Abuse report to individual.net - full copy of the email

[TomB]

Verbatim copy of the abuse report I sent to ab...@individual.net

=======================================================================
From tommy.b...@drumscum.be Sun Sep 25 21:19:18 2011
Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2011 21:19:18 +0200
From: Tommy Bongaerts <tommy.b...@drumscum.be>
To: ab...@individual.net
Subject: Abuse report concerning individual.net user with the handle 'Snit'
Message-ID: <2011092519...@drumscum.be>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
X-syserr: we just switched to Sprint.
X-URL: http://www.drumscum.be
X-mutt-bugs: Mutts have no bugs. They have fleas.
X-sysinfo: Linux 3.0.0-1-amd64 x86_64
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Status: RO
Content-Length: 6713
Lines: 149

Dear sir,

Hereby I would like to file an abuse report concerning the actions of
one of your users in the usenet group comp.os.linux.advocacy.

Here is a typical header from the user in question:

***
From use...@gallopinginsanity.com Sat Sep 17 11:37:39 2011
Path: s01-b013.ams2!cyclone02.ams2.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!voer-me.highwinds-media.com!feeder.news-service.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
Message-ID: <CA9970C1.A6674%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
From: Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Example of Herd Like Behavior: 16 Aug 2011
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 21:31:45 -0700
References: <CA8E6C60.A57C8%use...@gallopinginsanity.com> <j4b7c2$pjs$1...@dont-email.me> <rkmnj8-...@mordor.drumscum.be> <j4bqnr$far$1...@dont-email.me> <201109090...@usenet.drumscum.be> <j4dbrn$393$1...@speranza.aioe.org> <hdsjo4u...@news.eternal-september.org> <1elrj8-...@mordor.drumscum.be> <s6ju679ift9ij0g6e...@4ax.com> <CA94D027.A5FB0%use...@gallopinginsanity.com> <201109131...@usenet.drumscum.be> <j4t9b8$ejh$2...@dont-email.me> <CA977834.A63AB%use...@gallopinginsanity.com> <j4t9pt$gp8$1...@dont-email.me> <CA977E0A.A63BA%use...@gallopinginsanity.com> <j4tcgj$783$1...@dont-email.me> <201109152...@usenet.drumscum.be> <slrnj753ir.57...@netscape.net> <CA97E050.A64C3%use...@gallopinginsanity.com> <201109162...@usenet.drumscum.be> <slrnj77qql.5d...@netscape.net>
Lines: 44
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net fpznu4b0RuaJ6DP7RzuXVADOcr92+lxt85WmqJep2FWj76PFbM
Cancel-Lock: sha1:0a4r0EAJSTkNUxHVyCYb6spqfm4=
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.30.0.110427
Thread-Topic: Example of Herd Like Behavior: 16 Aug 2011
Thread-Index: Acx08rS7j1AUfaxxsk6meBQuVFzSjA==
X-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2011 04:31:50 UTC (s01-b013.ams2)
Xref: mordor.drumscum.be comp.os.linux.advocacy:11203
***

For the last couple of weeks, this user has been posting nearly 400
articles/week to the usenet group comp.os.linux.advocacy, as can be
seen from the following excepts from the weekly article logs I post to
the newsgroup:

***

Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2011 16:00:11 +0200
Total posts considered: 1,398 over 7 days
Earliest article: Sun Sep 18 16:01:39 2011
Latest article: Sun Sep 25 15:05:03 2011

============================================================================
Top 20 posters by number of articles
============================================================================
1: Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com>............................ : 319

***

Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2011 16:00:10 +0200
Total posts considered: 1,528 over 7 days
Earliest article: Sun Sep 18 16:00:03 2011
Latest article: Sun Sep 25 15:57:54 2011

============================================================================
Top 20 posters by number of articles
============================================================================
1: Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com>............................ : 339

***

Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2011 15:23:51 +0200
Total posts considered: 1,957 over 7 days
Earliest article: Sun Sep 4 15:45:02 2011
Latest article: Sun Sep 11 15:15:03 2011

============================================================================
Top 20 posters by number of articles
============================================================================
1: Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com>............................ : 400

***


Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2011 15:17:51 +0200
Total posts considered: 1,738 over 7 days
Earliest article: Sun Aug 28 15:20:02 2011
Latest article: Sun Sep 4 14:10:02 2011

============================================================================
Top 20 posters by number of articles
============================================================================
1: Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com>............................ : 354

***

Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2011 15:50:06 +0200
Total posts considered: 2,168 over 7 days
Earliest article: Sun Aug 21 22:00:02 2011
Latest article: Thu Aug 25 17:35:02 2011

============================================================================
Top 20 posters by number of articles
============================================================================
1: Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com>............................ : 458

***

Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 20:17:46 +0200
Total posts considered: 1,888 over 7 days
Earliest article: Thu Aug 18 19:15:04 2011
Latest article: Fri Aug 19 19:10:03 2011

============================================================================
Top 20 posters by number of articles
============================================================================
1: Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com>............................ : 306

***

As you can see, this one poster managed to post 2176 articles in just
6 weeks, which is an average of 362 articles/week, or a little over 2
articles/hour, 24/7. The main purpose of this steady flow of articles
is to disturb the regular discussions about Linux in this group, and
to libel the regulars in the group.

Even apart from the content of the postings I believe that posting
over 2000 articles in just 6 weeks can be considered spam.

Reasonable on-topic discussion in comp.os.linux.advocacy has been made
impossible thanks to this one single poster. Filtering his messages is
no longer feasible, as he generates a lot of replies from the
regulars, which clutters the on-topic discussions beyond control.

As a side note I would like to mention that this poster also regularly
claims that Richard Stallman, widely respected for being the man
behind the open source GNU operating system, is a supporter of sexual
abuse of children. This kind of behaviour can not be tolerated in a
GNU/Linux advocacy group, and has to be stopped. A lot of people
looking for information about GNU/Linux on usenet, end up in
comp.os.linux.advocacy (it is a very active usenet group), and it
cannot be tolerated that they are confronted with slander like this.
Please refer to the following posts for examples of this user posting
his slander about Richard Stallman:

<CAA4AED6.A7449%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
<CAA4BAFC.A745F%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
<CAA4ADEE.A7442%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>

I ask of you to consider withdrawing this person's access to usenet
via the individual.net service.

Best regards,
Tommy

--
"A raccoon tangled with a 23,000 volt line today. The results blacked
out 1400 homes and, of course, one raccoon."
-- Steel City News
=======================================================================


--
Good government never depends upon laws, but upon the personal qualities of
those who govern. The machinery of government is always subordinate to the
will of those who administer that machinery. The most important element of
government, therefore, is the method of choosing leaders.
-- Frank Herbert, "Children of Dune"

[Ender2070]

Scary image:

Freedom activists engaging in censorship

[Clogwog]

"TomB" <tommy.b...@gmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:201109261...@usenet.drumscum.be...

Hurray, another clueless twit made a fool of himself again!
Spamming?, you must be joking!
This "slander" thing "about Richard Stallman", does that have anything to do
with you?
Don't you know how to use a killfile?
If you don't want to see posts of Snit, just use it!

[RonB]

On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 10:34:46 -0700, Ender2070 wrote:

> Scary image:
>
> Freedom activists engaging in censorship

Right. It's like equating cockroach poison with censorship. Except
cockroaches are a bit smarter than Snit and his kiss-ass nyms.

--
RonB
Registered Linux User #498581
CentOS 5.6 or VectorLinux Deluxe 6.0
or Linux Mint 10

[Snit]

TomB stated in post 201109261...@usenet.drumscum.be on 9/26/11 10:24
AM:

> Verbatim copy of the abuse report I sent to ab...@individual.net

...

> Dear sir,
>
> Hereby I would like to file an abuse report concerning the actions of
> one of your users in the usenet group comp.os.linux.advocacy.
>
> Here is a typical header from the user in question:

...

> For the last couple of weeks, this user has been posting nearly 400
> articles/week to the usenet group comp.os.linux.advocacy, as can be
> seen from the following excepts from the weekly article logs I post to
> the newsgroup:

So you made an accusation and then support it by claiming you have said it.

And you mention nothing of Roy Schestowitz who has been shown to post as
much or more than I do, in the long run.

In other words: you are complaining about me posting the truth a lot. Not
about my content... but about how much I post. Got it.

...

> As you can see, this one poster managed to post 2176 articles in just
> 6 weeks, which is an average of 362 articles/week, or a little over 2
> articles/hour, 24/7. The main purpose of this steady flow of articles
> is to disturb the regular discussions about Linux in this group, and
> to libel the regulars in the group.

And here you are openly lying about me. I have no desire to disturb regular
discussions nor do I libel *anyone*. And notice your complete lack of
evidence of my doing so.

> Even apart from the content of the postings I believe that posting
> over 2000 articles in just 6 weeks can be considered spam.

So you think Roy spams COLA. Got it. Have you posted complaints to his
Usenet provider? I bet not.

> Reasonable on-topic discussion in comp.os.linux.advocacy has been made
> impossible thanks to this one single poster.

This is an out and out lie. I have been asking you and others to post in a
reasonable way. I have pointed out the attacks and other absurdities and
asked you to stop.

In other words: your "report" about me was to lie about me. No wonder no
examples of your accusations can be found - you are lying.

> Filtering his messages is no longer feasible, as he generates a lot of replies
> from the regulars, which clutters the on-topic discussions beyond control.

Again: I am the one asking for on-topic discussions. Your "report" on me
was a lie.

> As a side note I would like to mention that this poster also regularly
> claims that Richard Stallman, widely respected for being the man
> behind the open source GNU operating system, is a supporter of sexual
> abuse of children.

I have posted links to his own words. You claim I am twisting those words
but cannot say how.

> This kind of behaviour can not be tolerated in a GNU/Linux advocacy group, and
> has to be stopped.

Honesty "has to be stopped". Lovely.

> A lot of people looking for information about GNU/Linux on usenet, end up in
> comp.os.linux.advocacy (it is a very active usenet group), and it cannot be
> tolerated that they are confronted with slander like this.

There is nothing slanderous to quote Stallman's repulsive support of child
sexual abuse. Nothing.

> Please refer to the following posts for examples of this user posting his
> slander about Richard Stallman:
>
> <CAA4AED6.A7449%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
> <CAA4BAFC.A745F%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
> <CAA4ADEE.A7442%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
>
> I ask of you to consider withdrawing this person's access to usenet
> via the individual.net service.
>
> Best regards,
> Tommy

So you sent lies to my Usenet provider.

My guess: not one herd-member will call you out on your lies. Not one.

Which will just serve to prove me correct.

--
Herd Watch posts are posted by Snit.

[Ender2070]

I don't see slander, I see Stallman's own words.

[Snit]

RonB stated in post j5qdp1$7ov$6...@dont-email.me on 9/26/11 10:46 AM:

> On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 10:34:46 -0700, Ender2070 wrote:
>
>> Scary image:
>>
>> Freedom activists engaging in censorship
>
> Right. It's like equating cockroach poison with censorship. Except
> cockroaches are a bit smarter than Snit and his kiss-ass nyms.


--

[TomB]

On 2011-09-26, the following emerged from the brain of Ender2070:

> Scary image:
>
> Freedom activists engaging in censorship

And it was absolutely necessary to send this to my personal email
address too, yeah?

--
BOFH excuse #263:

It's stuck in the Web.

