it was started by Philip Deitiker on 12
December in message ID
vOknf.272146$zb5.2...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net. You didn't read
that message correctly, as it clearly states that it is about the charter
for **this** group, not the moderated one.
>
>> he just ignores
>> everything else, invents his own discussion, and goes with it.
>
> Pull your bloody head in - this is not an "invention" it is an ongoing
> issue that seems to jump from thread to thread and ALWAYS has been
> about the MODERATED group and the dictatorial Censors running it. No
> one has expressed interest in the charter of THIS, sci.archaeology,
> group. Therefor that is NOT part of the "debate over moderated
> charter" as Deitiker acknowledges is the issue. If anyone "invents his
> own discussion" then it is dopey DEITIKER, nobody else!
Philip started a new thread, and made it clear that out of a curiosity
generated from the other debates, he looked up the charter for **this**
group. It is a different thread to the others, and about a different
subject.
>
>> As for the
>> failure to provide a link/reference, I agree that one should have been
>> provided, but then Philip could always take a leaf from another regular
>> posters book (if it has been published yet) and tell you that the link
>> has
>> already been posted here several years ago, and if you were really
>> interested, you could find it! But here's a starter for you:
>> http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:vaDVMWgWgVcJ:www.landfield.com/usenet/control/sci/sci.archaeology+sci.archaeology+charter&hl=en
>
> WRONG again - it is the same charter for THIS group - no other group
> and therefor IRRELEVANT.
It is relevant to this thread, as this thread is about the charter for
**this** group, and no other group. It might not be relevant on other
threads, but I didn't post it on other threads, I posted it on this one.
> It would be fine *IF* the relevant charter
> has been published as is SHOULD have been - then it should also have
> a URL - that ULR that should be enclosed as a sig file by every one of
> the so called "moderators" - it isn't. They have FAILED miserably in
> their duties - a dereliction of their duties!
There are no moderators for this group, and the charter for this group is
the subject of this thread.
>
>> Or you could check what appears to be the original call for votes with a
>> Google search for message ID: rcl...@rpi.edu
>
> As for your "suggestion" - stuff it. It only points to the same
> irrelevant charter Deitiker already posted trying to make something of
> it in relation to the moderated group
This thread has nothing to do with the moderated group, other than your
stupidity in not being able to realise that.
> - something the dopey bottle
> washer was fully aware the discussions re charter related to! As per
> its own words: "With this sort of confused debate over moderated
> charter, which for some reason belongs here."
Yes, and there's a bit of sly editing on your part. That sentence does not
end with a full stop where you have placed it. You have only quoted part of
the sentence and edited it in a dishonest fashion to make look like a whole
sentence. The full sentence was:
"With this sort of confused debate over moderated charter, which for some
reason belongs here, I though I would actually find this groups charter."
Let me add some emphasis to that:
"... I though I would actually find **this** groups charter."
>
> Like DUH..... as any such discussion there would most certainly be
> CENSORED by the petty little dictators running the show. As for the
> headless chooks running in circles making gurgling sounds (alias the
> censors), THEY don't have the answer either - and have NO interest in
> providing it despite the heavy push for it. Of course they could just
> be their normal bastard selves, and be arseholes - and that is
> entirely possible... NAY.... PROBABLE! THAT is why they don't post the
> URL to the original source of the CFV.
The Moderated charter has been posted on the moderated group. Message ID
25ptp1dc7s8flo7ik...@4ax.com
with links at the end.
>
>
>
--
John Byrne
Doug Weller
Seppo's a heavy push? Is he that fat? :-)
For the record, there is no requirement for moderators to have any
specific urls in their sig. What would be the point? If anyone emailed me,
for instance, I'd give them whatever information they wanted. If doing a
simple Google search wasn't enough (most people would find the relevant
information very easy to find through Google).
Doug
--
Doug Weller --
Tedd Jacobs
"Philip Deitiker" wrote...
> In sci.archaeology message by Doug Weller
<snip>
>> The sci.archaeology charter is an example of a charter from the
>> early days of the Big 8 -- Big 7 then -- and I think it may even
>> pre-date the consultation mechanism.
>
> Indeed, sci.* groups came forth like babies before TV was invented.
> Some appeared on the scene out of the blue, your ISP suddenly after a
> year decides to carry a group. Sci.aquaria was my favorite, for a
> while, heh-heh. I think it may be because of Sci.Aquaria that a
> 'consultation' structure was created, for some reason the UVV did not
> want a repeat of the RS affair. lol.
>
> BTW, we can rewrite the charter for the group and resubmit it. Add a
> few things about hyperdiffusionism or excessive reference to
> historical material not cited, or materials not cited period. Danny
> Yee wrote rewrote the charter for S.a.p. with our discussion, and its
> has done some good when kooks came flooding in.
>
> I would have a section in their describing the difference betweeen
> the scientific method and Inger's Theory of Scam-de-Gluteus Science.
i'd add a few things for the foul-mouthed one as well.
George
Doug Weller wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 17:02:51 -0700, in sci.archaeology, Tedd Jacobs wrote:
>
> >
> >"Seppo Renfors" wrote...
> >> Philip Deitiker wrote:
> >[...]
> >>> [...] I though I would actually find this
> >>> groups charter. Amazingly simple it was.
> ><snip charter>
> >> [...] The above charter looks very good -as far as it goes, but it
> >> is clearly incomplete as a moderated news group charter.
> >
> >not much on 'reading for content', is he.
>
> ROTFL. Typical.
>
> The sci.archaeology charter is an example of a charter from the early days
> of the Big 8 -- Big 7 then -- and I think it may even pre-date the
> consultation mechanism.
>
:-)
Seppo Renfors
Doug Weller wrote:
>
[..]
>
> For the record, there is no requirement for moderators to have any
> specific urls in their sig.
We don't know that - it depends on the charter. On the other hand it
is a convention = when Moderators alters, cuts or edits a post to
INCLUDE the URL in the post to the group - so the person can verify
the correctness of the action IMMEDIATELY. It is COMMON SENSE - only
dictatorial CENSORS don't give a stuff about any such things.
> What would be the point? If anyone emailed me,
> for instance, I'd give them whatever information they wanted.
There is a VERY good reason to NOT supply a real e-mail address that
can be be used for malicious purposes that Douggie is capable of - I
too have had a variant of a Sven virus sent to me in the past
(originating in the UK) when I was more trusting of people.
Nor is the charter something needing be kept SECRET, as it is meant to
be a freely accessible public document - further more it is a bloody
DUMB idea as the URL serves all people with NIL effort - not only a
SELECT SECRET mob of backroom boys - eliminating the NEED for
constant e-mails. Brains is something Douggie has in short supply by
the look of it.
> If doing a
> simple Google search wasn't enough (most people would find the relevant
> information very easy to find through Google).
That is not actually true!
Tom McDonald
>
> Doug Weller wrote:
<snip Doug's first suggestion, and a nutbar rejection of that
particular suggestion>
>>If doing a
>>simple Google search wasn't enough (most people would find the relevant
>>information very easy to find through Google).
>
>
> That is not actually true!
Yes, it is actually true. But then, you are not most people, are
you?
Philip Deitiker
Tom McDonald <tmcdon...@nohormelcharter.net> . . . :
It would actually be hard to find the sci.archaeology charter unless
you knew how to look for it or if you did not know how the UseNet is
structured and developed. Previous posts indicated Seppo was largely
clueless.
To find the charter one needs to know that after the big Split, the
initial groups like sci.bio and sci.psychology were to be followed by
an introductory RFD (request for discussion) and a CFV (call for
votes) at which time the final version of the charter would be
present. To find the charter I dug up the first post in
sci.archaeology, which means that the CFV should have preceded it by
a few months. Over in news.group I search for sci.archaeology in the
preceding few months and found the charter attached to the Result
post following the CFV. This took me about 5 minutes, so I figured it
would take some of the 'slow to learn' folks hours.
I was actually on the UseNet shortly after the split, I used a
vt100 terminal to scroll through all the groups manually till I got
to the groups I was interested in, it took about 20 minutes to get to
the "S" and as the number of groups expanded astronomically and posts
also it became impossible to deal with traffic and I had to bow out
of the Usenet until I could get a reader. Writing posts was a major
pain in the ass, I think I did post once or twice, but I could not
find them in google, so. . . . ..
There is a deeper philosophical issue here, people like Doug and
myself, who have been involved at some level in the discussion and
approval of non alt.* groups understand the nature of these
discussions in News.groups and the demands on group creation. Unlike
Seppo and Inger, who spoil the environment of these groups with their
childish antics and OT statements, if they actually ever had to get a
group approved like the groups they pollute, they would be more
respectful of the groups they participate in and provide content
instead of Bullshit.
Inger claims that her 'presentations' deserve airing here, how
about a new group on sci.archaeology.westeurasian in which she could
specifically air her ideals in that group instead of here, how do you
think the RFD would go in news groups with her as the author of the
RFD?
Seppo Renfors
JMB wrote:
>
> "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.com.au> wrote in message
> news:439FF649...@not.com.au...
> >
[snip the pigheaded sticking to ignorance]
> > As for your "suggestion" - stuff it. It only points to the same
> > irrelevant charter Deitiker already posted trying to make something of
> > it in relation to the moderated group
>
> This thread has nothing to do with the moderated group, other than your
> stupidity in not being able to realise that.
This is part of why for the snip above - Jimbo doesn't want to know
reasons for why something was done - reason is of no interest to him.
>
> > - something the dopey bottle
> > washer was fully aware the discussions re charter related to! As per
> > its own words: "With this sort of confused debate over moderated
> > charter, which for some reason belongs here."
>
> Yes, and there's a bit of sly editing on your part.
THAT is a LIE - you can check it for yourself - and I encourage all
other to do so and realise that Jimbo is NOT exactly on the up and up!
> That sentence does not end with a full stop where you have placed it.
Whooo..... oh boo hoo..... what a pathetic come back! You really are
groping the bottom of the barrel now - I hope you get splinters under
your fingernails doing that!
> You have only quoted part of
> the sentence and edited it in a dishonest fashion to make look like a whole
> sentence.
Indeed the RELEVANT PART - as what follows does NOT ALTER what I was
referring to as a result of the quote. YOU haven't changed a bit, you
are as bloody dishonest as you ever was, if not worse!
> The full sentence was:
> "With this sort of confused debate over moderated charter, which for some
> reason belongs here, I though I would actually find this groups charter."
>
> Let me add some emphasis to that:
> "... I though I would actually find **this** groups charter."
NOW let me hear you screeching about you having "edited it in a
dishonest fashion to make look like a whole sentence" AND your added
something NOT present - eg the emphasis! This is a creation on YOUR
part not the OP's.
You are most definitely on a first name basis with Dishonesty, but a
total stranger to Truth!
>
> >
> > Like DUH..... as any such discussion there would most certainly be
> > CENSORED by the petty little dictators running the show. As for the
> > headless chooks running in circles making gurgling sounds (alias the
> > censors), THEY don't have the answer either - and have NO interest in
> > providing it despite the heavy push for it. Of course they could just
> > be their normal bastard selves, and be arseholes - and that is
> > entirely possible... NAY.... PROBABLE! THAT is why they don't post the
> > URL to the original source of the CFV.
