O.T. I'm blocking all Google Groups posts from now on.
John Corliss
Groups and Google's unwillingness to respond to complaints, from now on
I'm going to be filtering out all messages posted via that service. I
know this probably doesn't mean anything to you personally, but it will
make the group more readable for me.
If *you* want to read this group without including the idiocy posted via
that service, I recommend that you do the same. If your news reader
won't allow you to do this, install NewsProxy:
download:
http://www.nfilter.org/np-120.exe
and set a rule to block messages based on any header line that always
appears in posts originating from Google Groups:
alt.comp.freeware drop (copy and paste full header line here without
parenthesis)
I know that this will block some valid posts, but I'm afraid the bad
outweighs the good by far too large a factor. Maybe if enough people
start doing this, Google will start acting responsibly.
--
Regards from John Corliss
I don't reply to trolls like Andy Mabbett or Doc (who uses sock puppets)
for instance. I filter all Google Groups posts. No adware, cdware,
commercial software, crippleware, demoware, nagware, PROmotionware,
shareware, spyware, time-limited software, trialware, viruses or warez
for me, please.
»Q«
<news:126bi90...@corp.supernews.com>:
> Due to the amount of spam that's being posted to this group via
> Google Groups and Google's unwillingness to respond to complaints,
> from now on I'm going to be filtering out all messages posted via
> that service.
Blinky has a page about this, <http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html>.
He's gathering specific rules for different clients in n.s.r, to put on
that page. AFAIK, he doesn't have anything about using nFilter yet, in
case you'd like to help him out.
--
»Q«
meow...@care2.com
> John Corliss wrote:
> > Due to the amount of spam that's being posted to this group via Google
> > Groups and Google's unwillingness to respond to complaints, from now on
> > I'm going to be filtering out all messages posted via that service. I
> > know this probably doesn't mean anything to you personally, but it will
> >
> > I know that this will block some valid posts, but I'm afraid the bad
> > outweighs the good by far too large a factor. Maybe if enough people
> > start doing this, Google will start acting responsibly.
>
> that such a boycott would make one whit of difference to the folks at
> Google. Probably most people who post via Google Groups also read
> Usenet messages using Google Groups.
<- dancing round in circles blowing raspberries.
It wont make any difference, it seems goo couldnt care less. And its
not a persuasive reason for us goo users to switch services.
Newsgroup regulars need to learn how to deal with spam and spammers,
then the problem stays very small indeed. And spam is usually evident
from the subject heading. Works well in other groups anyway.
NT
badgolferman
> Due to the amount of spam that's being posted to this group via
> Google Groups and Google's unwillingness to respond to complaints,
> from now on I'm going to be filtering out all messages posted via
> that service. I know this probably doesn't mean anything to you
> personally, but it will make the group more readable for me.
To be truthful, I seldom see spam in any group I frequent and
especially not this group. There are occassional posts, but the
majority are from people replying to them with sarcastic comments or
such. Perhaps my news server ReadFreeNews filters them out or I just
gloss over them. Maybe your server has a role in this problem also.
John Corliss
> John Corliss wrote:
>
>> Due to the amount of spam that's being posted to this group via
>> Google Groups and Google's unwillingness to respond to complaints,
>> from now on I'm going to be filtering out all messages posted via
>> that service.
>
> Blinky has a page about this, <http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html>.
> He's gathering specific rules for different clients in n.s.r, to put on
> that page. AFAIK, he doesn't have anything about using nFilter yet, in
> case you'd like to help him out.
»Q«,
I just noticed that NewsProxy doesn't seem to work worth a damn.
However, I will keep looking for a way if I can't get it to work.
--
Regards from John Corliss
I don't reply to trolls like Andy Mabbett or Doc (who uses sock puppets)
for instance. No adware, cdware, commercial software, crippleware,
John Corliss
Supernews usually does a pretty good job of filtering out multiple
crossposts and the like, but there is another kind of spam showing up
that isn't cross-posted and is always through Google Groups. That Google
is so unresponsive to usenet abuse complaints jerks my chain. And they
also have the temerity to include an abuse address in their header info!