[chrisv]

Ender2070 wrote:

>I don't see

*plonk*

[Herd Watch]

Ender2070 stated in post
15909975.1832.1317059319475.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yqmw31 on 9/26/11
10:48 AM:

> I don't see slander, I see Stallman's own words.

Exactly. TomB is very, very upset I have compiled Stallman's quotes:

<http://trw.gallopinginsanity.com/2011/09/01/sex-scandals>

TomB has no response to truth... so he seeks to silence truth.

It is absurd.

[chrisv]

Herd Watch wrote:

>Exactly.

Plonk.

[Snit]

Ender2070 stated in post
57675.1980.1317058486709.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yqnv12 on 9/26/11
10:34 AM:

> Scary image:
>
> Freedom activists engaging in censorship

They are trying to silence ideas they do not like.

In a public forum.

Yes: TomB is trying to engage in censorship.


--
🙈🙉🙊

[Herd Watch]

chrisv stated in post kqf187li3rhbto5mb...@4ax.com on 9/26/11
11:07 AM:

> Herd Watch wrote:
>
>> Exactly.
>
> Plonk.
>

I have no problem with people kill filtering the herd watch posts.

The idea is I will post herd watch info to this name and on topic posts with
the Snit account. At least mostly. My Usenet program sucks and makes that
a pain.

[Herd Watch]

TomB stated in post 201109261...@usenet.drumscum.be on 9/26/11 11:00
AM:

> On 2011-09-26, the following emerged from the brain of Ender2070:
>> Scary image:
>>
>> Freedom activists engaging in censorship
>
> And it was absolutely necessary to send this to my personal email
> address too, yeah?

I can see this as being wrong - but why not respond to his comments?

You do not like that I post *ideas* you do not like but have no honest
response to... so you are working to silence me even if it means lying about
me (which you did).

Why?

Why are you so afraid of talking about Linux and OSS?

[Peter Köhlmann]

Herd Watch wrote:

> chrisv stated in post kqf187li3rhbto5mb...@4ax.com on
> 9/26/11 11:07 AM:
>
>> Herd Watch wrote:
>>
>>> Exactly.
>>
>> Plonk.
>>
> I have no problem with people kill filtering the herd watch posts.
>
> The idea is I will post herd watch info to this name and on topic posts
> with
> the Snit account. At least mostly. My Usenet program sucks and makes
> that a pain.
>

Another name to killfile for eternity, right, Snit Michael Glasser?

When will you criminal twit start actually working? Like, to support your
family.

You are the worst parasite ever to post on usenet. Your very existance is a
disgrace to humankind

And now, don't bother to answer, you retarded POS. I will not see it. Ever
again

[Kari Laine]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message

+100

--
Kari Laine

PICs, Displays,Relays - USB-SPI-I2C http://www.byvac.com
USB and FPGA boards http://www.ztex.de
I am just a happy customer
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJOgMgWAAoJEPjW/Kjfref2da8H+gPJvM6McxeQgCFn+M+QyO7h
PER1XgmINEn9YmCuAYBZYEnuoItxMhE5xODd/JO6wL6m7x0cqMVGz3i6esqzS9w8
akBqnhiWssodSC2OoMsp32wLTtC+BtG8LlIg1GpzYNG89vxW+mo8Hkc73UjYZA3h
UxZurZ5dy1pzQU28SBhZeaZxkb8Oqom0PhcLwEhfjX3rntJm1LfagE8EDTddsV1l
RjvZrSMxU2/awCrz2aW3LD0Yrbsk15SHlBZaYv1baF8iI0Iw7jw8+nmibFTLRfij
qGQMli0eeSC6MZu6Je7O/cz86hrj7+VoW/4tENtw5A4e1pBNDYo3uKUF6RseCPc=
=4YsE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[cc]

On Sep 26, 2:32 pm, Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlm...@t-online.de>
wrote:
> Herd Watch wrote:
> > chrisv stated in post kqf187li3rhbto5mbc6dmlm6r362dma...@4ax.com on

> > 9/26/11 11:07 AM:
>
> >> Herd Watch wrote:
>
> >>> Exactly.
>
> >> Plonk.
>
> > I have no problem with people kill filtering the herd watch posts.
>
> > The idea is I will post herd watch info to this name and on topic posts
> > with
> > the Snit account.  At least mostly.  My Usenet program sucks and makes
> > that a pain.
>
> Another name to killfile for eternity, right, Snit Michael Glasser?
>

How have you idiots not killfiled on his email address if you don't
want to read his posts? It's not like he's hiding (this particular
time) who he is when he posts as Herd Watch.

--
"And because OBVIOUSLY having the ability to take NOTHING is indeed a
first choice" - Hadron

[Clogwog]

"Peter Köhlmann" <peter-k...@t-online.de> schreef in bericht
news:j5qgfv$6a1$1...@dont-email.me...

Posted *directly* to Snit, which Dummkopf stalker denied doing!
Your lies are noted!
Message-ID: <j5qgfv$6a1$1...@dont-email.me>

b.t.w. start stalking Snit again, third party, like you're used to,
Kuntmann.
Same trick applied by chrisv. In the meanwhile you see and respond / rant to
almost every post of Snit, Hadron, FF and me, you lying hypocrite.
You are one of the filthiest posters I've ever encountered on Usenet.
And you have quite some competition in that regard, having filth like "turd"
chrisv, Willy Boaster , HPT as competing scum.

[A. van der Berigheid]

"chrisv" <chr...@nospam.invalid> schreef in bericht
news:dkf1871cis19c1ubi...@4ax.com...

> Ender2070 wrote:
>
>>I don't see
>
> *plonk*
>

*plonk*

[A. van der Berigheid]

"Kari Laine" <karit...@yahoo.com> schreef in bericht
news:T9SdnQ2ndKOLVR3T...@giganews.com...

- 101

[Clogwog]

"Ender2070" <blo...@gmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:15909975.1832.1317059319475.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yqmw31...

>I don't see slander, I see Stallman's own words.

Yup, full quotes!
Where is all the fuss about, I wonder?, maybe Tom is just trolling with
laughable rants.
Cola loons (cultists) tend to create their "heroes".
How an unwashed, toe-jam eating Stallman can be anyone's hero is beyond me!

[John]

On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 10:34:46 -0700 (PDT), Ender2070 wrote:

> Scary image:
>
> Freedom activists engaging in censorship

It's only freedom or choice when you choose what the herd wants you
to choose. Follow their ideology and you are in like flint. Oppose
them, even on a minor issue, and you will be attacked and labled a
troll.
It's very cult like which is probably why the Linux community has a
reputation of being a kind of cult.

As for slander or libel, I don't see anything other than Stallman's
own words. Snit's opinion is that because Stallman states these
beliefs Stallman must be participating in them. I disagree but
that's a minor point.

What I really find interesting is that for years, Roy Schestowitz
has pummeled this group with tens of thousands of messages and
until recently these were one way messages that he couldn't take the
time to reply or discuss.
He posts a 200 line message complete with links and so forth yet his
replies to the thread are one or two lines.
Can you say SPAM?

It ends up being a blatant Google seeding operation for his own
websites.

Did TomB or anyone else complain to Roy's ISP about this?

Of course not. TomB I believe admits he kill filed Roy's messages
and that's fair enough. He should do the same with snit or anyone
else he doesn't like reading.
Others had Roy kill filed as well and that's fine.

Complaining to a person's ISP with such a weak case just goes to
substantiate snit's claims concerning the herd trying to silence
him.

Like I've said before, snit is obsessed, he is, but Roy Schestowitz
is in a league all his own concerning obsessive behavior yet he gets
a pass.

One last item, I don't see snit being nasty and mean spirited
towards others. He is polite most of the time and simply is asking
for his accusers to provide evidence to substantiate their claims
against him.

In effect ironically it's really the herd that is libeling and
slandering snit not the other way around.

The never will though because it's easier to report snit and hope
his account gets tossed.

You guys have just proved snit's points concerning the herd.
And you've done an excellent job of it as well.

And BTW I have no horse in this race. I hate Linux and Windows and
OSX equally. Give me an Amiga or an Atari ST and I'm in heaven.

[TomB]

On 09/26/2011 08:18 PM, Herd Watch wrote:

8<

> You do not like that I post *ideas* you do not like but have no honest
> response to...

Your claim that Richard Stallman support sexual abuse of children is
false. It is a pathetic lie, conjured to troll this group and spread
misinformation. Nothing - I repeat: NOTHING - Stallman wrote on the
topic even /suggests/ that he supports sexual abuse of children.

You are a lying cunt, and your madness has to be stopped.

But again: if you think you're right in everything you say and do, you
have nothing to fear, right? Earlier tonight I got a reply from
individual.net that they have started their investigation. Surely they
will see what a nice individual you are, and leave your access to their
service intact, right?

Idiot.

[Clogwog]

"cc" <scat...@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:297e4785-42b9-4988...@j1g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...

On Sep 26, 2:32 pm, Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlm...@t-online.de>
wrote:
> Herd Watch wrote:
> > chrisv stated in post kqf187li3rhbto5mbc6dmlm6r362dma...@4ax.com on
> > 9/26/11 11:07 AM:
>
> >> Herd Watch wrote:
>
> >>> Exactly.
>
> >> Plonk.
>
> > I have no problem with people kill filtering the herd watch posts.
>
> > The idea is I will post herd watch info to this name and on topic posts
> > with
> > the Snit account. At least mostly. My Usenet program sucks and makes
> > that a pain.
>
> Another name to killfile for eternity, right, Snit Michael Glasser?
>
> How have you idiots not killfiled on his email address if you don't
> want to read his posts? It's not like he's hiding (this particular
> time) who he is when he posts as Herd Watch.

Quite simple, he's not filtering Snit, nor Hadron, FF, me or you.
Notice how Kuntmann, turd chrisv, Dumb Willy often brag about their so
called "filters" and yet reply third party to mask their lies!

[Herd Watch]

A. van der Berigheid stated in post 4e80cdc2$1...@news.x-privat.org on 9/26/11
12:08 PM:

Frankly I wish this whole BS attacks stuff would end... but now there is an
easy way to KF my responses to the attacks. Frankly that is the vast
majority of my posts.

[Herd Watch]

cc stated in post
297e4785-42b9-4988...@j1g2000yqj.googlegroups.com on 9/26/11
11:37 AM:

> On Sep 26, 2:32 pm, Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlm...@t-online.de>
> wrote:
>> Herd Watch wrote:
>>> chrisv stated in post kqf187li3rhbto5mbc6dmlm6r362dma...@4ax.com on
>>> 9/26/11 11:07 AM:
>>
>>>> Herd Watch wrote:
>>
>>>>> Exactly.
>>
>>>> Plonk.
>>
>>> I have no problem with people kill filtering the herd watch posts.
>>
>>> The idea is I will post herd watch info to this name and on topic posts
>>> with
>>> the Snit account.  At least mostly.  My Usenet program sucks and makes
>>> that a pain.
>>
>> Another name to killfile for eternity, right, Snit Michael Glasser?
>>
>
> How have you idiots not killfiled on his email address if you don't
> want to read his posts? It's not like he's hiding (this particular
> time) who he is when he posts as Herd Watch.

I am not hiding at all. My sig is very clear and the email address is the
same.