>
> The Moderated charter has been posted on the moderated group. Message ID
> 25ptp1dc7s8flo7ik...@4ax.com
> with links at the end.
Oh yeah? So he finally went and posted it (no he didn't, see later)
after my reply on the issue to dopey Deitiker, eh!! So why is he
keeping it a secret for, hmmm. Why hide it away on a dead hole for,
when the debate about it is HERE?
The first URL is not fully accessible - it requires logging in - in
any event it isn't of much value. The second is a document by Douggie
personally once more - in any event it isn't of much value either as
it is NOT the CFV that got passed. The third is NOT a pointer to any
web site - but to a post in sci.anthropology archived by Google -
something able to be created in hindsight!
Well it would be good IF one could have confidence in it. Remember who
posted it! - there IS NO URL to the ORIGINAL CFV - the relevant
document.
Oh and please note what Douggie has said:
"Revised 13 December 2005"
REVISE - reconsider and alter (something) in the light of further
evidence; re-examine and make alterations to (written or printed
matter): - OED
So he has unashamedly EDITED IT to suit his dictatorial, censoring
agendas!! He say's so himself! Pffffftttttt........
THAT is why the URL is required to a source HE (or his cronies) cannot
edit!!
Tom McDonald
>
> JMB wrote:
<snip>
>>The Moderated charter has been posted on the moderated group. Message ID
>>25ptp1dc7s8flo7ik...@4ax.com
>>with links at the end.
>
>
> Oh yeah? So he finally went and posted it (no he didn't, see later)
> after my reply on the issue to dopey Deitiker, eh!! So why is he
> keeping it a secret for, hmmm. Why hide it away on a dead hole for,
> when the debate about it is HERE?
The charter is posted where it should be posted.
The charter is what it is. It is not going to change. If you do
not like the charter, do not attempt to post to the ng. Although,
that said, were you to post an on-topic article in s.a.m. that
followed the charter, your article would almost certainly be
approved and posted.
<snip>
Philip Deitiker
McDonald <tmcdon...@nohormelcharter.net> . . . :
> Seppo Renfors wrote:
>>
>> JMB wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>>>The Moderated charter has been posted on the moderated group.
>>>Message ID 25ptp1dc7s8flo7ik...@4ax.com
>>>with links at the end.
>>
>>
>> Oh yeah? So he finally went and posted it (no he didn't, see
>> later) after my reply on the issue to dopey Deitiker, eh!! So
>> why is he keeping it a secret for, hmmm. Why hide it away on a
>> dead hole for, when the debate about it is HERE?
Its amazing that Seppo can type with both feet stuck in his mouth,
isn't it?
> The charter is posted where it should be posted.
>
> The charter is what it is. It is not going to change. If
> you do
> not like the charter, do not attempt to post to the ng.
> Although, that said, were you to post an on-topic article in
> s.a.m. that followed the charter, your article would almost
> certainly be approved and posted.
If he had brains he could have found both. If wishes were horses
beggars would ride.
Doug Weller
wrote:
What debate? Seppo is just raving, claiming there is no charter, etc.
Just to clarify, the charter has not been posted to
sci.archaeology.moderated. What is posted is (as it says at the bottom)
guidelines about the group and posting to it. Revised for clarity, correct
submission address, etc.
Seppo seems to have this bizarre idea that people are making things up,
that there is no charter, etc. Why he is raving on like this I have no
idea except that he clearly gets some sort of perverted pleasure out of
it. He also hasn't a clue as to how newsgroup creation works or he
wouldn't write "The second is a document by Douggie
personally once more" -- of course it is, that was what the rules said I
had to do. No one else could do it (to clarify, I had to post it, the
actual document was a group effort).
The actual results were not posted on the web, that again is not what
happens -- this is about newsgroup creation, not website creation, so it
was posted on Usenet.
As Tom says, the charter is the charter. The debate closed on it in
February 1996. Seppo can rave on as much as he wants, he's way too late.
People who don't like it are not forced to post there. :-)
JMB
>
>
> JMB wrote:
>>
>> "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:439FF649...@not.com.au...
>> >
>
> [snip the pigheaded sticking to ignorance]
LOL! You have to appreciate the entertainment value given by The Seppo. I
haven't bothered replying to anything below, because it is so daft only The
Seppo would be stupid enough to believe any of what he wrote. I will
however comment on his reference to me as "Jimbo". "Jim", and the
derivative "Jimbo", whether intended as insulting, or just a nick-name, are
variations on the name "James" (at least in this country). Refering to
someone named "John" with a variation of "James" is just stupid, nothing
more. If you want to create a word based on the JMB attached to my posts, I
suggest you look up some of Larry Athy's posts. It wasn't very original,
but it made a little bit more sence than trying to change my name
completely. But then again, trying to change the "facts" to suit your
claims is standard fair to you, isn't it? I never thought I'd say this, but
I miss Larry. For all his flaws, there was an educational component to
debating with him. While he frequently misinterpreted his references to
suit his beliefs, he did actually have references, and often provided them,
so it was possible to check things out, and learn from the references.
Debating with The Seppo and Inger doesn't have any such educational
components, just entertainment (when done in moderation!).
--
John Byrne
Dylan Sung
> In sci.archaeology message news:rk4of.11785$Eu3....@fe07.lga by
> Tom McDonald <tmcdon...@nohormelcharter.net> . . . :
>
>> Seppo Renfors wrote:
>>>
>>> Doug Weller wrote:
>>
>> <snip Doug's first suggestion, and a nutbar rejection of that
>> particular suggestion>
>>
>>>>If doing a
>>>>simple Google search wasn't enough (most people would find the
>>>>relevant information very easy to find through Google).
>>>
>>>
>>> That is not actually true!
>>
>> Yes, it is actually true. But then, you are not most
>> people, are
>> you?
>
> It would actually be hard to find the sci.archaeology charter unless
> you knew how to look for it or if you did not know how the UseNet is
> structured and developed. Previous posts indicated Seppo was largely
> clueless.
I found it in the first search results page.
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=cfv+sci.archaeology+charter
at
Dyl.
Eric Stevens
Actually, that isn't necessarily the charter that was accepted. Its
only the CFV (call for votes) which might not have been accepted on
the first pass. If my memory serves me correctly, the accepted charter
should be found in somewhere like news.news.admin or news.announce.
Hopefully, someone else will have a clearer recollection of the
procedure.
Eric Stevens
Philip Deitiker
news:8ok3q15j6cb76piru...@4ax.com by Eric Stevens
<eric.s...@sum.co.nz> . . . :
The passed results announcement has the active charter.
Seppo Renfors
So why is it that mindless, pathetic abusers like you cannot actually
PROVE me wrong, hmmm - if it was that simple?
Seppo Renfors
Dylan Sung wrote:
>
> "Philip Deitiker" <Donev...@worlnet.att.net> wrote in message
> news:6Z4of.286546$zb5.2...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> > In sci.archaeology message news:rk4of.11785$Eu3....@fe07.lga by
> > Tom McDonald <tmcdon...@nohormelcharter.net> . . . :
> >
> >> Seppo Renfors wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Doug Weller wrote:
> >>
> >> <snip Doug's first suggestion, and a nutbar rejection of that
> >> particular suggestion>
> >>
> >>>>If doing a
> >>>>simple Google search wasn't enough (most people would find the
> >>>>relevant information very easy to find through Google).
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> That is not actually true!
> >>
> >> Yes, it is actually true. But then, you are not most
> >> people, are
> >> you?
> >
> > It would actually be hard to find the sci.archaeology charter unless
> > you knew how to look for it or if you did not know how the UseNet is
> > structured and developed. Previous posts indicated Seppo was largely
> > clueless.
>
> I found it in the first search results page.
The hell you did!
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups?q=cfv+sci.archaeology+charter
I ask, is this stupidity something you have been born with, or are you
working hard at being that stupid? It is NOT correct and totally
uninteresting as it is IRRELEVANT - it isn't even for the group the
question of the missing charter has arisen for.
It is NOT the "source" document.
> at
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.bio/browse_frm/thread/ef62bdcf736d5fcd/29cd49d7dfe26bc2?lnk=st&q=cfv+sci.archaeology+charter&rnum=10#29cd49d7dfe26bc2
>
...and the demonstration for your terminal stupidity continues.....
Seppo Renfors
Why did you have to secretly EDIT and alter my message - did it
embarrass you or something, hmmmm? Therefor it isn't worth shit
irrespective of where it is posted - it is stated to NOT being the one
that passed the vote!
[restore text]
The first URL is not fully accessible - it requires logging in - in
any event it isn't of much value. The second is a document by Douggie
personally once more - in any event it isn't of much value either as
it is NOT the CFV that got passed. The third is NOT a pointer to any
web site - but to a post in sci.anthropology archived by Google -
something able to be created in hindsight!
Well it would be good IF one could have confidence in it. Remember who
posted it! - there IS NO URL to the ORIGINAL CFV - the relevant
document.
Oh and please note what Douggie has said:
"Revised 13 December 2005"
REVISE - reconsider and alter (something) in the light of further
evidence; re-examine and make alterations to (written or printed
matter): - OED
So he has unashamedly EDITED IT to suit his dictatorial, censoring
agendas!! He say's so himself! Pffffftttttt........
THAT is why the URL is required to a source HE (or his cronies) cannot
edit!!
[end restore]
How can people who are DISHONEST to their rotten core be trusted when
they provide a "copy" THEY have no doubt edited to suit their own
prejudices - eg like Tom (the empty of honesty) McDonald did with MY
message!
Seppo Renfors
JMB wrote:
>
> "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.com.au> wrote in message
> news:43A0E3A9...@not.com.au...
> >
> >
> > JMB wrote:
> >>
> >> "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.com.au> wrote in message
> >> news:439FF649...@not.com.au...
> >> >
> >
> > [snip the pigheaded sticking to ignorance]
>
> LOL! You have to appreciate the entertainment value given by The Seppo. I
> haven't bothered replying to anything below, because it is so daft only The
> Seppo would be stupid enough to believe any of what he wrote.
Aha.... and that is because you were SUCKED IN by Douggie's dishonesty
making you BELIEVE it was the charter when it wasn't - only *I*
spotted that immediately and noted it! It was only AFTER a number of
you had made a right FOOLS of yourselves that the Douggie elected to
expose you for what you were by confessing his sins!
If you don't understand where the "Jimbo" comes from (even after
having explained it to you in the past) - it is your loss nobody
else's.
Tedd Jacobs
"Seppo Renfors" wrote...
>
>
> Tom McDonald wrote:
>>
>> Seppo Renfors wrote:
>> >
>> > Doug Weller wrote:
>>
>> <snip Doug's first suggestion, and a nutbar rejection of that
>> particular suggestion>
>>
>> >>If doing a
>> >>simple Google search wasn't enough (most people would find the relevant
>> >>information very easy to find through Google).
>> >
>> >
>> > That is not actually true!
>>
>> Yes, it is actually true. But then, you are not most people, are
>> you?
>
> So why is it that mindless, pathetic abusers like you cannot actually
> PROVE me wrong, hmmm - if it was that simple?