--
Regards from John Corliss
I don't reply to trolls like Andy Mabbett or Doc (who uses sock puppets)
for instance. I filter out all Google Groups posts. No adware, cdware,
badgolferman
> badgolferman wrote:
> > John Corliss, 5/13/2006,7:55:08 AM, wrote:
> >
> > > Due to the amount of spam that's being posted to this group via
> > > Google Groups and Google's unwillingness to respond to complaints,
> > > from now on I'm going to be filtering out all messages posted via
> > > that service. I know this probably doesn't mean anything to you
> > > personally, but it will make the group more readable for me.
> >
> > To be truthful, I seldom see spam in any group I frequent and
> > especially not this group. There are occassional posts, but the
> > majority are from people replying to them with sarcastic comments or
> > such. Perhaps my news server ReadFreeNews filters them out or I
> > just gloss over them. Maybe your server has a role in this problem
> > also.
>
> Supernews usually does a pretty good job of filtering out multiple
> crossposts and the like, but there is another kind of spam showing up
> that isn't cross-posted and is always through Google Groups. That
> Google is so unresponsive to usenet abuse complaints jerks my chain.
> And they also have the temerity to include an abuse address in their
> header info!
In the past two days all I see are a couple of replies to what I would
consider spam One is for a golf slice cure and another is for some
webcam girls. Give me some recent examples please. Subject header
would be fine.
John Corliss
Heh. I'm afraid that isn't going to happen. I don't have to prove
anything to anybody in order to justify filtering posts. This is a
personal decision. See this page:
http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
which I totally agree with.
John Corliss
> »Q« wrote:
>> John Corliss wrote:
>>
>>> Due to the amount of spam that's being posted to this group via
>>> Google Groups and Google's unwillingness to respond to complaints,
>>> from now on I'm going to be filtering out all messages posted via
>>> that service.
>>
>> Blinky has a page about this, <http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html>.
>> He's gathering specific rules for different clients in n.s.r, to put on
>> that page. AFAIK, he doesn't have anything about using nFilter yet, in
>> case you'd like to help him out.
>
> »Q«,
> I just noticed that NewsProxy doesn't seem to work worth a damn.
> However, I will keep looking for a way if I can't get it to work.
Whoops. Spoke too soon. I modified my rule to omit spaces in the header
fields after the colons, and now it works fine.
I sent an email to Blinky abou nfilter (AKA NewsProxy).
--
Regards from John Corliss
I don't reply to trolls like Andy Mabbett or Doc (who uses sock puppets)
for instance. I filter out all Google Groups posts. No adware, cdware,
badgolferman
> > In the past two days all I see are a couple of replies to what I
> > would consider spam One is for a golf slice cure and another is
> > for some webcam girls. Give me some recent examples please.
> > Subject header would be fine.
>
> Heh. I'm afraid that isn't going to happen. I don't have to prove
> anything to anybody in order to justify filtering posts. This is a
> personal decision. See this page:
>
> http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
>
> which I totally agree with.
I wasn't asking you to justify anything. I was asking you to show me
the spam so I could see if my server was filtering it out.
At the risk of being added to your signature/killfile, I must say you
tend to take things the wrong way and over react to the point of
intolerance of others.
Caesar Romano
<REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote Re Re: O.T. I'm blocking all
Google Groups posts from now on.:
>>John Corliss, 5/14/2006,4:56:40 AM, wrote:
...
>> Heh. I'm afraid that isn't going to happen. I don't have to prove
>> anything to anybody in order to justify filtering posts. This is a
>> personal decision. See this page:
>>
>> http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
>>
>> which I totally agree with.
...
>I wasn't asking you to justify anything. I was asking you to show me
>the spam so I could see if my server was filtering it out.
>
>At the risk of being added to your signature/killfile, I must say you
>tend to take things the wrong way and over react to the point of
>intolerance of others.
I gotten that impression several times myself.
--
Slimes-Daily motto: 1) Tax and Spend, 2) Change the Constituion to make it easier to do (1).
Laminar Flow
news:1147563137.8...@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> It wont make any difference, it seems goo couldnt care less.
You said "couldn't care less".
You did not say "could care less", like most people.
How refreshingly informed (and rare)!
thomaswhite
> Due to the amount of spam that's being posted to this group via Google
> Groups and Google's unwillingness to respond to complaints, from now on
> I'm going to be filtering out all messages posted via that service.
Who gives a Flying Fuck what you do, Corliss?
John Corliss
You're right! Kinda like when people say "irregardless" instead of
"regardless".