[Big Steel]

On 9/26/2011 2:32 PM, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
> Herd Watch wrote:
>
>> chrisv stated in post kqf187li3rhbto5mb...@4ax.com on
>> 9/26/11 11:07 AM:
>>
>>> Herd Watch wrote:
>>>
>>>> Exactly.
>>>
>>> Plonk.
>>>
>> I have no problem with people kill filtering the herd watch posts.
>>
>> The idea is I will post herd watch info to this name and on topic posts
>> with
>> the Snit account. At least mostly. My Usenet program sucks and makes
>> that a pain.
>>
>
> Another name to killfile for eternity, right, Snit Michael Glasser?

Are you going to live for an eternity Kholtinkle? Who cares Kholtinkle?
Who cares? :)

[Ender2070]

>As you can see, this one poster managed to post 2176 articles in just
>6 weeks, which is an average of 362 articles/week, or a little over 2
>articles/hour, 24/7. The main purpose of this steady flow of articles
>is to disturb the regular discussions about Linux in this group, and
to libel the regulars in the group.
>

>Even apart from the content of the postings I believe that posting
>over 2000 articles in just 6 weeks can be considered spam.

What is Techrights then? Spam capitol of the world? Each article gets sent to twitter, identica and sometimes here. I've made jokes about how Roy outputs as much as Shakespeare (who has been suspected of being a pseudo-name for a number of writers).

[Herd Watch]

John stated in post j5qjcr$vlu$1...@speranza.aioe.org on 9/26/11 12:22 PM:

> On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 10:34:46 -0700 (PDT), Ender2070 wrote:
>
>> Scary image:
>>
>> Freedom activists engaging in censorship
>
> It's only freedom or choice when you choose what the herd wants you
> to choose. Follow their ideology and you are in like flint. Oppose
> them, even on a minor issue, and you will be attacked and labled a
> troll.
> It's very cult like which is probably why the Linux community has a
> reputation of being a kind of cult.

While such herd-like behavior is not limited to COLA, it is also not the
norm in the Linux or OSS community.

I have never seen it as extreme as it is in COLA.

> As for slander or libel, I don't see anything other than Stallman's
> own words. Snit's opinion is that because Stallman states these
> beliefs Stallman must be participating in them. I disagree but
> that's a minor point.

No: I do not say he *must* be participating in them. Not at all. I say he
*might* and that his comments make it seem likely. I think he should be
investigated but I do not think he should be railroaded or deemed guilty of
*anything* without strong and direct evidence. Stallman's comments are not
such evidence - not at all.

With that said, and in that context, anyone who defends child sexual abuse
is putting themselves in the spotlight to be investigated for such
activities. This is similar to if someone openly supports terrorist
invasions or is openly supporting the murder of someone, they should be
investigated (and even such support might be deemed a crime - though I do
not think Stallman's comments rise to that level).

> What I really find interesting is that for years, Roy Schestowitz
> has pummeled this group with tens of thousands of messages and
> until recently these were one way messages that he couldn't take the
> time to reply or discuss.
> He posts a 200 line message complete with links and so forth yet his
> replies to the thread are one or two lines.
> Can you say SPAM?

TomB has said he saw them as such... but I have not seen his copy of the
email he sent to Roy's Usenet provider to complain about the spam.

Because, surely, TomB never sent such.

> It ends up being a blatant Google seeding operation for his own
> websites.
>
> Did TomB or anyone else complain to Roy's ISP about this?

No. Not anyone in the herd *or* anyone else. The herd is far more
vindictive and immoral than those they attack.

> Of course not. TomB I believe admits he kill filed Roy's messages
> and that's fair enough. He should do the same with snit or anyone
> else he doesn't like reading.

Agreed. I am accused of working to get around kill filters - but other than
the use of this name, which is *obviously* me and not designed for that
reason, I do not use socks.

> Others had Roy kill filed as well and that's fine.
>
> Complaining to a person's ISP with such a weak case just goes to
> substantiate snit's claims concerning the herd trying to silence
> him.

Exactly.

> Like I've said before, snit is obsessed, he is, but Roy Schestowitz
> is in a league all his own concerning obsessive behavior yet he gets
> a pass.

Roy is far, far beyond me. Look at his activity here, in his IRC channels
and his website. Yes, I have a website, too... but he posts several updates
a *day*. I simply cannot keep up with his lies.

> One last item, I don't see snit being nasty and mean spirited
> towards others. He is polite most of the time and simply is asking
> for his accusers to provide evidence to substantiate their claims
> against him.

Exactly. And they *never* do.

> In effect ironically it's really the herd that is libeling and
> slandering snit not the other way around.

Exactly true.

> The never will though because it's easier to report snit and hope
> his account gets tossed.

Also exactly true.

> You guys have just proved snit's points concerning the herd.
> And you've done an excellent job of it as well.
>
> And BTW I have no horse in this race. I hate Linux and Windows and
> OSX equally. Give me an Amiga or an Atari ST and I'm in heaven.

[Clogwog]

"Big Steel" <bigon...@big1zzzzz.com> schreef in bericht
news:86-dnd6gyoJ1Th3T...@earthlink.com...

ROFL , Kuntkopf is already braindead for eternity!

[John]

On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 12:37:04 -0700 (PDT), Ender2070 wrote:


> What is Techrights then? Spam capitol of the world? Each article gets sent to twitter,
>identica and sometimes here.
>I've made jokes about how Roy outputs as much as Shakespeare
>(who has been suspected of being a pseudo-name for a number of writers).

If it keeps up he's going to make Webster's Dictionary.

Look up the word SPAM and it will say "See Schestowitz".

[Herd Watch]

Ender2070 stated in post
15212366.3805.1317065824338.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yqma37 on 9/26/11
12:37 PM:

TomB loathes how I have shown his clear ties to the herd... and how the herd
clearly is what it is (despite their own denials). Further, TomB loathes
how I have quoted Stallman from his own site. Worse yet for TomB, he knows
he has no *honest* response.

So he tries to silence me by *lying* to my Usenet provider.

And yet none of the herd will call out TomB for lying about me nor for
trying to have me censured from a public forum merely for presenting clearly
true comments he happens to not like.

He cannot help but prove me right about him and his group.

[Herd Watch]

John stated in post j5qkjt$37v$1...@speranza.aioe.org on 9/26/11 12:42 PM:

And yet TomB did not try to have Roy's account banned. He did not try to
censor Roy.

He is a complete hypocrite.

[Herd Watch]

TomB stated in post jvv6l8-...@mordor.drumscum.be on 9/26/11 12:21 PM:

> On 09/26/2011 08:18 PM, Herd Watch wrote:
>
> 8<
>
>> You do not like that I post *ideas* you do not like but have no honest
>> response to...
>
> Your claim that Richard Stallman support sexual abuse of children is
> false.

If you think so then *show* it. Here is the evidence against him:

<http://trw.gallopinginsanity.com/2011/09/01/sex-scandals>

These are his own words... with links back to his own site. There is no
"twisting" by me nor removal of any relevant context.

But you have no real argument - *nothing* to counter the *message*, so you
attack the *messenger*. See below for an example:

> It is a pathetic lie, conjured to troll this group and spread
> misinformation. Nothing - I repeat: NOTHING - Stallman wrote on the
> topic even /suggests/ that he supports sexual abuse of children.
>
> You are a lying cunt, and your madness has to be stopped.
>
> But again: if you think you're right in everything you say and do, you
> have nothing to fear, right? Earlier tonight I got a reply from
> individual.net that they have started their investigation. Surely they
> will see what a nice individual you are, and leave your access to their
> service intact, right?
>
> Idiot.

Your argument that you are fine making false accusations because you do not
think they can hurt some is absurd. But notice: you said not one thing to
counter my claim... you just deemed it a "lie" and attacked the messenger.

As your herd demands you do.

Why are you so afraid to actually discuss the message? Why attack the
messenger? You simply are proving me right.

[Peter Köhlmann]

Clogwog wrote:

> "Peter Köhlmann" <peter-k...@t-online.de> schreef in bericht
> news:j5qgfv$6a1$1...@dont-email.me...
>> Herd Watch wrote:
>>
>>> chrisv stated in post kqf187li3rhbto5mb...@4ax.com on
>>> 9/26/11 11:07 AM:
>>>
>>>> Herd Watch wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Exactly.
>>>>
>>>> Plonk.
>>>>
>>> I have no problem with people kill filtering the herd watch posts.
>>>
>>> The idea is I will post herd watch info to this name and on topic posts
>>> with
>>> the Snit account. At least mostly. My Usenet program sucks and makes
>>> that a pain.
>>>
>>
>> Another name to killfile for eternity, right, Snit Michael Glasser?
>>
>> When will you criminal twit start actually working? Like, to support your
>> family.
>>
>> You are the worst parasite ever to post on usenet. Your very existance is
>> a
>> disgrace to humankind
>>
>> And now, don't bother to answer, you retarded POS. I will not see it.
>> Ever again
>>
>>
>
> Posted *directly* to Snit, which Dummkopf stalker denied doing!
> Your lies are noted!

Oh, another clo9gretard post which is rife with stupidity.

Pray tell, you brainless cretin, how do you killfile a handle which is new?

You are really clogretard, and it shows. Hadron is most likely your twin

[John]

All of this hostility seems to have started right at about the time
TomB started regularly participating in Roy's channel.

I have to wonder if Tom's marching orders from Roy are to harass
snit and get him tossed.
After all, two weeks ago Roy wouldn't even ban snit but had one of
his lackeys do it instead.

Roy prefers that others do his dirty work for him so he can remain
squeaky clean.

Kind of like Charles Manson did.

[Herd Watch]

John stated in post j5qlld$63q$1...@speranza.aioe.org on 9/26/11 1:00 PM:

TomB clearly takes his queues from what the herd wants... if that is
directly from Roy or not I do not know.

> After all, two weeks ago Roy wouldn't even ban snit but had one of
> his lackeys do it instead.

Now Roy is doing it himself... and has gone back on his invitation to have
me on his show.

> Roy prefers that others do his dirty work for him so he can remain
> squeaky clean.
>
> Kind of like Charles Manson did.

Pretty much... though I would not say the actions of the herd, as wrong as
they are, rise anywhere near to that level.

[Clogwog]

"Peter Köhlmann" <peter-k...@t-online.de> schreef in bericht

news:j5qlk9$cld$1...@dont-email.me...

Just plonk it *unread* and STFU, Dummes Huhn, like your butt buddy turd
chrisv is always bragging about!

>
> You are really clogretard, and it shows. Hadron is most likely your twin
>

You would not know how to handle a killfile even if it was rammed, fist up
your loose anal sphincter, sent shivering pains up your spine, and made your
gormless-looking eyes pop out of your tiny pin Cherman head.

[Lt Cmdr. Gaston J. Feeblebunny]

"Clogwog" <clo...@anon.eu> schreef in bericht
news:201109262016...@smtp.cobalt.loc...

Classic erroneous presupposition, "Köhlmann"
Suffering from attribution problems?

>>
> You would not know how to handle a killfile even if it was rammed, fist up
> your loose anal sphincter, sent shivering pains up your spine, and made
> your gormless-looking eyes pop out of your tiny pin Cherman head.
>

There is no such "Dummes Huhn" nym in COLA. "Clogwog"!
And yet again both of you haven't wrote about Linux!

[Clogwog]

"John" <john...@allmail.net> schreef in bericht
news:j5qlld$63q$1...@speranza.aioe.org...