Results for 'sci.archaeology.moderated charter' with Safesearch on. (0.39
seconds)
RFD for sci.archaeology.moderated
CHARTER: sci.archaeology.moderated Sci.archaeology.moderated is to be a
moderated newsgroup dedicated to the discussion of archaeology,...
... END CHARTER.
took me all of .39 seconds to prove you wrong.
Seppo Renfors
Doug Weller wrote:
>
> On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 22:23:07 -0800, in sci.archaeology, Tom McDonald
> wrote:
>
> >Seppo Renfors wrote:
> >>
> >> JMB wrote:
> >
> ><snip>
> >
> >>>The Moderated charter has been posted on the moderated group. Message ID
> >>>25ptp1dc7s8flo7ik...@4ax.com
> >>>with links at the end.
> >>
> >>
> >> Oh yeah? So he finally went and posted it (no he didn't, see later)
> >> after my reply on the issue to dopey Deitiker, eh!! So why is he
> >> keeping it a secret for, hmmm. Why hide it away on a dead hole for,
> >> when the debate about it is HERE?
> >
> > The charter is posted where it should be posted.
> >
> > The charter is what it is. It is not going to change. If you do
> >not like the charter, do not attempt to post to the ng. Although,
> >that said, were you to post an on-topic article in s.a.m. that
> >followed the charter, your article would almost certainly be
> >approved and posted.
> >
> What debate? Seppo is just raving, claiming there is no charter, etc.
The ALLEGED "rules" that are supposed to exist but don't and so called
"moderators" are SHIT SCARED of actually providing. Now why would that
be, hmmmm - their DISHONESTY be exposed even further!
>
> Just to clarify, the charter has not been posted to
> sci.archaeology.moderated.
Well, you certain FOOLED a lot of people into thinking that IS what it
was by your dishonesty to make it LOOK LIKE it was the "charter" -
until I exposed it for what it was. Douggie sure as hell didn't
correct anyone - DOUGGIE was happy for the others to look like a right
mob of idiots because they were SUCKED IN by Douggie's
misrepresentation!
> What is posted is (as it says at the bottom)
> guidelines about the group and posting to it. Revised for clarity, correct
> submission address, etc.
In other words EXACTLY as I stated - it is intended to deceive and
fool people - look at the number of fools who have claimed it IS the
"charter" - even Tom (the empty in the head) a so called "moderator"
(read: "Censor". It is something not worth shit and has NO STANDING in
a democratic organisation this pretends to be....... oh yeah.... but
then little hitlerian dictators don't ALLOW such nasty ideologies like
"DEMOCRACY" to exist on their little turf.......
>
> Seppo seems to have this bizarre idea that people are making things up,
> that there is no charter, etc.
...and I'm yet to see it! I say it doesn't exist - nobody has been
smart enough to prove me wrong on that score so far - I INVITE PEOPLE
to do so! In particular the puppy farmer and its cronies!
[Snip - unsupported clap-trap - Doug Welder is a habitual liar - a
PROVEN habitual liar and his word is worth nothing.]
PRD
"Tedd Jacobs" <Jac...@mail.boisestate.edu> . . . :
> took me all of .39 seconds to prove you wrong.
You assume that Seppo knows what and RFD is and why it is important
Doug Weller
This is part of the problem. He doesn't seem to have a clue how newsgroup
creation works, as is shown by his thinking that Usenet posts by me are
somehow not verification of what he is asking for, even when those posts
are required by the process.
Doug Weller
>
>The first URL is not fully accessible - it requires logging in -
Logging in for precisely what vital information? Anyone else having
trouble?
in
>any event it isn't of much value. The second is a document by Douggie
>personally once more - in any event it isn't of much value either as
>it is NOT the CFV that got passed.
Of course it is by me. That's the way the process works.
> The third is NOT a pointer to any
>web site - but to a post in sci.anthropology archived by Google -
>something able to be created in hindsight!
ROTFL. How does someone create a Google archived newsgroup post in
hindsight? Let's see some evidence that's possible.
And the fact you want a pointer to a web site shows how clueless you are.
Usenet is not the web. Usenet has a variety of transport mechanisms.
Usenet groups are not created through the web. The process is done on
Usenet.
>
>Well it would be good IF one could have confidence in it. Remember who
>posted it! - there IS NO URL to the ORIGINAL CFV - the relevant
>document.
This is the url, once again, to the original CFV.
http://tinyurl.com/9gz7b
CFVs are issued twice, here is the Last Call
http://tinyurl.com/95k4n
>
>Oh and please note what Douggie has said:
>
>"Revised 13 December 2005"
>
>REVISE - reconsider and alter (something) in the light of further
>evidence; re-examine and make alterations to (written or printed
>matter): - OED
>
>So he has unashamedly EDITED IT to suit his dictatorial, censoring
>agendas!! He say's so himself! Pffffftttttt........
That post is guideline information, a FAQ about the newsgroup. Not the
charter, something you yourself have raved about in fact.
>THAT is why the URL is required to a source HE (or his cronies) cannot
>edit!!
>[end restore]
Here it is again:
http://tinyurl.com/9gz7b
This is Usenet, you can ignore the reality of how newsgroups are created
all you want, the more you do so the more you look like an idiot.
JMB
>
>
> JMB wrote:
>>
>> "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:43A0E3A9...@not.com.au...
>> >
>> >
>> > JMB wrote:
>> >>
>> >> "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.com.au> wrote in message
>> >> news:439FF649...@not.com.au...
>> >> >
>> >
>> > [snip the pigheaded sticking to ignorance]
>>
>> LOL! You have to appreciate the entertainment value given by The Seppo.
>> I
>> haven't bothered replying to anything below, because it is so daft only
>> The
>> Seppo would be stupid enough to believe any of what he wrote.
>
> Aha.... and that is because you were SUCKED IN by Douggie's dishonesty
> making you BELIEVE it was the charter when it wasn't - only *I*
> spotted that immediately and noted it! It was only AFTER a number of
> you had made a right FOOLS of yourselves that the Douggie elected to
> expose you for what you were by confessing his sins!
WTF are you going on about now? The charter was posted, and if you think
it's wrong, then a Google search will give you all the details you need.
But, **this** thread was originally about the charter for **this** group,
until you hijacked it.
>
> If you don't understand where the "Jimbo" comes from (even after
> having explained it to you in the past) - it is your loss nobody
> else's.
I think you are mixing your fantasy world with reality again. You've never
explained where the "Jimbo" comes from to me, and to be honest, I don't
recall ever noticing you refer to me with it before. Of course, you are
welcome to prove me wrong with a message ID or two.
>
--
John Byrne
Tom McDonald
> "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.com.au> wrote in message
> news:43A36718...@not.com.au...
>
>>
>>JMB wrote:
>>
>>>"Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.com.au> wrote in message
>>>news:43A0E3A9...@not.com.au...
>>>
>>>>
>>>>JMB wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.com.au> wrote in message
>>>>>news:439FF649...@not.com.au...
>>>>>
>>>>[snip the pigheaded sticking to ignorance]
>>>
>>>LOL! You have to appreciate the entertainment value given by The Seppo.
>>>I
>>>haven't bothered replying to anything below, because it is so daft only
>>>The
>>>Seppo would be stupid enough to believe any of what he wrote.
>>
>>Aha.... and that is because you were SUCKED IN by Douggie's dishonesty
>>making you BELIEVE it was the charter when it wasn't - only *I*
>>spotted that immediately and noted it! It was only AFTER a number of
>>you had made a right FOOLS of yourselves that the Douggie elected to
>>expose you for what you were by confessing his sins!
>
>
> WTF are you going on about now? The charter was posted, and if you think
> it's wrong, then a Google search will give you all the details you need.
John,
I was incorrect to refer to that posting as the 'charter.' As
Doug has pointed out a couple of times, what he posted are the
posting guidelines, which he updated with current information,
but did not change in any other way.
The posting guidelines are in compliance with the charter, and
in fact contain all the relevant information for people who want
to post to sam. Including the appeals process, which is available
for any poster who wishes to have his/her post reviewed by the
full moderation panel (or at least as many moderators as are
available at the time; even moderators occasionally have lives
that involve being out of easy e-mail contact).
Here is a link to the second Call for Votes (CFV), which
includes the charter:
> But, **this** thread was originally about the charter for **this** group,
> until you hijacked it.
This thread started with Phil posting the charter for *this*
group, that's true. But the first response was from Seppo, in
which he bitched about the charter not being the full charter
(presumably the full charter for s.a.m.), because, for one, it
didn't include moderation guidelines. You're right--but Seppo
hijacked it so early on that the s.a.m. charter is arguably
on-topic in this thread.
Seppo clearly was confused, because Phil's post clearly referred
to s.a., not s.a.m.; and in fact included the
name--sci.archaeology, and the type--*un*moderated.
Most of his flailing since then has been in aid of his covering
up his mistake, and his demonstrated need to find evil in those
he dislikes, even when he has to invent it out of whole cloth.
>>If you don't understand where the "Jimbo" comes from (even after
>>having explained it to you in the past) - it is your loss nobody
>>else's.
>
>
> I think you are mixing your fantasy world with reality again. You've never
> explained where the "Jimbo" comes from to me, and to be honest, I don't
> recall ever noticing you refer to me with it before. Of course, you are
> welcome to prove me wrong with a message ID or two.
This could be fun!
Doug Weller
wrote:
>JMB wrote:
>> "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:43A36718...@not.com.au...
>>
>>>
>>>JMB wrote:
>>>
>>>>"Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.com.au> wrote in message
>>>>news:43A0E3A9...@not.com.au...
>>>>
[SNIP]
>>>If you don't understand where the "Jimbo" comes from (even after
>>>having explained it to you in the past) - it is your loss nobody
>>>else's.
>>
>>
>> I think you are mixing your fantasy world with reality again. You've never
>> explained where the "Jimbo" comes from to me, and to be honest, I don't
>> recall ever noticing you refer to me with it before. Of course, you are
>> welcome to prove me wrong with a message ID or two.
>
> This could be fun!
ROTFL. Like his trying to cover up the fact he has no evidence for me
being a puppy farmer by claiming I confessed to being one and that somehow
it's the same as being a dog breeder (although I've never bred any dogs
either).