--
Regards from John Corliss
I don't reply to trolls like Andy Mabbett or Doc (who uses sock puppets)
for instance. I filter out all Google Groups posts. No adware, cdware,
John Corliss
Well, to be honest, you could have clarified your reason for wanting me
to invest the time. I doubt if your server is filtering it unless it's
cross-posted. I've been seeing about one or two Google spams in this
group every four days to a week. That's not a lot, but before Google
started doing their thing this group was darned near spam free.
Eugene Esterly III
Google Groups but I wanted to say something about this. There are
legitimate uses for Google Groups & blocking all Google Groups messages
will block everything including legitimate messages.
Just like all things, things can be used for both good & bad things.
Let's say for example, cars. People uses car for good things such as
traveling, going to work/shopping, et al but they can also be used in a
bad manner such as drunk driving, et al. Same thing with Google Groups,
some people use it to spam groups while people like me use it for
posting legitimate messages.
About Google's unwillingness to respond to complaints, this doesn't
surprise me since Google is big company who is raking in lots of money.
I have been using Google Groups for years back when it was Deja News.
nospam
>I have been using Google Groups for years back when it was Deja News.
If you have a genuine interest in usenet participation then you are taking
an extremely long time to acquire a clue.
--
badgolferman
<k41h62p8g2hkviiu1...@4ax.com> wrote:
> If you have a genuine interest in usenet participation then you are
> taking an extremely long time to acquire a clue.
> --
If you're going to criticize someone for their choice of newsreaders
then you should make sure yours is set up properly first. Your Agent
is not formatting the signature dashdashspaceenter properly. Therefore
someone else's newsreader cannot strip it automatically.
Some people must use Google Groups because they may not be able to
install separate newsreader applications on their work computers or
they have no Usenet access. Google Groups fills a need in these
instances.
John Corliss
> Due to the amount of spam that's being posted to this group via Google
> Groups and Google's unwillingness to respond to complaints, from now on
> I'm going to be filtering out all messages posted via that service. I
> know this probably doesn't mean anything to you personally, but it will
> make the group more readable for me.
I'm going to unblock Google Group posts. That NewsProxy program simply
doesn't work all the time. Better to see everything. However, I will
keep looking for a better way to filter newsgroups. Right now I'm
looking at Gravity:
http://mpgravity.sourceforge.net/
--
Regards from John Corliss
I don't reply to trolls like Andy Mabbett or Doc (who uses sock puppets)
for instance. I filter out all Google Groups posts. No adware, cdware,
Roger Johansson
badgolferman wrote:
> Some people must use Google Groups because they may not be able to
> install separate newsreader applications on their work computers or
> they have no Usenet access. Google Groups fills a need in these
> instances.
The main reason for a lot of people is the ever increasing lack of free
news servers in the world.
I have a lot of experience in using newsreaders, even before we had
internet I was a part of fidonet and we used other software for netmail
and discussion groups.
I have used free news servers for many years, moving to a new one every
time an old one went commercial or was laid down. The last news server
I used was a danish one.
Finally I gave up and started using google groups, which at least is up
all the time and is usable in spite of some problems in the software.
I see no difference in quality of posts from googlegroups and other
news servers.
It is the same old mixture of good and bad from all kinds of sources.
In fact, the worst offenders in usenet are often posting from some
private news server which tolerate a lot more crap and threats than the
bigger ones.
This is just a fix idea in JCs mind, he needs something to attack, and
this time it is googlegroups he has chosen as the target of his anger.
--
Roger J.
Ivan Tisljar
<jcor...@fake.invalid> wrote:
>I'm going to unblock Google Group posts. That NewsProxy program simply
>doesn't work all the time. Better to see everything. However, I will
It isnt? Strangely, it works for me.
Ivan.
--
"Ego autem quia veritatem dico non creditis mihi."
http://hlloyge.kickme.to/
-=delete _system_ to mail me=-
badgolferman
<126h5jj...@corp.supernews.com> wrote:
> John Corliss wrote:
> > Due to the amount of spam that's being posted to this group via
> > Google Groups and Google's unwillingness to respond to complaints,
> > from now on I'm going to be filtering out all messages posted via
> > that service. I know this probably doesn't mean anything to you
> > personally, but it will make the group more readable for me.