Isn't he kept in confinement for life next to that convicted murderer Hans
Reiser?

[Herd Watch]

Black Dragon stated in post 51ncpa....@news.alt.net on 9/26/11 1:27 PM:

> TomB wrote:
>
>> Verbatim copy of the abuse report I sent to ab...@individual.net
>
> [...]
>
>> I ask of you to consider withdrawing this person's access to usenet
>> via the individual.net service.
>
> http://individual.net/rules.php
>
> What part, or parts, of individual.net's use policy are allegedly being
> violated?

Sender Address: my address is valid. TomB has even complained about people
using it.

Netiquette: I certainly follow basic rules of netiquette far, far better
than Peter K. and many others in COLA.

No SPAM: I do not send the same message to a large number of groups.

No Binaries: Never. Not once.

Size Limit: Never gone over.

No Control Messages: None.

No Third Party Cancels: None.

Redistribution of News Articles: Never done so.

No Redistribution of Account Information: Never done so.

Observing the law and regulations: Never broken any I know of.

System Integrity and Resource Consumption: Never tried to disrupt anything
of the kind.

Seems I follow all of the rules. TomB is hoping his complaints - along with
others from the herd - will be enough to have me censured. He knows that
most providers do not want to get in the middle and will ban people if they
simply get a number of complaints, no matter how dishonest.

Carroll used to do the same thing - say his false accusations cannot harm an
innocent person. Just insane and clearly not true.

[Sneaky Weasel]

On 09/26/2011 10:24 AM, TomB wrote:
> Verbatim copy of the abuse report I sent to ab...@individual.net
>

> =======================================================================
> From tommy.b...@drumscum.be Sun Sep 25 21:19:18 2011
> Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2011 21:19:18 +0200
> From: Tommy Bongaerts<tommy.b...@drumscum.be>
> To: ab...@individual.net
> Subject: Abuse report concerning individual.net user with the handle 'Snit'
> Message-ID:<2011092519...@drumscum.be>
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Disposition: inline
> X-syserr: we just switched to Sprint.
> X-URL: http://www.drumscum.be
> X-mutt-bugs: Mutts have no bugs. They have fleas.
> X-sysinfo: Linux 3.0.0-1-amd64 x86_64
> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
> Status: RO
> Content-Length: 6713
> Lines: 149
>
> Dear sir,
>
> Hereby I would like to file an abuse report concerning the actions of
> one of your users in the usenet group comp.os.linux.advocacy.
>
> Here is a typical header from the user in question:
>
> ***
> From use...@gallopinginsanity.com Sat Sep 17 11:37:39 2011
> Path: s01-b013.ams2!cyclone02.ams2.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!voer-me.highwinds-media.com!feeder.news-service.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
> Message-ID:<CA9970C1.A6674%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
> From: Snit<use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
> Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
> Subject: Example of Herd Like Behavior: 16 Aug 2011
> Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 21:31:45 -0700
> References:<CA8E6C60.A57C8%use...@gallopinginsanity.com> <j4b7c2$pjs$1...@dont-email.me> <rkmnj8-...@mordor.drumscum.be> <j4bqnr$far$1...@dont-email.me> <201109090...@usenet.drumscum.be> <j4dbrn$393$1...@speranza.aioe.org> <hdsjo4u...@news.eternal-september.org> <1elrj8-...@mordor.drumscum.be> <s6ju679ift9ij0g6e...@4ax.com> <CA94D027.A5FB0%use...@gallopinginsanity.com> <201109131...@usenet.drumscum.be> <j4t9b8$ejh$2...@dont-email.me> <CA977834.A63AB%use...@gallopinginsanity.com> <j4t9pt$gp8$1...@dont-email.me> <CA977E0A.A63BA%use...@gallopinginsanity.com> <j4tcgj$783$1...@dont-email.me> <201109152...@usenet.drumscum.be> <slrnj753ir.57...@netscape.net> <CA97E050.A64C3%use...@gallopinginsanity.com> <201109162...@usenet.drumscum.be> <slrnj77qql.5d...@netscape.net>
> Lines: 44
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="UTF-8"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> X-Trace: individual.net fpznu4b0RuaJ6DP7RzuXVADOcr92+lxt85WmqJep2FWj76PFbM
> Cancel-Lock: sha1:0a4r0EAJSTkNUxHVyCYb6spqfm4=
> User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.30.0.110427
> Thread-Topic: Example of Herd Like Behavior: 16 Aug 2011
> Thread-Index: Acx08rS7j1AUfaxxsk6meBQuVFzSjA==
> X-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2011 04:31:50 UTC (s01-b013.ams2)
> Xref: mordor.drumscum.be comp.os.linux.advocacy:11203
> ***
>
> For the last couple of weeks, this user has been posting nearly 400
> articles/week to the usenet group comp.os.linux.advocacy, as can be
> seen from the following excepts from the weekly article logs I post to
> the newsgroup:
>
> ***
>
> Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2011 16:00:11 +0200
> Total posts considered: 1,398 over 7 days
> Earliest article: Sun Sep 18 16:01:39 2011
> Latest article: Sun Sep 25 15:05:03 2011
>
> ============================================================================
> Top 20 posters by number of articles
> ============================================================================
> 1: Snit<use...@gallopinginsanity.com>............................ : 319
>
> ***
>
> Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2011 16:00:10 +0200
> Total posts considered: 1,528 over 7 days
> Earliest article: Sun Sep 18 16:00:03 2011
> Latest article: Sun Sep 25 15:57:54 2011
>
> ============================================================================
> Top 20 posters by number of articles
> ============================================================================
> 1: Snit<use...@gallopinginsanity.com>............................ : 339
>
> ***
>
> Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2011 15:23:51 +0200
> Total posts considered: 1,957 over 7 days
> Earliest article: Sun Sep 4 15:45:02 2011
> Latest article: Sun Sep 11 15:15:03 2011
>
> ============================================================================
> Top 20 posters by number of articles
> ============================================================================
> 1: Snit<use...@gallopinginsanity.com>............................ : 400
>
> ***
>
>
> Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2011 15:17:51 +0200
> Total posts considered: 1,738 over 7 days
> Earliest article: Sun Aug 28 15:20:02 2011
> Latest article: Sun Sep 4 14:10:02 2011
>
> ============================================================================
> Top 20 posters by number of articles
> ============================================================================
> 1: Snit<use...@gallopinginsanity.com>............................ : 354
>
> ***
>
> Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2011 15:50:06 +0200
> Total posts considered: 2,168 over 7 days
> Earliest article: Sun Aug 21 22:00:02 2011
> Latest article: Thu Aug 25 17:35:02 2011
>
> ============================================================================
> Top 20 posters by number of articles
> ============================================================================
> 1: Snit<use...@gallopinginsanity.com>............................ : 458
>
> ***
>
> Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 20:17:46 +0200
> Total posts considered: 1,888 over 7 days
> Earliest article: Thu Aug 18 19:15:04 2011
> Latest article: Fri Aug 19 19:10:03 2011
>
> ============================================================================
> Top 20 posters by number of articles
> ============================================================================
> 1: Snit<use...@gallopinginsanity.com>............................ : 306
>
> ***

>
> As you can see, this one poster managed to post 2176 articles in just
> 6 weeks, which is an average of 362 articles/week, or a little over 2
> articles/hour, 24/7. The main purpose of this steady flow of articles
> is to disturb the regular discussions about Linux in this group, and
> to libel the regulars in the group.
>
> Even apart from the content of the postings I believe that posting
> over 2000 articles in just 6 weeks can be considered spam.
>

> Reasonable on-topic discussion in comp.os.linux.advocacy has been made
> impossible thanks to this one single poster. Filtering his messages is
> no longer feasible, as he generates a lot of replies from the
> regulars, which clutters the on-topic discussions beyond control.
>
> As a side note I would like to mention that this poster also regularly
> claims that Richard Stallman, widely respected for being the man
> behind the open source GNU operating system, is a supporter of sexual
> abuse of children. This kind of behaviour can not be tolerated in a
> GNU/Linux advocacy group, and has to be stopped. A lot of people
> looking for information about GNU/Linux on usenet, end up in
> comp.os.linux.advocacy (it is a very active usenet group), and it
> cannot be tolerated that they are confronted with slander like this.
> Please refer to the following posts for examples of this user posting
> his slander about Richard Stallman:
>
> <CAA4AED6.A7449%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
> <CAA4BAFC.A745F%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
> <CAA4ADEE.A7442%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>

>
> I ask of you to consider withdrawing this person's access to usenet
> via the individual.net service.
>

> Best regards,
> Tommy
>

To me this is crossing a line BIG TIME. Sure Snit is a lying piece of
crap. So? Kill file the ass or shove his lies down his throat but do not
contact someone's usenet provider because you can't bring yourself to do
either. What the hell were you thinking?

Snit says we are a herd. Homer recently called Roy out on stuff he did
not agree with and now I am calling you out. You are wrong to do this.
There is no excuse to try to get someone banned from an open usenet
forum even if they are as pathetic and obsessed as Snit is. You should
contact the provider back and let them know you were wrong to send in
such a letter and to make such a request.

[7]

TomB wrote:


> As you can see, this one poster managed to post 2176 articles in just
> 6 weeks, which is an average of 362 articles/week, or a little over 2
> articles/hour, 24/7. The main purpose of this steady flow of articles
> is to disturb the regular discussions about Linux in this group, and
> to libel the regulars in the group.

Trolling is not freedom of speech and snot and fellow trolls know it.
Well done for you to get these commercially sponsored trolls packing.

You can also mention snot has posted numerous blank posts
to keep up the pressure on COLA newsgroup to pack it full with incessant off
topic spam, spewing and trolling which has invited the anger of USENET users
of COLA.

[Herd Watch]

7 stated in post DF5gq.1725$7E7...@newsfe30.ams2 on 9/26/11 1:56 PM:

I support your right to troll, as you do above, in a public forum.

The bottom line: TomB could not refute my comments. He found them
irrefutable so he is trying to censure me from a public forum. And he has
shown he is willing to lie to people, even those outside of COLA, to do so.

His actions are reprehensible.

[Ender2070]

It's easy to say Trolling is not freedom of speech, then change the definition of trolling to be things that other people do not.

[Herd Watch]

Ender2070 stated in post
23522400.548.1317071395648.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yqcr11 on 9/26/11
2:09 PM:

> It's easy to say Trolling is not freedom of speech, then change the definition
> of trolling to be things that other people do not.

Exactly.

I do not do what many of the herd do: I do not track down personal info, I
do not make up stories about their personal lives... and I tend to stick to
talking about the message and not the messenger.

I wish the herd could rise to that same level.

[Snit]

Sneaky Weasel stated in post 4e80...@news.x-privat.org on 9/26/11 1:48 PM:

> On 09/26/2011 10:24 AM, TomB wrote:
>> Verbatim copy of the abuse report I sent to ab...@individual.net

...

>
> To me this is crossing a line BIG TIME. Sure Snit is a lying piece of
> crap. So? Kill file the ass or shove his lies down his throat but do not
> contact someone's usenet provider because you can't bring yourself to do
> either. What the hell were you thinking?
>
> Snit says we are a herd. Homer recently called Roy out on stuff he did
> not agree with and now I am calling you out. You are wrong to do this.
> There is no excuse to try to get someone banned from an open usenet
> forum even if they are as pathetic and obsessed as Snit is. You should
> contact the provider back and let them know you were wrong to send in
> such a letter and to make such a request.