Garry...@denocoinc.com
their bearing on the date of Woodhenge. Wiltshire Archaeological and
Natural History Magazine, 47, 55-67
2. STONE, JOHN F.S., 1936. An enclosure on Boscombe Down East.
Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine, 47, 466-489
3. STONE, JOHN F.S., 1938. An early Bronze Age grave in Fargo
Plantation near Stonehenge. Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural
History Magazine, 48, 357-70
4. STONE, JOHN F.S., 1947. The Stonehenge Cursus and its affinities.
Archaeological Journal, 104, 7-19
5. STONE, JOHN F.S., & YOUNG, W.E.V., 1948. Two pits of grooved ware
date near Woodhenge. Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History
Magazine, 52, 287-306
6. STONE, JOHN F.S., 1949. Some grooved ware pottery from the Woodhenge
area. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, 15, 122-27
7. STONE, JOHN F.S., 1958. Wessex Before the Celts. Frederick A.
Praeger Publishers, New York. Library of Congress, Card No. 58-8184
http://www.britarch.ac.uk/stonehenge/stone23.html
"1950 - 1964 Professor Richard Atkinson, Professor Stuart Piggott and
Dr J F S Stone Supervised by the Ministry of Public Buildings and Works
/ Society of Antiquaries"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge
"In 1950 the Society of Antiquaries commissioned Richard Atkinson,
Stuart Piggott and Marcus Stone to carry out further excavations. They
recovered many cremations and developed the phasing that still
dominates much of what is written about Stonehenge."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Stone
Dr. JFS Stone
http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Stonehenge
http://groups.google.com/group/Stonehenge-Geology
http://groups.google.com/group/Stonehenge-Geophysics
hey pop, you are wasting your time here in sci.archaeology. the
archaeologists here could care less about wikipedia's (and others')
marcus stone bad links. the archaeologists here are too busy painting
each other as smarter than their chartered other. far as we can tell,
no archaeologist here wants to do anything constructive about this.
like writing a good article about a real archaeologist, dr. jfs stone,
for wikipedia, and others. well pop, guess us kids will just keep
clicking on the marcus stone bad links for dr. jfs stone. see ya
later... john and james
Doctor Jesus For Sarsen Stone Christ.
FAR AS I can tell; You're right.
http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Stonehenge
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Stone
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonehenge
Cremate, phase-in, dominate.
Dr. John F.S. Stone
see, we told ya, tdmn
the fellows don't care either, dr. john f.s. stone not a fellow
http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/page.asp?id=1727
a fellow's email said, "go to hell"
Which of The Fellows cus?
http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/page.asp?id=1727
Lists of Royal Society Fellows 1660-2004
A quick reference list of all Fellows of the Royal Society elected from
its foundation in 1660 to the present day.
Lists name, birth and death dates (where known), date of election and
membership type.
Search the Sackler Archive Resource, a biographical database of all
Fellows elected to the Royal Society since its foundation in 1660.
Alternatively download one of the PDFs ordered alphabetically by
Fellows surnames:
Fellows of the Royal Society - A (Adobe PDF File)
Fellows of the Royal Society - B (Adobe PDF File)
Fellows of the Royal Society - C (Adobe PDF File)
Fellows of the Royal Society - D (Adobe PDF File)
Fellows of the Royal Society - E (Adobe PDF File)
Fellows of the Royal Society - F (Adobe PDF File)
Fellows of the Royal Society - G (Adobe PDF File)
Fellows of the Royal Society - H (Adobe PDF File)
Fellows of the Royal Society - I (Adobe PDF File)
Fellows of the Royal Society - J (Adobe PDF File)
Fellows of the Royal Society - K (Adobe PDF File)
Fellows of the Royal Society - L (Adobe PDF File)
Fellows of the Royal Society - M (Adobe PDF File)
Fellows of the Royal Society - N (Adobe PDF File)
Fellows of the Royal Society - O (Adobe PDF File)
Fellows of the Royal Society - P (Adobe PDF File)
Fellows of the Royal Society - Q (Adobe PDF File)
Fellows of the Royal Society - R (Adobe PDF File)
Fellows of the Royal Society - S (Adobe PDF File)
Fellows of the Royal Society - T (Adobe PDF File)
Fellows of the Royal Society - U (Adobe PDF File)
Fellows of the Royal Society - V (Adobe PDF File)
Fellows of the Royal Society - W (Adobe PDF File)
Fellows of the Royal Society - Y (Adobe PDF File)
Fellows of the Royal Society - Z (Adobe PDF File)
http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/page.asp?id=1727
Which of The Fellows cus?
marcus
http://www.google.com/search?q=In+1950+the+Society+of+Antiquaries+commissioned+Richard+Atkinson,+Stuart+Piggott+and+Marcus+Stone+to+carry+out+further+excavations.+They+recovered+many+cremations+and+developed+the+phasing+that+still+dominates+much+of+what+is+written+about+Stonehenge.&hl=en&lr=&filter=0
stone
http://www.google.com/search?q=1950+-+1964+Professor+Richard+Atkinson,+Professor+Stuart+Piggott+and+Dr+J+F+S+Stone+Supervised+by+the+Ministry+of+Public+Buildings+and+Works+/+Society+of+Antiquaries&hl=en&lr=&filter=0
""
Dear All,
Yesterday (15th December 2005) there was a debate in Westminster Hall
(*) on the report of the Science and Technology Committee's report
"Scientific Publishing: Free for all?". Details of the debate are
available here:
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/whall/?d=2005-12-15
(*) For those unfamiliar with the UK parliament, Westminster Hall is a
"parallel debating chamber" to the main House of Commons chamber. It is
used for debates which do not lead to a formal vote but which are > > >
formally recognised as part of the business of the House.
Doctor AAA
""
Somebody must care about these Encyclopedia errors,
who is Doctor AAA, Fellow of the Royal Society cus?
Mr. Marcus Stone, the world famous British painter
http://www.google.com/search?q=In+1950+the+Society+of+Antiquaries+commissioned+Richard+Atkinson,+Stuart+Piggott+and+Marcus+Stone+to+carry+out+further+excavations.+They+recovered+many+cremations+and+developed+the+phasing+that+still+dominates+much+of+what+is+written+about+Stonehenge.&hl=en&lr=&filter=0
Dr. John F.S. Stone, the British archaeologist
http://www.google.com/search?q=1950+-+1964+Professor+Richard+Atkinson,+Professor+Stuart+Piggott+and+Dr+J+F+S+Stone+Supervised+by+the+Ministry+of+Public+Buildings+and+Works+/+Society+of+Antiquaries&hl=en&lr=&filter=0
MPs Care
(TheyWorkForYou.com)
http://www.theyworkforyou.com
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/user/?u=3440
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/whall/?d=2005-12-15
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/whall/?id=2005-12-15a.501.1
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/whall/?gid=2005-12-15a.501.2#c3063
"Garry Denke
Posted on 16 Dec 2005 5:01 pm
Mr. Marcus Stone, the world famous British painter
http://www.google.com/search?q=In+1950+the+Society+of+Antiquaries+commissioned+Richard+Atkinson,+Stuart+Piggott+and+Marcus+Stone+to+carry+out+further+excavations.+They+recovered+many+cremations+and+developed+the+phasing+that+still+dominates+much+of+what+is+written+about+Stonehenge.&hl=en&lr=&filter=0
is not Dr. John F.S. Stone, the British archaeologist
http://www.google.com/search?q=1950+-+1964+Professor+Richard+Atkinson,+Professor+Stuart+Piggott+and+Dr+J+F+S+Stone+Supervised+by+the+Ministry+of+Public+Buildings+and+Works+/+Society+of+Antiquaries&hl=en&lr=&filter=0
Open Access would help Encyclopedias avoid errors.
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.archaeology/browse_frm/thread/e1f17a118c2e990b?scoring=d&hl=en
Thank you. Garry W. Denke, Geologist/Geophysicist"
Who of The Fellows cus?
nobody cares about encyclopedia errors,
doctor aaa not a royal society fellow.
mps do not care about this,
http://www.theyworkforyou.com
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/user/?u=3446
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/whall/?d=2005-12-15
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/whall/?id=2005-12-15a.513.2
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/whall/?gid=2005-12-15a.513.3#c3067
sitting suspended for a division in the house.
"John Denke
Posted on 16 Dec 2005 7:55 pm
Dr. John F.S. Stone the British archaeologist:
http://www.google.com/search?q=1950+-+1964+Professor+Richard+Atkinson,+Professor+Stuart+Piggott+and+Dr+J+F+S+Stone+Supervised+by+the+Ministry+of+Public+Buildings+and+Works+/+Society+of+Antiquaries&hl=en&lr=&filter=0
is NOT Marcus Stone the great British painter:
http://www.google.com/search?q=In+1950+the+Society+of+Antiquaries+commissioned+Richard+Atkinson,+Stuart+Piggott+and+Marcus+Stone+to+carry+out+further+excavations.+They+recovered+many+cremations+and+developed+the+phasing+that+still+dominates+much+of+what+is+written+about+Stonehenge.&hl=en&lr=&filter=0
Open Access will eliminate Encyclopedia error.
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.archaeology/browse_frm/thread/e1f17a118c2e990b?scoring=d&hl=en
Many thanks. John P. Denke, Esquire/Biologist"
http://www.frsopenletter.org
http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/page.asp?id=1727
the non-signatories
see pop, waste of time... james
Marcus Stone (1840-1921)
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=Marcus+Stone+%281840-1921%29&btnG=Search
1. STONE, J.F.S., 1935. Some discoveries at Ratfyn, Amesbury and their
bearing on the date of Woodhenge. Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural
History Magazine, 47, 55-67
2. STONE, J.F.S., 1936. An enclosure on Boscombe Down East. Wiltshire
Archaeological and Natural History Magazine, 47, 466-489
3. STONE, J.F.S., 1938. An early Bronze Age grave in Fargo Plantation
near Stonehenge. Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine,
48, 357-70
4. STONE, J.F.S., 1947. The Stonehenge Cursus and its affinities.
Archaeological Journal, 104, 7-19
5. STONE, J.F.S., & YOUNG, W.E.V., 1948. Two pits of grooved ware date
near Woodhenge. Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine,
52, 287-306
6. STONE, J.F.S., 1949. Some grooved ware pottery from the Woodhenge
area. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, 15, 122-27
7. STONE, J.F.S., 1958. Wessex Before the Celts. Frederick A Praeger
Publishers, New York. Library of Congress, Card No. 58-8184
Christ. Rose from the dead. Stone.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=Christ.+Rose+from+the+dead.+Stone.&btnG=Search
thus, without full open access, according to all online encyclopedias,
http://www.google.com/search?q=In+1950+the+Society+of+Antiquaries+commissioned+Richard+Atkinson,+Stuart+Piggott+and+Marcus+Stone+to+carry+out+further+excavations.+They+recovered+many+cremations+and+developed+the+phasing+that+still+dominates+much+of+what+is+written+about+Stonehenge.&hl=en&lr=&filter=0
in 1950 the society of antiquaries commissioned richard atkinson
(1920-1994), stuart piggott (1910-1996) and marcus stone (1840-1921),
said marcus stone being he who a) rose from the dead in 1935, b) rose
from the dead in 1936, c) rose from the dead in 1938, d) rose from the
dead in 1947, e) rose from the dead in 1948, f) rose from the dead in
1949, g) rose from the dead in 1950, and h) rose from the dead in 1958,
to carry out further excavations. They recovered many cremations and
developed the phasing that still dominates much of what is written
about Stonehenge.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Stone.+Rose+from+the+dead.+Christ.&btnG=Google+Search
Stone. Rose from the dead. Christ.
Garry...@denocoinc.com
Eric Stevens
wrote:
Of course there is no URL to the original document! News groups were
created before the WWW ever existed.
However, Deja News (now Google Groups) has copies of the original
which was promulgated the news group news.newgroups.announce. You will
find them in http://tinyurl.com/8yrm3 Alternatively, you could try
hunting down the original articles in news.newgroups.announce
yourself. They should all be there.
>
>Oh and please note what Douggie has said:
>
>"Revised 13 December 2005"
>
>REVISE - reconsider and alter (something) in the light of further
>evidence; re-examine and make alterations to (written or printed
>matter): - OED
>
>So he has unashamedly EDITED IT to suit his dictatorial, censoring
>agendas!! He say's so himself! Pffffftttttt........