>
> I'm going to unblock Google Group posts. That NewsProxy program
> simply doesn't work all the time. Better to see everything. However,
> I will keep looking for a better way to filter newsgroups. Right now
> I'm looking at Gravity:
>
> http://mpgravity.sourceforge.net/
Also look at Xananews. I just created a filter to hide all Google
Groups posts using the following header and it works fine: X-Trace:
posting.google.com
I could prevent it from downloading also if I wish but at least hiding
it will allow later viewing.
Now, back to disabling the filter.
thomaswhite
> This is just a fix idea in JCs mind, he needs something to attack, and
> this time it is googlegroups he has chosen as the target of his anger.
If I was Corliss, I would be pissed off too.
At his Mom for dropping him on his pointed little head at birth.
thomaswhite
> I'm going to unblock Google Group posts.
Who gives a Flying Fuck what you do, Corliss?
nospam
>I see no difference in quality of posts from googlegroups and other
>news servers.
Then you must be blind.
--
John Corliss
> John Corliss wrote:
>
>> I'm going to unblock Google Group posts. That NewsProxy program simply
>> doesn't work all the time. Better to see everything. However, I will
>
> It isnt? Strangely, it works for me.
Ivan, I figured out what it was. I did like the NewsProxy F.A.Q.
recommended and asked my ISP for the news-server's overview fields they
use. They sent them to me, and the header field I was using to filter
out Google isn't among them. The program works I suppose, but because
none of the fields my ISP uses for overview are anything I can use, I
will be unable to filter out Google posts unless they add an overview
field I can use. Either that, or maybe I will be looking into
Microplanet Gravity a little more. I have it installed and although
there are a couple of things I don't like about it, it's otherwise
really quite an excellent news reader. I don't know if filtering is
limited to overview fields in that program or any other, but maybe
there's a way.
John Corliss
Thanks, I've found the site:
http://www.wilsonc.demon.co.uk/xananews.htm
and bookmarked it for later review.
»Q«
<news:126hk7j...@corp.supernews.com>:
> Ivan, I figured out what it was. I did like the NewsProxy F.A.Q.
> recommended and asked my ISP for the news-server's overview fields
> they use. They sent them to me, and the header field I was using
> to filter out Google isn't among them. The program works I
> suppose, but because none of the fields my ISP uses for overview
> are anything I can use, I will be unable to filter out Google
> posts unless they add an overview field I can use.
I thought NewsProxy 1.2x could filter on non-XOVER headers by using the
XHDR command to get them.
Anyway, Message-ID is almost certainly in your server's XOVER data, and
you can use that to filter Google Groups posts; kill anything with
googlegroups.com in the MID.
--
»Q«
Eugene Esterly III
You need to get a clue. And I do have a clue, I been partipating in
newsgroups for years, been on the Net since 1997.
Also remember, not everyone can use a newsreader. My ISP's newsgroup
doesn't even contain all of the messages in this & other newsgroups. I
used Usenet readers such as Xnews which was great but my ISP's
newsgroup server sucks, in fact, many of the current messages in this
newsgroup doesn't even appear.
So, in fact, it is you who needs to get a clue.
elaich
news:1147705647.8...@j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
> The main reason for a lot of people is the ever increasing lack of free
> news servers in the world.
So why not pay news.individual.net $1.95 a month for their excellent
service? That's as close to free as it gets anymore.
My take on Google Groups is similar to blinky's. There might be a few posts
you miss from people who really have a clue, but the vast majority of them
are top posting, clueless airheads. I don't mind at all missing a few posts
to filter out the static. I can also use Xnews to assign a high score to
certain posters so that they get through (which is how I read your post in
the first place, Roger.)
»Q«
> My take on Google Groups is similar to blinky's. There might be a
> few posts you miss from people who really have a clue, but the
> vast majority of them are top posting, clueless airheads. I don't
> mind at all missing a few posts to filter out the static.
I also agree with you and Blinky, for the most part.
> I can also use Xnews to assign a high score to certain posters so
> that they get through (which is how I read your post in the first
> place, Roger.)
I do that kind of whitelisting in some groups, but not this one. If
someone good is overlooked when setting up the whitelist, it's easy to
add him when you notice the replies to him.
Another approach would be to give GG posts a negative score, but not
kill them. Then if you've got a lot of time to kill, keep them in
view, but if not, have a key bound to "show articles with scores >=0".
(That's not how I handle GG posts, but it is how I handle Tramp
floods.)