While I disagree with much of what you say, thank you for standing up for
what is right. And thank you for speaking out against the herd.


--
🙈🙉🙊

[Peter Köhlmann]

Sneaky Weasel wrote:

>
> To me this is crossing a line BIG TIME. Sure Snit is a lying piece of
> crap. So? Kill file the ass or shove his lies down his throat but do not
> contact someone's usenet provider because you can't bring yourself to do
> either. What the hell were you thinking?
>
> Snit says we are a herd. Homer recently called Roy out on stuff he did
> not agree with and now I am calling you out. You are wrong to do this.

No, it is absolutely the right thing to do

> There is no excuse to try to get someone banned from an open usenet
> forum even if they are as pathetic and obsessed as Snit is. You should
> contact the provider back and let them know you were wrong to send in
> such a letter and to make such a request.

He should additionally contact Yavapai College and Prescott Police
department.
*And* send Michael Glassers wife an email with a short report about her
useless husband

After all, she is paying for his abusing the newsgroups. And could too be
legally responsible for his slander because of that

What Snit Michael Glasser is doing is inexcuseable. He should pay for it

[7]

Sneaky Weasel wrote:


> To me this is crossing a line BIG TIME.

No chance in hell legally or morally.

Trolling is NOT freedom of speech.
Particularly those that are sponsored by commercial entities like Appil and
micosahft crocporation.
Trolling interferes with the rights of those who have freedom of speech
and care to exercise it responsibly.
Troll have had their day in courts and
have set precedents in courts and they now invite prison
sentences and court fines for trolling because trolling
has been determined to be not free speech.

Prison sentence being handed out to troll here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-14897948

Stories like this
http://www.11alive.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=173964
set a precedent which means every asstroturfer is due for a minimum
$400,000 fine.

[chrisv]

7 wrote:

>Sneaky Weasel wrote:
>>
>> To me this is crossing a line BIG TIME.

Who cares what you think, troll?

>No chance in hell legally or morally.

In this case I think it appropriate. Almost 400 posts per week? Come
on. Not to mention the vile attacks on the advocates because we don't
share a disgusting troll's interpretation of what someone said.

[7]

Ender2070 wrote:

> It's easy to say Trolling is not freedom of speech, then change the
> definition of trolling to be things that other people do not.

Trolls are trolls if they can't abide by the rule of law
and beg for court fines and prison sentences to be handed
out because they choose to break the law for the express
purpose of profiting from breaking the law.

Not one person will stop this troll from posting his trolls
in an appropriate forum.

Posting his trolls here is breaking
the rules here about trolling.

No troll is above the law.

[Ender2070]

True story: When I was a RMS advocate SirSane had created an image with me and RMS in it. SirSane had super imposed a joint on RMS's face and I had e-mailed RMS about it. RMS brushed it off saying there isn't anything wrong with anyone who wants to smoke pot.

[Homer]

Verily I say unto thee that Sneaky Weasel spake thusly:

> On 09/26/2011 10:24 AM, TomB wrote:
>> Verbatim copy of the abuse report I sent to ab...@individual.net

[...]

> To me this is crossing a line BIG TIME. Sure Snit is a lying piece of
> crap. So?

So making false accusations of paedophilia is a criminal offence,
cyberstalking is a criminal offence, persistently posting abusive,
off-topic and antithetical diatribes (i.e. trolling) is a violation of
the group's charter and Usenet provider's TOS, and thus a LART is
entirely justified, indeed it's the very least one should expect under
the circumstances. Frankly I think he should be arrested, never mind
LARTed.

> Snit says we are a herd.

I don't give a damn what Snit says. He's an abusive troll and he doesn't
belong in COLA. Period.

--
K. | A lively young damsel named Menzies
http://slated.org | Inquired: "Do you know what this thenzies?"
Fedora 8 (Werewolf) on šky | Her aunt, with a gasp, replied: "It's a wasp,
kernel 2.6.31.5, up 126 days | And you're holding the end where the stenzies."

[TomB]

On 2011-09-26, the following emerged from the brain of Black Dragon:

> TomB wrote:
>
>> Verbatim copy of the abuse report I sent to ab...@individual.net
>
> [...]
>

>> I ask of you to consider withdrawing this person's access to usenet
>> via the individual.net service.
>

> http://individual.net/rules.php
>
> What part, or parts, of individual.net's use policy are allegedly
> being violated?

I don't care about their specific rules. All I care for is that Snit
keeps accusing the man behind the free software movement, respected
and honoured by many, of supporting sexual abuse of children. You do
*NOT* do that, and especially not in a usenet group dedicated to the
advocacy of GNU/Linux.

Do /you/ think that's normal and moral behaviour?

And then there's also the highly disrupting nature of about everything
he posts, and of course the massive post count.

--
Freedom of the press is for those who happen to own one.

[TomB]

On 2011-09-26, the following emerged from the brain of Sneaky Weasel:

8<

> To me this is crossing a line BIG TIME. Sure Snit is a lying piece
> of crap. So? Kill file the ass or shove his lies down his throat but
> do not contact someone's usenet provider because you can't bring
> yourself to do either. What the hell were you thinking?

So reporting scum to their ISP is crossing a line big time, but
accusing the man behind the Free software movement of supporting
sexual abuse of children, yes, even go as far as suggesting that
there's a good chance that he actually abused children, is not
crossing a line big time?

Odd morals you have, Mr. Weasel.

> Snit says we are a herd. Homer recently called Roy out on stuff he
> did not agree with and now I am calling you out. You are wrong to do
> this. There is no excuse to try to get someone banned from an open
> usenet forum even if they are as pathetic and obsessed as Snit is.
> You should contact the provider back and let them know you were
> wrong to send in such a letter and to make such a request.

Yeah, in your dreams.

--
McDonald's -- Because you're worth it.

[Herd Watch]

chrisv stated in post ngr187tcjqdgt5ve7...@4ax.com on 9/26/11
2:31 PM:

Roy's posting history proves you do not mind the number of posts.
And what attacks? You cannot quote any. If attacks bothered you then you
would want your own posts to be censored.

[Kolyder]

In article <jvv6l8-...@mordor.drumscum.be>

TomB <tommy.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 09/26/2011 08:18 PM, Herd Watch wrote:
>
> 8<
>
> > You do not like that I post *ideas* you do not like but have no honest
> > response to...
>
> Your claim that Richard Stallman support sexual abuse of children is

> false. It is a pathetic lie, conjured to troll this group and spread

> misinformation. Nothing - I repeat: NOTHING - Stallman wrote on the
> topic even /suggests/ that he supports sexual abuse of children.

"I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms
children. The arguments that it causes harm seem to be based on
cases which aren’t voluntary, which are then stretched by
parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is
maturing."

Your defense implies that you agree with Stallman. Are you
hiding something?

> You are a lying cunt, and your madness has to be stopped.

Nobody likes to hear bad news. Especially liberals. You
probably voted for Obama too.

[Herd Watch]

TomB stated in post 201109270...@usenet.drumscum.be on 9/26/11 3:31
PM:

> On 2011-09-26, the following emerged from the brain of Black Dragon:
>> TomB wrote:
>>
>>> Verbatim copy of the abuse report I sent to ab...@individual.net
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> I ask of you to consider withdrawing this person's access to usenet
>>> via the individual.net service.
>>
>> http://individual.net/rules.php
>>
>> What part, or parts, of individual.net's use policy are allegedly
>> being violated?
>
> I don't care about their specific rules.

Right. You care about censoring facts you do not like.

> All I care for is that Snit keeps accusing the man behind the free software
> movement, respected and honoured by many, of supporting sexual abuse of
> children.

You hate that I quote his repulsive comments. Remember: I have done nothing
but quote him and link back to his own pages where he says these things.

> You do *NOT* do that, and especially not in a usenet group dedicated
> to the advocacy of GNU/Linux.

Honestly is not allowed in COLA. Got it.

> Do /you/ think that's normal and moral behaviour?

So why not try to ban Roy for his *lies* about Jobs' health? You want to
ban truth - but not lies.

This proves me correct about you.

> And then there's also the highly disrupting nature of about everything
> he posts, and of course the massive post count.

Sad how you think truth is "disruptive" of your lies. And Roy proves post
count is not a reason for your attempts to censure me.

[Herd Watch]

Homer stated in post eu97l8-...@sky.matrix on 9/26/11 3:11 PM:

> Verily I say unto thee that Sneaky Weasel spake thusly:
>> On 09/26/2011 10:24 AM, TomB wrote:
>>> Verbatim copy of the abuse report I sent to ab...@individual.net
> [...]
>> To me this is crossing a line BIG TIME. Sure Snit is a lying piece of
>> crap. So?
>
> So making false accusations of paedophilia is a criminal offence,
> cyberstalking is a criminal offence, persistently posting abusive,
> off-topic and antithetical diatribes (i.e. trolling) is a violation of
> the group's charter and Usenet provider's TOS, and thus a LART is
> entirely justified, indeed it's the very least one should expect under
> the circumstances. Frankly I think he should be arrested, never mind
> LARTed.

See: you post attacks against me... false attacks. Lies. Why not be
*honest*?

>> Snit says we are a herd.
>
> I don't give a damn what Snit says. He's an abusive troll and he doesn't
> belong in COLA. Period.

You want to censor truth. Got it.

Which proves me correct.

[Herd Watch]

7 stated in post l06gq.9286$Nq1....@newsfe25.ams2 on 9/26/11 2:20 PM:

The herd wants to censor the truth. Got it.

[Herd Watch]

Ender2070 stated in post
20717938.385.1317066183185.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yqcr11 on 9/26/11
12:43 PM:

I think it should be legal - and that is someone who has never smoked
*anything* in my life.

[Kolyder]

In article <201109270...@usenet.drumscum.be>

TomB <tommy.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 2011-09-26, the following emerged from the brain of Black Dragon:
> > TomB wrote:
> >
> >> Verbatim copy of the abuse report I sent to ab...@individual.net
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >> I ask of you to consider withdrawing this person's access to usenet
> >> via the individual.net service.
> >
> > http://individual.net/rules.php
> >
> > What part, or parts, of individual.net's use policy are allegedly
> > being violated?
>
> I don't care about their specific rules.

Ah yes, a liberal.

> All I care for is that Snit
> keeps accusing the man behind the free software movement, respected
> and honoured by many, of supporting sexual abuse of children. You do
> *NOT* do that, and especially not in a usenet group dedicated to the
> advocacy of GNU/Linux.

As much as you may dislike it, the OP appears to have a case.

> Do /you/ think that's normal and moral behaviour?

Wouldn't you?

> And then there's also the highly disrupting nature of about everything
> he posts, and of course the massive post count.

Translation: I disagree with his posts so he must be stopped.

[Homer]

Verily I say unto thee that BSD-faker "Black Dragon" spake thusly:

>
> What part, or parts, of individual.net's use policy are allegedly
> being violated?

[quote]

Observing the law and regulations

This server must only be used for lawful purposes. Each user has to
observe applicable law and regulations. Regulations of the Federal
Republic of Germany apply implicitly, since this is where this server is
located. Place of jurisdiction is Berlin, Germany.
[/quote]

http://individual.net/rules.php

[quote]
Section 164

False accusation

(1) Whosoever intentionally and knowingly and with the purpose that
official proceedings or other official measures be brought or be
continued against another before a public authority accuses another
before a public authority or a public official competent to receive a
criminal information or a military superior or publicly, of having
committed an unlawful act or a violation of an official duty, shall be
liable to imprisonment of not more than five years or a fine.