>
>THAT is why the URL is required to a source HE (or his cronies) cannot
>edit!!
>[end restore]
>
>How can people who are DISHONEST to their rotten core be trusted when
>they provide a "copy" THEY have no doubt edited to suit their own
>prejudices - eg like Tom (the empty of honesty) McDonald did with MY
>message!
Eric Stevens
Garry...@rock.com
> Of course there is no URL to the original document! News groups were
> created before the WWW ever existed.
>
> However, Deja News (now Google Groups) has copies of the original
> which was promulgated the news group news.newgroups.announce. You will
> find them in http://tinyurl.com/8yrm3 Alternatively, you could try
> hunting down the original articles in news.newgroups.announce
> yourself. They should all be there.
>
FidoNet was great in 1984-85. Glorious days.
Seppo Renfors
Doug Weller wrote:
>
> On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 02:29:52 GMT, in sci.archaeology, PRD wrote:
>
> >In sci.archaeology message news:dnvpd...@enews3.newsguy.com by
> >"Tedd Jacobs" <Jac...@mail.boisestate.edu> . . . :
> >
> >> took me all of .39 seconds to prove you wrong.
> >
> >You assume that Seppo knows what and RFD is and why it is important
>
> This is part of the problem. He doesn't seem to have a clue how newsgroup
> creation works, as is shown by his thinking that Usenet posts by me are
> somehow not verification of what he is asking for, even when those posts
> are required by the process.
Well well... more proof that the Douggie is a habitual liar - he KNOWS
I have been involved in news group creation and know at least as much
about it as he does (or pretends to know).
Lies and ignorance doesn't make for intelligence despite what some may
believe.
Tom McDonald
<snip>
> Lies and ignorance doesn't make for intelligence despite what some may
> believe.
So you've finally come over to the side of light! Welcome! I
anticipate many fruitful conversations, now that you've foregone
lies and ignorance!
Seppo Renfors
Doug Weller wrote:
>
> On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 00:50:55 GMT, in sci.archaeology, Seppo Renfors wrote:
>
[Douggie's posturing deleted]
>
> Usenet is not the web. Usenet has a variety of transport mechanisms.
> Usenet groups are not created through the web. The process is done on
> Usenet.
...but there IS a repository for charters!
YOU cannot be trusted as you have proven yourself to be a habitual
LIAR!
> >Well it would be good IF one could have confidence in it. Remember who
> >posted it! - there IS NO URL to the ORIGINAL CFV - the relevant
> >document.
>
> This is the url, once again, to the original CFV.
> http://tinyurl.com/9gz7b
>
> CFVs are issued twice, here is the Last Call
> http://tinyurl.com/95k4n
.... "last call", eh.... and we are expected to believe a proven
HABITUAL liar! As if....
I want to see the CFV that has been PASSED! Not one sent out for a
vote...... hell why bother voting for anything at all if just posting
a call for it is enough...... oh yeah, but then, that IS what has
happened see below! Douggie doesn't bother with a 'mob rule' notion
like a "vote" - and in the past he has claimed PRIVATE OWNERSHIP of
said group! Such claims do not fit the concept of a democratic vote!
The reality is that a "moderator" is by a CARETAKER of a group - not
the OWNER - a totally bogus notion.
> >Oh and please note what Douggie has said:
> >
> >"Revised 13 December 2005"
> >
> >REVISE - reconsider and alter (something) in the light of further
> >evidence; re-examine and make alterations to (written or printed
> >matter): - OED
> >
> >So he has unashamedly EDITED IT to suit his dictatorial, censoring
> >agendas!! He say's so himself! Pffffftttttt........
>
> That post is guideline information, a FAQ about the newsgroup. Not the
> charter, something you yourself have raved about in fact.
It is not specified to be an FAQ, if it was it would be so named, it
is NOT thereof it isn't an FAQ either - you FOOLED a number of the
baying mongrels who follow your scent trail into believing it was the
Charter - and I say it was INTENTIONAL on your part!
Further more *IF* you knew anything about an FAQ's you would also know
it doesn't amount to anything LIKE an FAQ.
> >THAT is why the URL is required to a source HE (or his cronies) cannot
> >edit!!
> >[end restore]
>
> Here it is again:
> http://tinyurl.com/9gz7b
>
> This is Usenet, you can ignore the reality of how newsgroups are created
> all you want, the more you do so the more you look like an idiot.
The idiot here is you - blustering, and evading for all it is worth
nothing but HUMBUG - then you point to to a REVISED version that
panders to your personal BIGOTRY and prejudices - in as good a job as
that of any DICTATOR who writes their own rules as they see fit!
Pffff.......
But never mind I'll pull that alleged "charter" to pieces for you....
at my leisure :-)
Tom McDonald
Let this dog alone to lick up its own vomit. There is no value
in this mongrel, and responding to him is a waste of our time.
Seppo Renfors
JMB wrote:
>
> "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.com.au> wrote in message
> news:43A36718...@not.com.au...
> >
> >
[..]
> >
> > Aha.... and that is because you were SUCKED IN by Douggie's dishonesty
> > making you BELIEVE it was the charter when it wasn't - only *I*
> > spotted that immediately and noted it! It was only AFTER a number of
> > you had made a right FOOLS of yourselves that the Douggie elected to
> > expose you for what you were by confessing his sins!
>
> WTF are you going on about now? The charter was posted, and if you think
> it's wrong, then a Google search will give you all the details you need.
> But, **this** thread was originally about the charter for **this** group,
> until you hijacked it.
You have been shown to be the FOOL you are by Douggie:
"That post is guideline information, a FAQ about the newsgroup. Not
the
charter, something you yourself have raved about in fact. "
Only that too is a LIE as it is NOT an FAQ either, it is missing the
"Q & A" part totally - but then that IS something from a habitual
liar, so what can you expect?
So much for your "charter", you were SUCKED IN to make a fool of
yourself - you were CONNED as was the INTENT - only I wasn't conned by
that.
[I'm not your lackey - if you are suffering from dementia it is your
problem]
Seppo Renfors
Eric Stevens wrote:
>
> On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 00:50:55 GMT, Seppo Renfors <Ren...@not.com.au>
> wrote:
[..]
>
> Of course there is no URL to the original document! News groups were
> created before the WWW ever existed.
WWW existed from before 10 Apr 1996 the alleged vote closing date - in
fact it has existed from May 1991.
>
> However, Deja News (now Google Groups) has copies of the original
> which was promulgated the news group news.newgroups.announce. You will
> find them in http://tinyurl.com/8yrm3
Nope doesn't wash - not the relevant source.
> Alternatively, you could try
> hunting down the original articles in news.newgroups.announce
> yourself. They should all be there.
Indeed, they "should" be there - IF they exist, so why is it that
Douggie and cronies cannot find it and post a link to it, hmmmm? After
all THEY whinge and whine like mad if Inger doesn't do so to something
she talks about, so are THEY some kind of Ubermenchen to whom their
own standards do NOT apply, hmmm?
[..]
Doug Weller
>
>
>Doug Weller wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 00:50:55 GMT, in sci.archaeology, Seppo Renfors wrote:
>>
>
>[Douggie's posturing deleted]
>>
>> Usenet is not the web. Usenet has a variety of transport mechanisms.
>> Usenet groups are not created through the web. The process is done on
>> Usenet.
>
>...but there IS a repository for charters!
There is? You know this but can't find it? Tsk tsk, that stretches
credibility a bit. Even if there were, it's not part of the system, which
is designed to rely only on Usenet, not the web.
>
>YOU cannot be trusted as you have proven yourself to be a habitual
>LIAR!
>
>> >Well it would be good IF one could have confidence in it. Remember who
>> >posted it! - there IS NO URL to the ORIGINAL CFV - the relevant
>> >document.
>>
>> This is the url, once again, to the original CFV.
>> http://tinyurl.com/9gz7b
>>
>> CFVs are issued twice, here is the Last Call
>> http://tinyurl.com/95k4n
>
>.... "last call", eh.... and we are expected to believe a proven
>HABITUAL liar! As if....
You don't need to believe me, you just need to read it -- it's clearly
legitimate and you clearly have no evidence it isn't. But it's real, and
posted as it should have been, as you would know if you'd been involved in
creating any Big 7/8 newsgroups.
>
>I want to see the CFV that has been PASSED! Not one sent out for a
>vote...... hell why bother voting for anything at all if just posting
>a call for it is enough...
You've been given the url, it's in the Welcome to
sci.archaeology.moderated post I made recently.
The official results are at:
http://tinyurl.com/c9b76
... oh yeah, but then, that IS what has
>happened see below! Douggie doesn't bother with a 'mob rule' notion
>like a "vote" - and in the past he has claimed PRIVATE OWNERSHIP of
>said group! Such claims do not fit the concept of a democratic vote!
>The reality is that a "moderator" is by a CARETAKER of a group - not
>the OWNER - a totally bogus notion.
That's the terminology used by moderators and those who are responsible
for the creation of Big 8 newsgroups. You don't like it, tough.
>
>> >Oh and please note what Douggie has said:
>> >
>> >"Revised 13 December 2005"
>> >
>> >REVISE - reconsider and alter (something) in the light of further
>> >evidence; re-examine and make alterations to (written or printed
>> >matter): - OED
>> >
>> >So he has unashamedly EDITED IT to suit his dictatorial, censoring
>> >agendas!! He say's so himself! Pffffftttttt........
>>
>> That post is guideline information, a FAQ about the newsgroup. Not the
>> charter, something you yourself have raved about in fact.
>
>It is not specified to be an FAQ, if it was it would be so named, it
>is NOT thereof it isn't an FAQ either - you FOOLED a number of the
>baying mongrels who follow your scent trail into believing it was the
>Charter - and I say it was INTENTIONAL on your part!
>
>Further more *IF* you knew anything about an FAQ's you would also know
>it doesn't amount to anything LIKE an FAQ.
FAQ's vary, but if you don't like the word, fine. Call it guidelines.
>
>> >THAT is why the URL is required to a source HE (or his cronies) cannot
>> >edit!!
>> >[end restore]
>>
>> Here it is again:
>> http://tinyurl.com/9gz7b
>>
>> This is Usenet, you can ignore the reality of how newsgroups are created
>> all you want, the more you do so the more you look like an idiot.
>
>The idiot here is you - blustering, and evading for all it is worth
>nothing but HUMBUG - then you point to to a REVISED version that
>panders to your personal BIGOTRY and prejudices - in as good a job as
>that of any DICTATOR who writes their own rules as they see fit!
>Pffff.......
>
Guidelines get revised when bits turn out not to be clear, or when
circumstances change.
>But never mind I'll pull that alleged "charter" to pieces for you....
>at my leisure :-)
Who cares? And why do you bother if you think it's not the real charter?
It was debated and passed with a thumping majority, you can rave all you
want it won't change anything. People who don't like moderated groups do
this all the time and it's everyone's right to make an idiot of themselves
in public if that's how they get their kicks, so rave on.