--
»Q«
Roger Johansson
elaich wrote:
> > The main reason for a lot of people is the ever increasing lack of free
> > news servers in the world.
> So why not pay news.individual.net $1.95 a month for their excellent
> service? That's as close to free as it gets anymore.
It's not the money, I do not like giving my credit card info away too
often.
I also think information should be free, and paying for newsgroup
access would be to encourage the idea of paying for access. Such
solutions are not available to poor people in the world who have no
credit card, for example.
It would be like paying to be allowed to download freeware.
Not the kind of solution I want to support.
> I can also use Xnews to assign a high score to
> certain posters so that they get through (which is how I read your post in
> the first place, Roger.)
Thanks :-)
--
Roger J.
John Corliss
> John Corliss wrote:
>
>> recommended and asked my ISP for the news-server's overview fields
>> they use. They sent them to me, and the header field I was using
>> to filter out Google isn't among them. The program works I
>> suppose, but because none of the fields my ISP uses for overview
>> are anything I can use, I will be unable to filter out Google
>> posts unless they add an overview field I can use.
>
> I thought NewsProxy 1.2x could filter on non-XOVER headers by using the
> XHDR command to get them.
From the nFilter (another name for NewsProxy) F.A.Q. section 4.1
(http://www.nfilter.org/faq.html#4.1):
___________________________________________
4.1 nfilter isn't filtering properly
The most likely reason is that your news server is not giving you the
headers you request. Very often, a news server will not give you a
header unless it is in the overview.
To find a list of overview fields, connect to your news server on port
119 using telnet. Type "list overview.fmt" and press enter. You should
see a response like this:
list overview.fmt
215 Order of fields in overview database.
Subject:
From:
Date:
Message-ID:
References:
Bytes:
Lines:
Xref:full
You can filter on any of the headers listed.
4.2 Why don't newsgroup filters work?
This is usually the same reason as for question 4.1. However, there is a
work-around and that is to use the XREF header instead. The XREF header
contains the list of newsgroups that the mesage was stored in on your
news server. This may be slightly shorter than the original newsgroups
line if your server doesn't carry all the groups that the message was
posted to.
Also, the format of XREF is different in that it also contains the
number of the article in each group, so be sure to use wildcards in
between newsgroup names. For example:
* FLAG:XPOST-FLAME XREF:*flame*
___________________________________________
> Anyway, Message-ID is almost certainly in your server's XOVER data,
I requested that info from my ISP and you're right, it is.
> and you can use that to filter Google Groups posts; kill anything
> with googlegroups.com in the MID.
Thanks for that info. Don't know how I missed that one.
It's strange, some of the Google messages *were* getting blocked, but
not all of them. Not sure why NewsProxy is limited to using only header
overview fields. Too bad it can't filter on anything in the header.
--
Regards from John Corliss
I don't reply to trolls like Andy Mabbett or Doc (who uses sock puppets)
for instance. No adware, cdware, commercial software, crippleware,
Eugene Esterly III
Roger Johansson wrote:
> elaich wrote:
>
> > > The main reason for a lot of people is the ever increasing lack of free
> > > news servers in the world.
>
> > So why not pay news.individual.net $1.95 a month for their excellent
> > service? That's as close to free as it gets anymore.
>
> It's not the money, I do not like giving my credit card info away too
> often.
>
> I also think information should be free, and paying for newsgroup
> access would be to encourage the idea of paying for access. Such
> solutions are not available to poor people in the world who have no
> credit card, for example.
>
> It would be like paying to be allowed to download freeware.
> Not the kind of solution I want to support.
Well, the paying to download freeware did happen several years ago with
Completely Free Software which was a site devoted to freeware software
but they went members only which means that people have to pay to
access the downloads.
I also would like info to be free but, unfortuntely, in this world,
this will never happen.
seaside
Big Snip ....
>
>
> Heh. I'm afraid that isn't going to happen. I don't have to prove
> anything to anybody in order to justify filtering posts. This is a
> personal decision. See this page:
>
> http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
>
> which I totally agree with.
>
Sure it's a personal decision but why on earth do you have to make
it public, you don't readily accept others personal opinions, so
why force yours on others.
Ivan Tisljar
<jcor...@fake.invalid> wrote:
>really quite an excellent news reader. I don't know if filtering is
>limited to overview fields in that program or any other, but maybe
>there's a way.