(2) Whosoever intentionally and knowingly and with the same purpose,
makes any other assertion of fact about another before one of the
authorities indicated in subsection (1) above or publicly which is
capable of causing official proceedings or other official measures to be
brought or continued against that person shall incur the same penalty.

...

Section 186

Defamation

Whosoever asserts or disseminates a fact related to another person which
may defame him or negatively affect public opinion about him, shall,
unless this fact can be proven to be true, be liable to imprisonment of
not more than one year or a fine and, if the offence was committed
publicly or through the dissemination of written materials (section 11
(3)), to imprisonment of not more than two years or a fine.
[/quote]

http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_stgb/englisch_stgb.html#StGBengl_000P164
http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_stgb/englisch_stgb.html#StGBengl_000P186

[quote]
User of News.Individual.NET are obliged to abide by the following set of
rules. Disregarding the rules may cause termination of access privileges
without further notice.

...

Netiquette

Most hierarchies of Usenet have their own netiquette and guidelines.
Users should pay attention to the relevant policies.
[/quote]

http://individual.net/rules.php

[quote]
1.4 The Charter of comp.os.linux.advocacy

The charter of comp.os.linux.advocacy is:

For discussion of the benefits of Linux compared to other operating
systems.

That single sentence is the one and only charter of the newsgroup
comp.os.linux.advocacy. The newsgroup's charter is for the newsgroup
as a place for supporters of Linux to gather to discuss Linux, for
the betterment of the Linux community and the promotion and
development of Linux. It supports this as a place for those who would
like to learn more about Linux to come to learn from those who know
Linux. It does not call for it to be a place where the anti-Linux
propagandists to gather in order to discredit Linux.
[/quote]

http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer

HTH.

[TomB]

On 2011-09-26, the following emerged from the brain of Kolyder:

> As much as you may dislike it, the OP appears to have a case.

Snit has no case at all. There's absolutely *nothing* in Stallman's
comments that even remotely suggests that he supports *sexual abuse*
of children. Nothing at all. Read the comments. The Snit troll
plastered them all over this usenet group. Then point me to even just
a single line that even just remotely suggests that Stallman supports
*sexual abuse* of children.

--
Overload -- core meltdown sequence initiated.

[TomB]

On 2011-09-26, the following emerged from the brain of Black Dragon:

8<

> Anyone care to offer poor 'ole Tommy a much needed binky?

I posted a copy of this email on Snit's own request. Don't need a
'binky' at all.

And what's up with the x-posting? Are you proud of yourself now?

--
Into love and out again,
Thus I went and thus I go.
Spare your voice, and hold your pen:
Well and bitterly I know
All the songs were ever sung,
All the words were ever said;
Could it be, when I was young,
Someone dropped me on my head?
-- Dorothy Parker, "Theory"

[Herd Watch]

TomB stated in post 201109270...@usenet.drumscum.be on 9/26/11 4:59
PM:

> On 2011-09-26, the following emerged from the brain of Black Dragon:
>
> 8<
>
>> Anyone care to offer poor 'ole Tommy a much needed binky?
>
> I posted a copy of this email on Snit's own request. Don't need a
> 'binky' at all.
>
> And what's up with the x-posting? Are you proud of yourself now?

You posted the lies you sent to my Usenet provider.

I spoke honestly but poorly of your cult god. And now you feel you must
censor me. Your are Scientologist whacky.

[Herd Watch]

TomB stated in post 201109270...@usenet.drumscum.be on 9/26/11 4:56
PM:

Wanting school students to be subjected to porn and relabeling it as
"educational material" is a form of sexual abuse. How is it not?

And that is exactly what your cult-god Stallman supports.

[Herd Watch]

Homer stated in post tgf7l8-...@sky.matrix on 9/26/11 4:47 PM:

Hence the reason I am right and much of the herd is wrong.

[Herd Watch]

TomB stated in post 201109270...@usenet.drumscum.be on 9/26/11 4:25
PM:

> On 2011-09-26, the following emerged from the brain of Sneaky Weasel:
>
> 8<
>
>> To me this is crossing a line BIG TIME. Sure Snit is a lying piece
>> of crap. So? Kill file the ass or shove his lies down his throat but
>> do not contact someone's usenet provider because you can't bring
>> yourself to do either. What the hell were you thinking?
>
> So reporting scum to their ISP is crossing a line big time,

Lying to someone's Usenet provider because they speak honestly of one of
your cult gods *is* crossing a line.

Yes.

You were wrong to do as you did. Period.

> but
> accusing the man behind the Free software movement of supporting
> sexual abuse of children, yes, even go as far as suggesting that
> there's a good chance that he actually abused children, is not
> crossing a line big time?
>
> Odd morals you have, Mr. Weasel.

I spoke honestly and accurately, with full linked support, of one of your
cult gods.

And now you are crying. Wahhhhhh!

>> Snit says we are a herd. Homer recently called Roy out on stuff he
>> did not agree with and now I am calling you out. You are wrong to do
>> this. There is no excuse to try to get someone banned from an open
>> usenet forum even if they are as pathetic and obsessed as Snit is.
>> You should contact the provider back and let them know you were
>> wrong to send in such a letter and to make such a request.
>
> Yeah, in your dreams.

You will not do the right thing. I spoke honestly but poorly of your
cult-god. Poor you.

[Hadron]

Herd Watch <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> writes:

> TomB stated in post 201109270...@usenet.drumscum.be on 9/26/11 4:56
> PM:
>
>> On 2011-09-26, the following emerged from the brain of Kolyder:
>>
>>> As much as you may dislike it, the OP appears to have a case.
>>
>> Snit has no case at all. There's absolutely *nothing* in Stallman's
>> comments that even remotely suggests that he supports *sexual abuse*
>> of children. Nothing at all. Read the comments. The Snit troll
>> plastered them all over this usenet group. Then point me to even just
>> a single line that even just remotely suggests that Stallman supports
>> *sexual abuse* of children.
>
> Wanting school students to be subjected to porn and relabeling it as
> "educational material" is a form of sexual abuse. How is it not?

You think all porn is abuse and non concensual? Wow. Go and live in
Germany....

[Herd Watch]

Hadron stated in post vm7h4uy...@news.eternal-september.org on 9/26/11
5:27 PM:

No, I do not. Absolutely not. Not even close.

> Wow. Go and live in Germany....

Why?

[Herd Watch]

Black Dragon stated in post 51nsv8....@news.alt.net on 9/26/11 6:04 PM:

> TomB wrote:
>
>> On 2011-09-26, the following emerged from the brain of Black Dragon:
>>> TomB wrote:
>
>>>> Verbatim copy of the abuse report I sent to ab...@individual.net
>
>>> [...]
>
>>>> I ask of you to consider withdrawing this person's access to usenet
>>>> via the individual.net service.
>
>>> http://individual.net/rules.php
>
>>> What part, or parts, of individual.net's use policy are allegedly
>>> being violated?
>
>> I don't care about their specific rules.
>

> You should, since those rules determine what and what not is actionable
> abuse by users of their system. As it stands now, Snit hasn't violated
> any of those rules so it's extremely unlikely individual.net will
> terminate his account based on you just don't like what he's saying.

Hmmm, I wonder if TomB's lies and attacks against me are against his
providers TOS. Ah, not my style to try to block even someone who goes to
the absurd Scientologist-level extremes he just went to.

[John]

On Tue, 27 Sep 2011 00:31:08 +0200, TomB wrote:

> On 2011-09-26, the following emerged from the brain of Black Dragon:
>> TomB wrote:
>>
>>> Verbatim copy of the abuse report I sent to ab...@individual.net
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> I ask of you to consider withdrawing this person's access to usenet
>>> via the individual.net service.
>>
>> http://individual.net/rules.php
>>
>> What part, or parts, of individual.net's use policy are allegedly
>> being violated?
>
> I don't care about their specific rules.

It figures.

Too bad you weren't born 80 or so years ago. You would have fit
perfectly into a brown shirt and black boots blowing your whistle
and yelling at the top of your lungs "There's another Jew hiding
behind the barn!!".

[Herd Watch]

John stated in post j5r7l6$gah$1...@speranza.aioe.org on 9/26/11 6:07 PM:

I am the target of his Scientologist-level BS and even I think that is a
*little* far. Then again, those people who are likely to be drawn to the
herd and its cult thinking, as TomB is, are also likely those who would be
more likely to be drawn to such things.

Really, though, I would prefer to just see the name calling and accusations
go away. Why not focus on the topics?

[John]

On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 22:34:21 +0200, Clogwog wrote:

> "John" <john...@allmail.net> schreef in bericht

>> Kind of like Charles Manson did.
>
>
> Isn't he kept in confinement for life next to that convicted murderer Hans
> Reiser?

Yep.
San Quentin prison in California USA.
Maybe Reiser can advocate Linux to Charley and Charley can teach
Reiser how to play the guitar, or the skin flute.

[John]

On Tue, 27 Sep 2011 01:59:00 +0200, TomB wrote:

> On 2011-09-26, the following emerged from the brain of Black Dragon:
>
> 8<
>
>> Anyone care to offer poor 'ole Tommy a much needed binky?
>
> I posted a copy of this email on Snit's own request. Don't need a
> 'binky' at all.
>
> And what's up with the x-posting? Are you proud of yourself now?

What's up with the drumscum domain or whatever it is?
You sure picked an appropriate domain name.

The scum part fits perfectly.

[John]

On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 18:07:05 -0700, Herd Watch wrote:


> Hmmm, I wonder if TomB's lies and attacks against me are against his
> providers TOS. Ah, not my style to try to block even someone who goes to
> the absurd Scientologist-level extremes he just went to.

Don't lower yourself to his level.
Let him have his platform and spew his hate and given enough time
even the rest of the herd will disassociate themselves from him
because I believe they know what the right thing to do is.

[Herd Watch]

John stated in post j5r84l$hnt$1...@speranza.aioe.org on 9/26/11 6:16 PM:

There was a time when TomB was actually one of the more rational of the
herd.

He has recently just lost it. I had the audacity to speak honestly about
Stallman, one of the gods of his cult, and he just flipped out.

Insane.

For what it is worth, as much as Stallman is scum, I would never wish on his
the type of health problems Steve Jobs has. If he were to struggle with
such I would never sink to the level Roy and others in the herd went.

But TomB did not try to censor those in his cult who did so.

Shows his bias and proves me right about him and the herd.

[Herd Watch]

John stated in post j5r8kf$it6$1...@speranza.aioe.org on 9/26/11 6:24 PM:

> On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 18:07:05 -0700, Herd Watch wrote:
>
>
>> Hmmm, I wonder if TomB's lies and attacks against me are against his
>> providers TOS. Ah, not my style to try to block even someone who goes to
>> the absurd Scientologist-level extremes he just went to.
>
> Don't lower yourself to his level.

I will not do so.

> Let him have his platform and spew his hate and given enough time
> even the rest of the herd will disassociate themselves from him
> because I believe they know what the right thing to do is.

I wish you were right. Sneaky Weasel did surprise me and call TomB out on
his crap - and will likely now be ex-communicated by the cult.