Doug Weller
>
>
>Doug Weller wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 02:29:52 GMT, in sci.archaeology, PRD wrote:
>>
>> >In sci.archaeology message news:dnvpd...@enews3.newsguy.com by
>> >"Tedd Jacobs" <Jac...@mail.boisestate.edu> . . . :
>> >
>> >> took me all of .39 seconds to prove you wrong.
>> >
>> >You assume that Seppo knows what and RFD is and why it is important
>>
>> This is part of the problem. He doesn't seem to have a clue how newsgroup
>> creation works, as is shown by his thinking that Usenet posts by me are
>> somehow not verification of what he is asking for, even when those posts
>> are required by the process.
>
>Well well... more proof that the Douggie is a habitual liar - he KNOWS
>I have been involved in news group creation and know at least as much
>about it as he does (or pretends to know).
>
Actually I didn't know that. But I am referring to the Big 7/8 creation
process, which you don't seem to have been involved in and clearly don't
understand or you wouldn't be writing the things you do. I've posted the
RFD, the CFV and the results and you don't recognize them for what they
are.
>Lies and ignorance doesn't make for intelligence despite what some may
>believe.
Nice to see some self-reflection there Seppo.
JMB
>
>
> JMB wrote:
>>
>> "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:43A36718...@not.com.au...
>> >
>> >
> [..]
>> >
>> > Aha.... and that is because you were SUCKED IN by Douggie's dishonesty
>> > making you BELIEVE it was the charter when it wasn't - only *I*
>> > spotted that immediately and noted it! It was only AFTER a number of
>> > you had made a right FOOLS of yourselves that the Douggie elected to
>> > expose you for what you were by confessing his sins!
>>
>> WTF are you going on about now? The charter was posted, and if you think
>> it's wrong, then a Google search will give you all the details you need.
>> But, **this** thread was originally about the charter for **this** group,
>> until you hijacked it.
>
> You have been shown to be the FOOL you are by Douggie:
>
> "That post is guideline information, a FAQ about the newsgroup. Not
> the
> charter, something you yourself have raved about in fact. "
>
> Only that too is a LIE as it is NOT an FAQ either, it is missing the
> "Q & A" part totally - but then that IS something from a habitual
> liar, so what can you expect?
>
> So much for your "charter", you were SUCKED IN to make a fool of
> yourself - you were CONNED as was the INTENT - only I wasn't conned by
> that.
The charter as was voted on, and passed, can be found in Message ID:
8292646...@uunet.uu.net, a direct link to the Google archive of the
post is:
http://groups.google.ie/group/sci.anthropology/msg/17593d40204b447a?dmode=source&hl=en
It's an easy search, and I'm amazed that even The Seppo couldn't find it,
but then again, I shouldn't be amazed at any amount of stupidity that The
Seppo proves himself capable of.
>
> [I'm not your lackey - if you are suffering from dementia it is your
> problem]
>
--
John Byrne
Eric Stevens
wrote:
>
>
>Eric Stevens wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 00:50:55 GMT, Seppo Renfors <Ren...@not.com.au>
>> wrote:
>
>[..]
>>
>> Of course there is no URL to the original document! News groups were
>> created before the WWW ever existed.
>
>WWW existed from before 10 Apr 1996 the alleged vote closing date - in
>fact it has existed from May 1991.
Usenet which carries the news groups dates back to 1979. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet
>>
>> However, Deja News (now Google Groups) has copies of the original
>> which was promulgated the news group news.newgroups.announce. You will
>> find them in http://tinyurl.com/8yrm3
>
>Nope doesn't wash - not the relevant source.
What do you think is the relevant source?
>
>> Alternatively, you could try
>> hunting down the original articles in news.newgroups.announce
>> yourself. They should all be there.
>
>Indeed, they "should" be there - IF they exist, so why is it that
>Douggie and cronies cannot find it and post a link to it, hmmmm?
Go away and look for yourself.
>After
>all THEY whinge and whine like mad if Inger doesn't do so to something
>she talks about, so are THEY some kind of Ubermenchen to whom their
>own standards do NOT apply, hmmm?
>
>
>[..]
Eric Stevens
George
Loved the mail tossers, front ends and Blue Wave
Ran a BBS from 1985 to 1995
.....
prd
news:0htgq1hjpdqb9rkee...@4ax.com by Eric Stevens
<eric.s...@sum.co.nz> . . . :
> On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 04:51:24 GMT, Seppo Renfors
> <Ren...@not.com.au> wrote:
>>> Of course there is no URL to the original document! News
>>> groups were created before the WWW ever existed.
>>WWW existed from before 10 Apr 1996 the alleged vote closing
>>date - in fact it has existed from May 1991.
WWW is a naming directory for https: The Usenet uses TCP/IP NNTP
protocol for distribution and URLs use http, 2 different systems.
The UseNet is not subserviant to the WWW or Http. Seppo Renfors does
not understand the basic facts, as a participant of the UseNet he is
expected to use the UseNet and Service groups like News.Groups to get
information about the UseNet. There he might understand how groups
are formed.
Note the similarity between
NNTP - net news. (requires a NNTP reader and NNTP server and a
NNTP composer)
HTTP - web pages. (Requires a page server and a page reader)
SMTP - email. (requires an email server, and email retreaver and
reader and email composer)
>>> However, Deja News (now Google Groups) has copies of the
>>> original which was promulgated the news group
>>> news.newgroups.announce. You will find them in
>>> http://tinyurl.com/8yrm3
>>
>>Nope doesn't wash - not the relevant source.
ROFLMAO, what an iiiddddiiiioooottttt.
> What do you think is the relevant source?
[Doctor pulls out glove the sound of rubber snapping on fingers]
"Bend over seppo"
>>> Alternatively, you could try
>>> hunting down the original articles in news.newgroups.announce
>>> yourself. They should all be there.
>>
>>Indeed, they "should" be there - IF they exist, so why is it
>>that Douggie and cronies cannot find it and post a link to it,
>>hmmmm?
Cause he probably doesn't think you need to be babied. He would be
wrong, because you are clueless as to how the UseNet functions.
These are sci.* groups Seppo, If you cannot figure it out, you don't
belong here, go subscribe to Compuserve.
> Go away and look for yourself.
>
>>After
>>all THEY whinge and whine like mad if Inger doesn't do so to
>>something she talks about, so are THEY some kind of Ubermenchen
>>to whom their own standards do NOT apply, hmmm?
Hey dipwap, I provided you with both group charters. Even before you
asked this group for them. There are no secrets on the UseNet, you
have the power of mind to find and answer all questions.
Garry Denke
Did you know that the FidoNet consists of approximately 10,000 systems
world-wide now? For those who never heard of FidoNet, you cannot Telnet
or FTP to a FidoNet site, only communicate via E-Mail, and Usenet News.
Long live Tom Jennings, and bow wow, Fido!
Doug Weller
>In sci.archaeology message
>news:0htgq1hjpdqb9rkee...@4ax.com by Eric Stevens
><eric.s...@sum.co.nz> . . . :
>
>> On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 04:51:24 GMT, Seppo Renfors
>> <Ren...@not.com.au> wrote:
>
>>>> Of course there is no URL to the original document! News
>>>> groups were created before the WWW ever existed.
>
>>>WWW existed from before 10 Apr 1996 the alleged vote closing
>>>date - in fact it has existed from May 1991.
>
>WWW is a naming directory for https: The Usenet uses TCP/IP NNTP
>protocol for distribution and URLs use http, 2 different systems.
>The UseNet is not subserviant to the WWW or Http. Seppo Renfors does
>not understand the basic facts, as a participant of the UseNet he is
>expected to use the UseNet and Service groups like News.Groups to get
>information about the UseNet. There he might understand how groups
>are formed.
Usenet has also used CDs for news transport, but more commonly UUCP which
carried the first Usenet traffic. I first accessed it via a Fidonet
gateway. What it doesn't use for newsgroup creation, let alone
propagation, is the web.
These are the guidelines that existed at the time
http://tinyurl.com/appv2
Which doesn't mention 'internet' or 'web', and explains how the results
are handled. And once again we see that however much Seppo may know about
how au hierarchy groups are handled, he hasn't a clue about Big 7/8
newsgroup creation.
Doug
Seppo Renfors
Tom McDonald wrote:
>
> Seppo Renfors wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > > This is part of the problem. He doesn't seem to have a clue how newsgroup
> > > creation works, as is shown by his thinking that Usenet posts by me are
> > > somehow not verification of what he is asking for, even when those posts
> > > are required by the process.
>
> > Lies and ignorance doesn't make for intelligence despite what some may
> > believe.
>
> So you've finally come over to the side of light! Welcome! I
> anticipate many fruitful conversations, now that you've foregone
> lies and ignorance!
Now that the context, you edited out creating a forgery, is back we
see that I have ALWAYS rejected Lies and fabrications - in the same
manner I reject your FORGERY attempt and expose it for all to see here
- Now all we need is for you to grow up and stop begging for pats on
the head from the puppy farmer you pander to!
Seppo Renfors
Doug Weller wrote:
>
> On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 02:00:51 GMT, in sci.archaeology, Seppo Renfors wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Doug Weller wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 02:29:52 GMT, in sci.archaeology, PRD wrote:
> >>
> >> >In sci.archaeology message news:dnvpd...@enews3.newsguy.com by
> >> >"Tedd Jacobs" <Jac...@mail.boisestate.edu> . . . :
> >> >
> >> >> took me all of .39 seconds to prove you wrong.
> >> >
> >> >You assume that Seppo knows what and RFD is and why it is important
> >>
> >> This is part of the problem. He doesn't seem to have a clue how newsgroup
> >> creation works, as is shown by his thinking that Usenet posts by me are
> >> somehow not verification of what he is asking for, even when those posts
> >> are required by the process.
> >
> >Well well... more proof that the Douggie is a habitual liar - he KNOWS
> >I have been involved in news group creation and know at least as much
> >about it as he does (or pretends to know).
> >
> Actually I didn't know that.
I repeat once more - he KNEW because I had already informed him that
long ago - but he is only interested in hearing himself speak.... and
kissing his own mirror image to take any notice of what he has been
informed of..
> But I am referring to the Big 7/8 creation
> process, which you don't seem to have been involved in and clearly don't
> understand or you wouldn't be writing the things you do.
Wohooo..... the "mine is bigger than yours" argument from the Douggie!
Again we see that he is a habitual liar, as despite now KNOWING (as if
he didn't know before, pffffttt...) that I have been involved in such
in the past - despite that the stupid berk says I don't know the
process..... what a lying FRAUD he has turned out to be.
> I've posted the
> RFD, the CFV and the results and you don't recognize them for what they
> are.
Another LIE. What I have stated is that - they are exceedingly poorly
compiled - but that isn't even the point the POINT is, Doug Weller is
a KNOWN habitual liar and for that reason cannot be trusted to point
to one that has PASSED MUSTER - ie voted into existence. IE the one
stored by the INDEPENDENT vote taker and kept as a source of
reference!
The PROOF of his untrustworthiness is his recent rewriting of it on 13
Dec 2005 - that is to say - Doug Weller doesn't care for proper
recognised procedure and protocols. Obviously "votes" are such a pain
in the arse to him and therefor he DOES bypass such processes, as
demonstrated.
>
> >Lies and ignorance doesn't make for intelligence despite what some may
> >believe.