I don't know what do you call "overview fields", but I look at headers
of a poster that I dislike, and then filter by some header information
that can differentiate that poster from any other.
For example, these are my headers:
Path: news3.t-com.hr!not-for-mail
From: Ivan Tisljar <_system_...@hi.htnet.hr>
Newsgroups: alt.comp.freeware
Subject: Re: O.T. I'm blocking all Google Groups posts from now on.
Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 18:25:42 +0200
Organization: 127.0.0.1
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <3rah62pvl77hqj1mv...@4ax.com>
References: <126bi90...@corp.supernews.com>
<126h5jj...@corp.supernews.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 194-152-209-70.adsl.net.t-com.hr
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: ss408.t-com.hr 1147710346 14490 194.152.209.70 (15 May 2006
16:25:46 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: ab...@t-com.hr
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 16:25:46 +0000 (UTC)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Pz8Baz00u1T1EhEVb2ka8YAc07E=
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846
X-NFilter: 1.2.0
Xref: news3.t-com.hr alt.comp.freeware:416813
Now, you can filter me out by nickname in news reader, but I can
change it. So, you have to find something that will identify me.
email? Could be changed, also.
But there is one thing - I am going through commercial news server,
this from t-com. Abuse could work.
But what to do with posting from free servers?
THIS:
hr.* drop NNTP-Posting-Host:*6rQ.user.aioe.org
It's the end of authentification of these users from free news server.
But Tramp doesn't change his nickname, so he is easily filtered out.
Al Klein
wrote:
>I also think information should be free, and paying for newsgroup
>access would be to encourage the idea of paying for access.
The information is completely free. Most companies that spend money
to maintain equipment and personnel want you to pay for access to
their equipment and personnel, whether it's the internet or your
plumber. You're not paying for the information any more than paying
for Word means that you're paying for a free .doc file that you read
in Word.
John Corliss
1. I made it public and provided info on how to do so, so that others
who feel likewise about Google spew can do the same thing.
2. Hey, who in HELL is forcing any opinion on ANYBODY?
Simply stating an opinion is NOT forcing it on other people. Or are you
trying to tell me that I don't have a right to state my opinion? How
would you like it if I said that YOU don't have a right to state your
opinion? Probably not very much, so get off of my back.
In_Parenthesis
@corp.supernews.com:
> seaside wrote:
>> John Corliss wrote:
>> Big Snip ....
>>>
>>> Heh. I'm afraid that isn't going to happen. I don't have to prove
>>> anything to anybody in order to justify filtering posts. This is a
>>> personal decision. See this page:
>>>
>>> http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
>>>
>>> which I totally agree with.
>>
>> Sure it's a personal decision but why on earth do you have to make
>> it public, you don't readily accept others personal opinions, so
>> why force yours on others.
>
> 1. I made it public and provided info on how to do so, so that others
> who feel likewise about Google spew can do the same thing.
>
> 2. Hey, who in HELL is forcing any opinion on ANYBODY?
>
> Simply stating an opinion is NOT forcing it on other people. Or are you
> trying to tell me that I don't have a right to state my opinion? How
> would you like it if I said that YOU don't have a right to state your
> opinion? Probably not very much, so get off of my back.
>
John,
Cool down... it is already warm enough here, don't need the extra heat
;-)
You just filter out anything you want, just like anyone else can do; and
you can post it here, or elsewhere, after all... this is an unmoderated
newsgroup. But IMO what we don't need is yet another lengthy flaming
thread, I hope you can agree with me on that point.
Jay
(IP)
thomaswhite
> Simply stating an opinion is NOT forcing it on other people. Or are you
> trying to tell me that I don't have a right to state my opinion?
Assholes must fart.
Continue.
Andy Mabbett
<jcor...@fake.invalid> writes
>> Sure it's a personal decision but why on earth do you have to make
>> it public, you don't readily accept others personal opinions, so
>> why force yours on others.
>
>1. I made it public and provided info on how to do so, so that others
>who feel likewise about Google spew can do the same thing.
Thank goodness you did: otherwise, we'd have all those people running
around like headless chickens, not knowing what to do.
--
Andy Mabbett
Say "NO!" to compulsory ID Cards: <http://www.no2id.net/>
Free Our Data: <http://www.freeourdata.org.uk>
Andy Mabbett
<jcor...@fake.invalid> writes
>I'm going to unblock Google Group posts.
This thread once again demonstrates your cluelessness.