[Kolyder]

In article <201109270...@usenet.drumscum.be>
TomB <tommy.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>

This does it for me.

"I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms
children. The arguments that it causes harm seem to be based on
cases which aren't voluntary, which are then stretched by
parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is
maturing."

http://web.archive.org/web/20110515185726/http://stallman.org/ar
chives/2006-may-aug.html

[Hadron]

"Kolyder" <kol...@sbcglobal.net> writes:

> In article <201109270...@usenet.drumscum.be>
> TomB <tommy.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 2011-09-26, the following emerged from the brain of Kolyder:
>>
>> > As much as you may dislike it, the OP appears to have a case.
>>
>> Snit has no case at all. There's absolutely *nothing* in Stallman's
>> comments that even remotely suggests that he supports *sexual abuse*
>> of children. Nothing at all. Read the comments. The Snit troll
>> plastered them all over this usenet group. Then point me to even just
>> a single line that even just remotely suggests that Stallman supports
>> *sexual abuse* of children.
>
> This does it for me.
>
> "I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms
> children. The arguments that it causes harm seem to be based on
> cases which aren't voluntary, which are then stretched by
> parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is
> maturing."

Does what for you?

The big error he made here was keeping the work pedophelia in place. The
rest he says is pretty much bang on- People under the legal age have
consensual sex all the time all over the world and it does them no
harm. I suspect Stallman misused the word here.

I am at a loss to see why Snit is being so vindicative of a pretty
liberal view that does not kowtow to the god botherers and loony fringe.

[Herd Watch]

Hadron stated in post 8pqimw...@news.eternal-september.org on 9/26/11
9:24 PM:

> "Kolyder" <kol...@sbcglobal.net> writes:
>
>> In article <201109270...@usenet.drumscum.be>
>> TomB <tommy.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2011-09-26, the following emerged from the brain of Kolyder:
>>>
>>>> As much as you may dislike it, the OP appears to have a case.
>>>
>>> Snit has no case at all. There's absolutely *nothing* in Stallman's
>>> comments that even remotely suggests that he supports *sexual abuse*
>>> of children. Nothing at all. Read the comments. The Snit troll
>>> plastered them all over this usenet group. Then point me to even just
>>> a single line that even just remotely suggests that Stallman supports
>>> *sexual abuse* of children.
>>
>> This does it for me.
>>
>> "I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms
>> children. The arguments that it causes harm seem to be based on
>> cases which aren't voluntary, which are then stretched by
>> parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is
>> maturing."
>
> Does what for you?
>
> The big error he made here was keeping the work pedophelia in place. The
> rest he says is pretty much bang on- People under the legal age have
> consensual sex all the time all over the world and it does them no
> harm. I suspect Stallman misused the word here.

There is nothing about Stallman's comments that indicates he is talking
about under age people having sex with each other.

> I am at a loss to see why Snit is being so vindicative of a pretty
> liberal view that does not kowtow to the god botherers and loony fringe.

This is from a previous post to TomB:

---------------------------------------------------------------

Let me be clear and specific:

I work in schools. There was a school I used to work at where, before I
worked there, it had no Internet policy and no blocking of anything. And
the computers were set up so that students could view them without an
instructor in the room and where screens were not visible to the center of
the room - easy for students to do as they pleased.

One of the conditions I set to accept the job was I got to create an
Internet policy, move computers so their screens could always be seen and we
had to have some sort of porn blocking. To not do so, in a school, is
negligent. To not take actions of that sort is *criminally* negligent. It
is rightfully illegal and, had I maintained a situation where the students
had such access, I (and the school) *rightfully* could have been legally
liable to the harm done to the children at the school. Yes: this was a high
school. And, yes, children.

Stallman, however, thinks such sensible and reasonable measures should not
happen. I can see thinking that the automated blocking should not be done -
it did sometimes block legitimate sites and was not perfect. But *some*
safeguards are absolutely required. To provide none is *criminally*
negligent. And to encourage them and to claim that the porn the students
find is "educational material" is offensive to the extreme. It is child
sexual abuse. And Stallman supports it. So, yes, Stallman support child
sexual abuse. And it is grotesque.

---------------------------------------------------------------

If you think I am missing something or misinterpreting something then I am
open to hearing your thoughts. TomB's cult-like BS, however, is just
insane... Scientology-level insane. Just whacked.

[Steve Carroll]

On Sep 26, 1:21 pm, TomB <tommy.bongae...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 09/26/2011 08:18 PM, Herd Watch wrote:
>
> 8<
>
> > You do not like that I post *ideas* you do not like but have no honest
> > response to...
>
> Your claim that Richard Stallman support sexual abuse of children is
> false. It is a pathetic lie, conjured to troll this group and spread
> misinformation. Nothing - I repeat: NOTHING - Stallman wrote on the
> topic even /suggests/ that he supports sexual abuse of children.
>
> You are a lying cunt, and your madness has to be stopped.
>
> But again: if you think you're right in everything you say and do, you
> have nothing to fear, right? Earlier tonight I got a reply from
> individual.net that they have started their investigation. Surely they
> will see what a nice individual you are, and leave your access to their
> service intact, right?
>
> Idiot.

Maybe they'll somehow come across a copy of the quotes about Snit and
they'll see how long he's been pulling usenet crap...

[Steve Carroll]

On Sep 26, 3:12 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> Sneaky Weasel stated in post 4e80e...@news.x-privat.org on 9/26/11 1:48 PM:

>
>
>
> > On 09/26/2011 10:24 AM, TomB wrote:
> >> Verbatim copy of the abuse report I sent to ab...@individual.net
> ...
>

> > To me this is crossing a line BIG TIME. Sure Snit is a lying piece of
> > crap. So? Kill file the ass or shove his lies down his throat but do not
> > contact someone's usenet provider because you can't bring yourself to do
> > either. What the hell were you thinking?
>

> > Snit says we are a herd. Homer recently called Roy out on stuff he did
> > not agree with and now I am calling you out. You are wrong to do this.
> > There is no excuse to try to get someone banned from an open usenet
> > forum even if they are as pathetic and obsessed as Snit is. You should
> > contact the provider back and let them know you were wrong to send in
> > such a letter and to make such a request.
>

> While I disagree with much of what you say, thank you for standing up for
> what is right.  And thank you for speaking out against the herd.

Says the lying, whining hypocrite who did to me (and others) exactly
what TomB is now doing to him.

Funny how Snit thinks he is *special*

[Steve Carroll]

On Sep 26, 2:48 pm, Sneaky Weasel <Sne...@Weasel.com> wrote:
> On 09/26/2011 10:24 AM, TomB wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Verbatim copy of the abuse report I sent to ab...@individual.net
>

> > =======================================================================
> >  From tommy.bongae...@drumscum.be Sun Sep 25 21:19:18 2011
> > Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2011 21:19:18 +0200
> > From: Tommy Bongaerts<tommy.bongae...@drumscum.be>
> > To: ab...@individual.net
> > Subject: Abuse report concerning individual.net user with the handle 'Snit'
> > Message-ID:<20110925191918.GA3...@drumscum.be>
> > MIME-Version: 1.0
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> > Content-Disposition: inline
> > X-syserr: we just switched to Sprint.
> > X-URL:http://www.drumscum.be
> > X-mutt-bugs: Mutts have no bugs. They have fleas.
> > X-sysinfo: Linux 3.0.0-1-amd64 x86_64
> > User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
> > Status: RO
> > Content-Length: 6713
> > Lines: 149
>
> > Dear sir,
>
> > Hereby I would like to file an abuse report concerning the actions of
> > one of your users in the usenet group comp.os.linux.advocacy.
>
> > Here is a typical header from the user in question:
>
> > ***
> >  From use...@gallopinginsanity.com Sat Sep 17 11:37:39 2011
> > Path: s01-b013.ams2!cyclone02.ams2.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!v oer-me.highwinds-media.com!feeder.news-service.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin. de!individual.net!not-for-mail
> > Message-ID:<CA9970C1.A6674%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
> > From: Snit<use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
> > Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
> > Subject: Example of Herd Like Behavior: 16 Aug 2011
> > Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 21:31:45 -0700
> > References:<CA8E6C60.A57C8%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>  <j4b7c2$pj...@dont-email.me>  <rkmnj8-rti....@mordor.drumscum.be>  <j4bqnr$fa...@dont-email.me>  <20110909092334....@usenet.drumscum.be>  <j4dbrn$39...@speranza.aioe.org>  <hdsjo4ucqc....@news.eternal-september.org>  <1elrj8-pq2....@mordor.drumscum.be>  <s6ju679ift9ij0g6el66qlsp7k0pdhh...@4ax.com>  <CA94D027.A5FB0%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>  <20110913193529....@usenet.drumscum.be>  <j4t9b8$ej...@dont-email.me>  <CA977834.A63AB%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>  <j4t9pt$gp...@dont-email.me>  <CA977E0A.A63BA%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>  <j4tcgj$78...@dont-email.me>  <20110915200012....@usenet.drumscum.be>  <slrnj753ir.57u.ZekeGreg...@netscape.net>  <CA97E050.A64C3%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>  <20110916225231....@usenet.drumscum.be>  <slrnj77qql.5d8.ZekeGreg...@netscape.net>
> > Lines: 44
> > Mime-Version: 1.0
> > Content-Type: text/plain;
> >    charset="UTF-8"
> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> > X-Trace: individual.net fpznu4b0RuaJ6DP7RzuXVADOcr92+lxt85WmqJep2FWj76PFbM
> > Cancel-Lock: sha1:0a4r0EAJSTkNUxHVyCYb6spqfm4=
> > User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.30.0.110427
> > Thread-Topic: Example of Herd Like Behavior: 16 Aug 2011
> > Thread-Index: Acx08rS7j1AUfaxxsk6meBQuVFzSjA==
> > X-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2011 04:31:50 UTC (s01-b013.ams2)
> > Xref: mordor.drumscum.be comp.os.linux.advocacy:11203
> > ***
>
> > For the last couple of weeks, this user has been posting nearly 400
> > articles/week to the usenet group comp.os.linux.advocacy, as can be
> > seen from the following excepts from the weekly article logs I post to
> > the newsgroup:
>
> > ***
>
> >    Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2011 16:00:11 +0200
> >    Total posts considered: 1,398 over 7 days
> >    Earliest article: Sun Sep 18 16:01:39 2011
> >    Latest article:   Sun Sep 25 15:05:03 2011
>
> >    =========================================================================== =
> >                        Top 20 posters by number of articles
> >    =========================================================================== =
> >     1: Snit<use...@gallopinginsanity.com>............................ :    319
>
> > ***
>
> >    Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2011 16:00:10 +0200
> >    Total posts considered: 1,528 over 7 days
> >    Earliest article: Sun Sep 18 16:00:03 2011
> >    Latest article:   Sun Sep 25 15:57:54 2011
>
> >    =========================================================================== =
> >                        Top 20 posters by number of articles
> >    =========================================================================== =
> >     1: Snit<use...@gallopinginsanity.com>............................ :    339
>
> > ***
>
> >    Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2011 15:23:51 +0200
> >    Total posts considered: 1,957 over 7 days
> >    Earliest article: Sun Sep  4 15:45:02 2011
> >    Latest article:   Sun Sep 11 15:15:03 2011
>
> >    =========================================================================== =
> >                        Top 20 posters by number of articles
> >    =========================================================================== =
> >     1: Snit<use...@gallopinginsanity.com>............................ :    400
>
> > ***
>
> >    Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2011 15:17:51 +0200
> >    Total posts considered: 1,738 over 7 days
> >    Earliest article: Sun Aug 28 15:20:02 2011
> >    Latest article:   Sun Sep  4 14:10:02 2011
>
> >    =========================================================================== =
> >                        Top 20 posters by number of articles
> >    =========================================================================== =
> >     1: Snit<use...@gallopinginsanity.com>............................ :    354
>
> > ***
>
> >    Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2011 15:50:06 +0200
> >    Total posts considered: 2,168 over 7 days
> >    Earliest article: Sun Aug 21 22:00:02 2011
> >    Latest article:   Thu Aug 25 17:35:02 2011
>
> >    =========================================================================== =
> >                        Top 20 posters by number of articles
> >    =========================================================================== =
> >     1: Snit<use...@gallopinginsanity.com>............................ :    458
>
> > ***
>
> >    Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 20:17:46 +0200
> >    Total posts considered: 1,888 over 7 days
> >    Earliest article: Thu Aug 18 19:15:04 2011
> >    Latest article:   Fri Aug 19 19:10:03 2011
>
> >    =========================================================================== =
> >                        Top 20 posters by number of articles
> >    =========================================================================== =
> >     1: Snit<use...@gallopinginsanity.com>............................ :    306
>
> > ***
>
> > As you can see, this one poster managed to post 2176 articles in just
> > 6 weeks, which is an average of 362 articles/week, or a little over 2
> > articles/hour, 24/7. The main purpose of this steady flow of articles
> > is to disturb the regular discussions about Linux in this group, and
> > to libel the regulars in the group.
>
> > Even apart from the content of the postings I believe that posting
> > over 2000 articles in just 6 weeks can be considered spam.
>
> > Reasonable on-topic discussion in comp.os.linux.advocacy has been made
> > impossible thanks to this one single poster. Filtering his messages is
> > no longer feasible, as he generates a lot of replies from the
> > regulars, which clutters the on-topic discussions beyond control.
>
> > As a side note I would like to mention that this poster also regularly
> > claims that Richard Stallman, widely respected for being the man
> > behind the open source GNU operating system, is a supporter of sexual
> > abuse of children. This kind of behaviour can not be tolerated in a
> > GNU/Linux advocacy group, and has to be stopped. A lot of people
> > looking for information about GNU/Linux on usenet, end up in
> > comp.os.linux.advocacy (it is a very active usenet group), and it
> > cannot be tolerated that they are confronted with slander like this.
> > Please refer to the following posts for examples of this user posting
> > his slander about Richard Stallman:
>
> > <CAA4AED6.A7449%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
> > <CAA4BAFC.A745F%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
> > <CAA4ADEE.A7442%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>