>
> Nice to see some self-reflection there Seppo.
Indeed here we see the Douggie practise its habitual lying as he KNOWS
my text above is in context to his earlier LIES - those he restored to
repeating again and again and the fraud he is.
Seppo Renfors
Eric Stevens wrote:
>
> On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 04:51:24 GMT, Seppo Renfors <Ren...@not.com.au>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Eric Stevens wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 00:50:55 GMT, Seppo Renfors <Ren...@not.com.au>
> >> wrote:
> >
> >[..]
> >>
> >> Of course there is no URL to the original document! News groups were
> >> created before the WWW ever existed.
> >
> >WWW existed from before 10 Apr 1996 the alleged vote closing date - in
> >fact it has existed from May 1991.
>
> Usenet which carries the news groups dates back to 1979. See
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet
Your claim was WWW did not exist in 1996 - which I showed you was
incorrect.
[..]
> >Indeed, they "should" be there - IF they exist, so why is it that
> >Douggie and cronies cannot find it and post a link to it, hmmmm?
>
> Go away and look for yourself.
Been there done that and found ONE (alleged) location - albeit
inaccessible as it was stored in a pass word protected site. Therefor
I have no access to the original, the "prime source" so often demanded
by tossers like Douggie and Tom of others. Now it is up to them to
perform to their own standards!
Seppo Renfors
...and you still haven't woken up that Douggie made a FOOL out of you,
sucking you in to BELIEVE he had posted the "charter" to the moderated
group...... nor have you said a PEEP about the INCONSISTENCIES between
the one ALLEGEDLY voted on and the forgery put up by Douggie! Why is
that, hmmmm? Are you perhaps just another puppy he's farming?
> can be found in Message ID:
> 8292646...@uunet.uu.net, a direct link to the Google archive of the
> post is:
> http://groups.google.ie/group/sci.anthropology/msg/17593d40204b447a?dmode=source&hl=en
> It's an easy search, and I'm amazed that even The Seppo couldn't find it,
> but then again, I shouldn't be amazed at any amount of stupidity that The
> Seppo proves himself capable of.
Listen Jimbo, get it through your thick head - that IS NOT THE
ORIGINAL which can't exist in "sci.anthropology"!! You know the PRIME
MATERIAL you tossers so often whine about to others they provide - I
want to see the ORIGINAL - the prime source you wankers demand of
others - now it is your turn to perform to 'standards' you demand of
others!
Seppo Renfors
That a not of tosers - and LIARS - *I* have NOT addressed the issue of
when usenet came into existence = or its protocol or any other related
question.
Eric made a statement - WWW did not exist in April 1996. It is
HABITUAL LIARS who alleged I have state anything different - bloody
pathetic FRAUDS like the bottle washer and the puppy farmer!
Doug Weller
[SNIP]
>Another LIE. What I have stated is that - they are exceedingly poorly
>compiled - but that isn't even the point the POINT is, Doug Weller is
>a KNOWN habitual liar and for that reason cannot be trusted to point
>to one that has PASSED MUSTER - ie voted into existence. IE the one
>stored by the INDEPENDENT vote taker and kept as a source of
>reference!
Yawn. I posted the url to that. The problem is, the newgroup creaton
system works through Usenet and Seppo won't accept it, insisting that it
must be stored on the web. You can't conquer invincible ignorance though,
Doug Weller
>
>
>JMB wrote:
[SNIP]
>> can be found in Message ID:
>> 8292646...@uunet.uu.net, a direct link to the Google archive of the
>> post is:
>> http://groups.google.ie/group/sci.anthropology/msg/17593d40204b447a?dmode=source&hl=en
>> It's an easy search, and I'm amazed that even The Seppo couldn't find it,
>> but then again, I shouldn't be amazed at any amount of stupidity that The
>> Seppo proves himself capable of.
>
>Listen Jimbo, get it through your thick head - that IS NOT THE
>ORIGINAL which can't exist in "sci.anthropology"!! You know the PRIME
>MATERIAL you tossers so often whine about to others they provide - I
>want to see the ORIGINAL - the prime source you wankers demand of
>others - now it is your turn to perform to 'standards' you demand of
>others!
ROTFL. That's the original, it can exist in sci.anthropology, in fact it
had to be posted there. Note who posted it. You don't get anymore original
than that.
JMB
Still an incredibly stupid thing to do, refering to someone named "John"
with a variation of "James". I note too that you haven't been able to
provide any link to where you "explained" the connection to me.
> get it through your thick head - that IS NOT THE
> ORIGINAL which can't exist in "sci.anthropology"!! You know the PRIME
> MATERIAL you tossers so often whine about to others they provide - I
> want to see the ORIGINAL - the prime source you wankers demand of
> others - now it is your turn to perform to 'standards' you demand of
> others!
That is the original. Google gives the link as part of the sci.anthropology
group, but if you actually looked at the newsgroups the post was sent to,
you would see that it was sent to:
news.announce.newgroups,
news.groups,
alt.archaeology,
sci.anthropology,
sci.archaeology,
sci.archaeology.mesoamerican,
soc.history,
soc.history.medieval,
soc.history.moderated
--
John Byrne
Seppo Renfors
Doug Weller wrote:
>
> On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 23:02:25 GMT, in sci.archaeology, Seppo Renfors wrote:
> [SNIP]
> >Another LIE. What I have stated is that - they are exceedingly poorly
> >compiled - but that isn't even the point the POINT is, Doug Weller is
> >a KNOWN habitual liar and for that reason cannot be trusted to point
> >to one that has PASSED MUSTER - ie voted into existence. IE the one
> >stored by the INDEPENDENT vote taker and kept as a source of
> >reference!
>
> Yawn. I posted the url to that.
LIAR!
> The problem is, the newgroup creaton
> system works through Usenet and Seppo won't accept it, insisting that it
> must be stored on the web. You can't conquer invincible ignorance though,
....and lest see the reason for it, deleted from here by Douggie
without any indication of doing so:
[restore text]
The PROOF of his untrustworthiness is his recent rewriting of it on 13
Dec 2005 - that is to say - Doug Weller doesn't care for proper
recognised procedure and protocols. Obviously "votes" are such a pain
in the arse to him and therefor he DOES bypass such processes, as
demonstrated.
[end restore]
So now we know what I want to see the ORIGINAL - But Douggie, if it
doesn't exist, SAY SO - what are you afraid of? You don't know much
about news group creations - do you! There are groups like this:
news.announce.newgroups
news.groups
news.lists.misc
news.groups.reviews
etc which is where the 11 administration of "big 8" group list post
messages relating to groups. The control message should be somewhere
at www.isc.org which leads you to this page:
ftp://ftp.isc.org/usenet/control/sci
where you will find this:
sci.archaeology.moderated.gz
BUT with the date: 4/11/2001 when it was most likely relocated to that
facility - on opening it, we find dates *starting* from Wed Apr 17
10:37:31 1996. THAT dumbo is the originals -yes PLURAL! Now wonder WHY
you didn't want me to see these, hmmmm???
So Douggie, don't bullshit to me, that it doesn't exist, you bloody
fraud. You are a habitual LIAR as we see time and time again - as I
have proven you to be once more! You have had more than AMPLE
opportunity, and NOTICE to provide the ORIGINAL - you didn't but
CLAIMED you had - while pretending to be an "expert" on group creation
and all thing associated! You have been exposed once again!
Oh, and there is some very interesting stuff there......... more
later...... but as a teaser, does the date "27 Aug 1998" remind you of
anything, hmmmm :-)
Seppo Renfors
JMB wrote:
>
> "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.com.au> wrote in message
> news:43A9E646...@not.com.au...
[..]
> > Listen Jimbo,
>
> Still an incredibly stupid thing to do, refering to someone named "John"
> with a variation of "James". I note too that you haven't been able to
> provide any link to where you "explained" the connection to me.
Your early onset dementia is no concern of mine - deal with it, I'm
not your nanny.
> > get it through your thick head - that IS NOT THE
> > ORIGINAL which can't exist in "sci.anthropology"!! You know the PRIME
> > MATERIAL you tossers so often whine about to others they provide - I
> > want to see the ORIGINAL - the prime source you wankers demand of
> > others - now it is your turn to perform to 'standards' you demand of
> > others!
>
> That is the original. Google gives the link as part of the sci.anthropology
> group, but if you actually looked at the newsgroups the post was sent to,
> you would see that it was sent to:
> news.announce.newgroups,
> news.groups,
> alt.archaeology,
> sci.anthropology,
> sci.archaeology,
> sci.archaeology.mesoamerican,
> soc.history,
> soc.history.medieval,
> soc.history.moderated
It is NOT the original that I KNEW existed, and after having had
Douggie repeatedly showing what a fraud he is I have revealeds the
sources HE must know about:
A message posted on the same day he RUNS AWAY! Interesting isn't
it.....
http://groups.google.com.au/group/sci.archaeology/msg/63328c88b917857b
Now why did he run away for? Perhaps because he doesn't have a group
to moderate!
Here is an extract, and a place to verify the PGP key being authentic,
if you wish to mess around verifying it:
[quote]
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1998 14:08:37 GMT
X-Pgp-Sig: 2.6.2 Subject,Control,Message-ID,Date,From,Sender
NIXAnH1J0zJ8_7hb4EdOsrx_2nI8i_arvmgTVwIbchBv0xBS_8oGjD52CQ8ikTU3
jULSmvOU4JWXrTab6v1a5KoQ0LoZFERqsh0xnXbQ4tyUKX4A8sY5xxyrKLgrPPex
gR_oI2Zdixf74ZrHVQi9vRUDYlVKejmsaPc0wvJFQkmjtm173M_Ht82xWtCIC7VN
c_xik9cV6lr=
=VAYm
X-Info: ftp://ftp.isc.org/pub/pgpcontrol/README.html
ftp://ftp.isc.org/pub/pgpcontrol/README
"sci.archaeology.moderated is an unmoderated newsgroup which passed
its vote for creation by 250:11 as reported in news.announce.newgroups
on 27 Aug 1998."
David C Lawrence
[end quote]
This message is repeated again on 5 Sep 1998; and 13 Sep 1998; and 24
Sep 1998; and 30 Sep 1998; and 26 Oct 1998; ands 31 Oct 1998 .......!
and the last message of relevance to this issue:
X-No-Archive: Control: rmgroup sci.archaeology.moderated
Sender: Urs Janßen <u...@tin.org>
"please remove the bogus newsgroup sci.archaeology.moderated"....
Hmmm..... Urs *could* be a serial pest, but then why did Douggie find
a NEED to run away!!
JMB
>
>
> JMB wrote:
>>
>> "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:43A9E646...@not.com.au...
>
> [..]
>
>> > Listen Jimbo,
>>
>> Still an incredibly stupid thing to do, refering to someone named "John"
>> with a variation of "James". I note too that you haven't been able to
>> provide any link to where you "explained" the connection to me.
>
> Your early onset dementia is no concern of mine - deal with it, I'm
> not your nanny.
You truely are an idiot. I did a google search, and what pathetic excuses
you came up with for such stupidity were posted to a completely different
group, is response to a completely different poster. You never "explained"
your stupidity to me.
>
>> > get it through your thick head - that IS NOT THE
>> > ORIGINAL which can't exist in "sci.anthropology"!! You know the PRIME
>> > MATERIAL you tossers so often whine about to others they provide - I
>> > want to see the ORIGINAL - the prime source you wankers demand of
>> > others - now it is your turn to perform to 'standards' you demand of
>> > others!
>>
>> That is the original. Google gives the link as part of the
>> sci.anthropology
>> group, but if you actually looked at the newsgroups the post was sent to,
>> you would see that it was sent to:
>> news.announce.newgroups,
>> news.groups,
>> alt.archaeology,
>> sci.anthropology,
>> sci.archaeology,
>> sci.archaeology.mesoamerican,
>> soc.history,
>> soc.history.medieval,
>> soc.history.moderated
>
> It is NOT the original that I KNEW existed, and after having had
> Douggie repeatedly showing what a fraud he is I have revealeds the
> sources HE must know about:
It is the original.
>
> A message posted on the same day he RUNS AWAY! Interesting isn't
> it.....
>
> http://groups.google.com.au/group/sci.archaeology/msg/63328c88b917857b
>
> Now why did he run away for? Perhaps because he doesn't have a group
> to moderate!
Well, that's a new low in stupidity, even from you.
sci.archaeology.moderated clearly does exist, and Doug is one of the
moderators of that group, so he obviously does have a group to moderate.
The post you were referred to on the earlier post, which you sniped off:
http://groups.google.ie/group/sci.anthropology/msg/17593d40204b447a?dmode=source&hl=en
Message ID: 8292646...@uunet.uu.net
is dated 11 April, 1996. Since you are going on about wanting the
**original**, it is quite clear that your quotes from 1998 posts are not the
originals. In fact, from glancing through a Google search for the poster of
that quote you gave (with no references to the full post by the looks of
it), would look more like he is a spammer than anyone to be taken seriously.
Although that is based on a very narrow search to find the post you got your
quote from, so I could be wrong about him.
--
John Byrne
Doug Weller
Thanks, There was a rash of forged newsgroup creation messages in 1998,
see
http://tinyurl.com/bhvog
Seppo seems to have run across some of the evidence without understanding
it. An unmoderated sci.archaeology.moderated was a bogus newsgroup and
Urs was acting properly, not being a serial pest. The real
sci.archaeology.moderated was created in 1996 as a moderated group, not
1998, with a rather different vote than the one in the forged message from
Tale Seppo quotes.
Seppo continues to show how ignorant he is.
The official RFD, CFV, etc. gets posted to Usenet, not to the web.
"From: Russ Allbery <r...@stanford.edu>
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Is misc.rural moderated?
Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 23:32:53 -0700
Organization: The Eyrie
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <yl4r3ox...@windlord.stanford.edu>
References: <3EC7C95F...@anonymous.com>
<ylr86uz...@windlord.stanford.edu>
<9Rfya.213601$My6.3...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
<Xns9380D0AA0C677wi...@216.168.3.44>
<badqjg$t9l$1...@iruka.swcp.com>
<Xns9381EC0C66041wi...@216.168.3.44>
NNTP-Posting-Host: windlord.stanford.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.Stanford.EDU 1053498773 4636 171.64.19.147 (21 May 2003
06:32:53 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: ne...@news.stanford.edu
User-Agent: Gnus/5.090008 (Oort Gnus v0.08) XEmacs/21.4 (Portable Code,
sparc-sun-solaris2.6)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Nx2zWGPuL1or9a8xV3QIHj4hEVo=
wildstar <wildstar...@hotmail.com> writes:
> There are FAQs as for the standard used by Net Admins to deal with
> abuse.
There are?
News to me.
> ISPs would use them as reference for actions to be taken when dealing
> with complaints and a general policy is that an ISP must receive info if
> the NG is a moderated or non-moderated NG and the source of that info is
> the keeper of the Charters.
There is no official charter repository for Big Eight groups.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>"
Control messages are a result of the RFC/CFV process, not part of it. You
could think of them as instructions to servers to inform them that a
newsgroup has been created (or to remove a newsgroup).
Seppo Renfors
...and here we see Douggie claim the "independent vote taker" (David C
Lawrence) is the "forger"!! Bogus news group creation is not limited
to 1998 - the URL doesn't indicate that year to be in any way
significant - more bullshit from Douggie - BUT it does indicate the
NEED to see the ORIGINALS as I have insisted on - but what has douggie
to FEAR, as he was NOT prepared to point to the originals?!? What has
Douggie to FEAR not stating the details of the 8 REQUIRED so called
"moderators"??
>
> Seppo seems to have run across some of the evidence without understanding
> it.
The only person NOT understanding it is the habitual liar Doug Weller
(and its latrating string of puppies)!
> An unmoderated sci.archaeology.moderated was a bogus newsgroup and
> Urs was acting properly, not being a serial pest.
Urs is a serial pest he attempted to have a number of groups removed -
he TRIED to issue 'RMGROUP' messages despite NOT being authorised to
do so (NO PGP key). Of course Urs tried to remove the group
"sci.archaeology.moderated" - NOT specifying it to be the
"unmoderated" version!
The "unmoderated" version of the so called "moderated" group DOES have
a PGP key! The holder of the key is the proper person to create/remove
groups as it is verifiable via the ftp sites! See here:
[message]
From group...@isc.org Sat Aug 29 06:37:26 1998
From: group...@isc.org (David C Lawrence)
Sender: group...@isc.org (David C Lawrence)
Organization: The Cabal
Newsgroups: news.groups,sci.archaeology.moderated
Subject: cmsg newgroup sci.archaeology.moderated
Control: newgroup sci.archaeology.moderated
Approved: newgroup...@isc.org
Message-ID: <0cxgvR9...@isc.org>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 17:01:01 -0000
X-PGP-Sig: 2.6.2 Subject,Control,Message-ID,Date,From,Sender
I6FXYVirFlswbYfDFFQaw8Qbp0lrDfgjCRIuHWYOQ_U_P3bceHQ0ebbUWNr_auxC
_Vjbm6XP93fJlLN6WyANkdJocQh0PlN_hiwcFf2e43c9ZU6FqmaQV8JvWZXUANGr
gn0Nbmf3GBAloVryDxPFuhEiFYY1F0jYnzBZdIFxfdFFyRgryJU6SZpj9odQECCW
wLoB69ScmHN=
=LCur
X-No-Archive: Yes
[..]
sci.archaeology.moderated is an unmoderated newsgroup which passed its
vote for creation by 209:27 as reported in news.announce.newgroups on
28 Aug 1998.
[end message]
> The real
> sci.archaeology.moderated was created in 1996 as a moderated group, not
> 1998, with a rather different vote than the one in the forged message from
> Tale Seppo quotes.
Any number of them - and they are all LATER than 1996 - and therefor
supersedes the vote taken back then and ALL are signed "David C
Lawrence" and have a PGP key.
This is from Urs who acted "properly" according to Douggie:
[quote]
From: Urs Janßen <u...@tin.org>
Newsgroups:
sci.archaeology.moderated,sci.config,sci.control,sci.groups
Subject: cmsg rmgroup sci.archaeology.moderated
Approved: Urs Janßen <u...@tin.org>
Organization: Arbeitskreis Kultur und Kommunikation
Message-ID: <19ffg9y9t4$4o9$1...@akk3.akk.uni-karlsruhe.de>
X-No-Archive: Control: rmgroup sci.archaeology.moderated
Sender: Urs Janßen <u...@tin.org>
References: <9rn9cp$4o9$1...@akk3.akk.uni-karlsruhe.de>
Control: rmgroup sci.archaeology.moderated
Lines: 4
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2001 00:27:01 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 142.169.27.24
X-Complaints-To: ab...@globetrotter.net
X-Trace: carnaval.risq.qc.ca 1004833621 142.169.27.24 (Sat, 03 Nov
2001 19:27:01 EST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2001 19:27:01 EST
Xref: news.isc.org control.rmgroup:109238
please remove the bogus newsgroup sci.archaeology.moderated
[end quote of full message]
Note the DATE: "04 Nov 2001" - NOT something from 1998 when, according
to Douggie a rash of "forgeries" took place (and no doubt taken care
off before 2001) - but something relatively RECENT!
>
> Seppo continues to show how ignorant he is.
>
> The official RFD, CFV, etc. gets posted to Usenet, not to the web.
....and is ARCHIVED ON THE WEB as I have shown - Douggie still
attempts pure bullshit to hide behind! It is archived so that
forgeries can be eliminated - the second last message I have is one
declaring the group "unmoderated" - but that could be for the reason
that THERE ARE NOT the required qty of "moderators" for the group to
remain functioning.
>
> "From: Russ Allbery <r...@stanford.edu>
> Newsgroups: news.groups
> Subject: Re: Is misc.rural moderated?
> Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 23:32:53 -0700
[improperly quoted - who knows what was a quote and what was not]
Incorrect message.
>
So lets see what passes as "acceptable" to so called "moderators":
http://groups.expo.st/art/sci.archaeology.moderated/131
This is OFF TOPIC - ie VERBOTEN by the "rules"...... only it was
posted by the Gruppen Furher itself...
http://groups.expo.st/art/sci.archaeology.moderated/157
http://groups.expo.st/art/sci.archaeology.moderated/158
100% OFF TOPIC by an ALLEGED "forger" (ref Douggie) who has attempted
to net cop the person - not only to "moderate" the group!
http://groups.expo.st/art/sci.archaeology.moderated/139
The above message is also in breach of the demand below!
Oh, and this demand is VERBOTEN by the rules:
http://groups.expo.st/art/sci.archaeology.moderated/155
Seppo Renfors
JMB wrote:
>
> "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.com.au> wrote in message
> news:43B26649...@not.com.au...
> >
> >
> > JMB wrote:
> >>
> >> "Seppo Renfors" <Ren...@not.com.au> wrote in message
> >> news:43A9E646...@not.com.au...
> >
> > [..]
> >
> >> > Listen Jimbo,
> >>
> >> Still an incredibly stupid thing to do, refering to someone named "John"
> >> with a variation of "James". I note too that you haven't been able to
> >> provide any link to where you "explained" the connection to me.
> >
> > Your early onset dementia is no concern of mine - deal with it, I'm
> > not your nanny.
>
> You truely are an idiot.
....but practically a GENIUS compared to you!
> I did a google search, and what pathetic excuses
> you came up with for such stupidity were posted to a completely different
> group,
Oh dear.... and here we see Jimbo resorting to LIES again - an
explanation is found in a reply to the offender itself, in the group
sci.archaeology (in a message where I exposed his propensity to
resort to forgery)!
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/578019e2419ad2fb
> is response to a completely different poster.
THAT is another lie as we can see. But then that IS the nature of the
beast!
> You never "explained" your stupidity to me.
....and there is another lie of his....
Did I say you were FORBIDDEN from reading my message, hmmmm? It was
therefor explained to YOU, in reply to your forgery creation, and as
it was posted to the group, that includes you....... of course you may
well consider yourself to be an outsider to humanity - but then that
remains your problem, not mine (even if I agree with that).
Now that you have been hung out to dry - AGAIN, dripping with exposure
to your lies, you can crawl back under your rock once more.
[..]