>
> > I ask of you to consider withdrawing this person's access to usenet
> > via the individual.net service.
>

> > Best regards,
> > Tommy

>
> To me this is crossing a line BIG TIME.

Tell it to Snit... he's done this same thing to numerous people.

[Savlan]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

A. van der Berigheid wrote:

>> plonk
>>
>
> plonk
>
what does your famous last words have to do with linux, Arend?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
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=yG38
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Sneaky Weasel]

Cite?

[Sneaky Weasel]

Cite?

[Sneaky Weasel]

On 09/26/2011 04:25 PM, TomB wrote:
> On 2011-09-26, the following emerged from the brain of Sneaky Weasel:
>
> 8<

>
>> To me this is crossing a line BIG TIME. Sure Snit is a lying piece
>> of crap. So? Kill file the ass or shove his lies down his throat but
>> do not contact someone's usenet provider because you can't bring
>> yourself to do either. What the hell were you thinking?
>

> So reporting scum to their ISP is crossing a line big time, but

> accusing the man behind the Free software movement of supporting
> sexual abuse of children, yes, even go as far as suggesting that
> there's a good chance that he actually abused children, is not
> crossing a line big time?
>
> Odd morals you have, Mr. Weasel.

Contacting his ISP because you disagree with him is crossing a line even
if he is a shit head.

>> Snit says we are a herd. Homer recently called Roy out on stuff he
>> did not agree with and now I am calling you out. You are wrong to do
>> this. There is no excuse to try to get someone banned from an open
>> usenet forum even if they are as pathetic and obsessed as Snit is.
>> You should contact the provider back and let them know you were
>> wrong to send in such a letter and to make such a request.
>

> Yeah, in your dreams.

[Sneaky Weasel]

On 09/26/2011 02:17 PM, Peter Köhlmann wrote:

> Sneaky Weasel wrote:
>
>>
>> To me this is crossing a line BIG TIME. Sure Snit is a lying piece of
>> crap. So? Kill file the ass or shove his lies down his throat but do not
>> contact someone's usenet provider because you can't bring yourself to do
>> either. What the hell were you thinking?
>>

>> Snit says we are a herd. Homer recently called Roy out on stuff he did
>> not agree with and now I am calling you out. You are wrong to do this.
>

> No, it is absolutely the right thing to do

>
>> There is no excuse to try to get someone banned from an open usenet
>> forum even if they are as pathetic and obsessed as Snit is. You should
>> contact the provider back and let them know you were wrong to send in
>> such a letter and to make such a request.
>

> He should additionally contact Yavapai College and Prescott Police
> department.
> *And* send Michael Glassers wife an email with a short report about her
> useless husband
>
> After all, she is paying for his abusing the newsgroups. And could too be
> legally responsible for his slander because of that
>
> What Snit Michael Glasser is doing is inexcuseable. He should pay for it

What the fuck is wrong with you?

[Sneaky Weasel]

On 09/26/2011 03:11 PM, Homer wrote:
> Verily I say unto thee that Sneaky Weasel spake thusly:

>> On 09/26/2011 10:24 AM, TomB wrote:
>>> Verbatim copy of the abuse report I sent to ab...@individual.net

> [...]

>> To me this is crossing a line BIG TIME. Sure Snit is a lying piece of
>> crap. So?
>

> So making false accusations of paedophilia is a criminal offence,
> cyberstalking is a criminal offence, persistently posting abusive,
> off-topic and antithetical diatribes (i.e. trolling) is a violation of
> the group's charter and Usenet provider's TOS, and thus a LART is
> entirely justified, indeed it's the very least one should expect under
> the circumstances. Frankly I think he should be arrested, never mind
> LARTed.

>
>> Snit says we are a herd.
>

> I don't give a damn what Snit says. He's an abusive troll and he doesn't
> belong in COLA. Period.
>
Killfile him. End of story.

[Sneaky Weasel]

On 09/26/2011 04:34 PM, Herd Watch wrote:
> Homer stated in post eu97l8-...@sky.matrix on 9/26/11 3:11 PM:

>
>> Verily I say unto thee that Sneaky Weasel spake thusly:
>>> On 09/26/2011 10:24 AM, TomB wrote:
>>>> Verbatim copy of the abuse report I sent to ab...@individual.net
>> [...]
>>> To me this is crossing a line BIG TIME. Sure Snit is a lying piece of
>>> crap. So?
>>
>> So making false accusations of paedophilia is a criminal offence,
>> cyberstalking is a criminal offence, persistently posting abusive,
>> off-topic and antithetical diatribes (i.e. trolling) is a violation of
>> the group's charter and Usenet provider's TOS, and thus a LART is
>> entirely justified, indeed it's the very least one should expect under
>> the circumstances. Frankly I think he should be arrested, never mind
>> LARTed.
>

> See: you post attacks against me... false attacks. Lies. Why not be
> *honest*?

>
>>> Snit says we are a herd.
>>
>> I don't give a damn what Snit says. He's an abusive troll and he doesn't
>> belong in COLA. Period.
>

> You want to censor truth. Got it.
>
> Which proves me correct.
>
TomB is wrong to contact your ISP but shut the fuck up already.

[Sneaky Weasel]

On 09/26/2011 04:35 PM, Herd Watch wrote:
> 7 stated in post l06gq.9286$Nq1....@newsfe25.ams2 on 9/26/11 2:20 PM:

>
>> Sneaky Weasel wrote:
>>
>>
>>> To me this is crossing a line BIG TIME.
>>
>>

>> No chance in hell legally or morally.
>>
>> Trolling is NOT freedom of speech.
>> Particularly those that are sponsored by commercial entities like Appil and
>> micosahft crocporation.
>> Trolling interferes with the rights of those who have freedom of speech
>> and care to exercise it responsibly.
>> Troll have had their day in courts and
>> have set precedents in courts and they now invite prison
>> sentences and court fines for trolling because trolling
>> has been determined to be not free speech.
>>
>> Prison sentence being handed out to troll here:
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-14897948
>>
>> Stories like this
>> http://www.11alive.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=173964
>> set a precedent which means every asstroturfer is due for a minimum
>> $400,000 fine.
>
> The herd wants to censor the truth. Got it.
>
The 'herd' wants you to shut the fuck up.

[Sneaky Weasel]

On 09/26/2011 05:15 PM, Herd Watch wrote:

> TomB stated in post 201109270...@usenet.drumscum.be on 9/26/11 4:25
> PM:

>
>> On 2011-09-26, the following emerged from the brain of Sneaky Weasel:
>>
>> 8<
>>

>>> To me this is crossing a line BIG TIME. Sure Snit is a lying piece

>>> of crap. So? Kill file the ass or shove his lies down his throat but
>>> do not contact someone's usenet provider because you can't bring
>>> yourself to do either. What the hell were you thinking?
>>

>> So reporting scum to their ISP is crossing a line big time,
>

> Lying to someone's Usenet provider because they speak honestly of one of
> your cult gods *is* crossing a line.
>
> Yes.
>
> You were wrong to do as you did. Period.

>
>> but
>> accusing the man behind the Free software movement of supporting
>> sexual abuse of children, yes, even go as far as suggesting that
>> there's a good chance that he actually abused children, is not
>> crossing a line big time?
>>
>> Odd morals you have, Mr. Weasel.
>

> I spoke honestly and accurately, with full linked support, of one of your
> cult gods.
>
> And now you are crying. Wahhhhhh!

>
>>> Snit says we are a herd. Homer recently called Roy out on stuff he
>>> did not agree with and now I am calling you out. You are wrong to do

>>> this. There is no excuse to try to get someone banned from an open

>>> usenet forum even if they are as pathetic and obsessed as Snit is.
>>> You should contact the provider back and let them know you were
>>> wrong to send in such a letter and to make such a request.
>>

>> Yeah, in your dreams.
>
> You will not do the right thing. I spoke honestly but poorly of your
> cult-god. Poor you.
>
TomB should never have contacted your ISP. That was fucked up. It is
done and you are still posting so shut the fuck up. Clearly his email
did nothing. They did the right thing and told him to shove it up his ass.

[Sneaky Weasel]

I speak my mind. Maybe to much when I am a bit drunk.

[Sneaky Weasel]

On 09/26/2011 02:31 PM, chrisv wrote:
> 7 wrote:

>
>> Sneaky Weasel wrote:
>>>
>>> To me this is crossing a line BIG TIME.
>

> Who cares what you think, troll?

>
>> No chance in hell legally or morally.
>

> In this case I think it appropriate. Almost 400 posts per week? Come
> on. Not to mention the vile attacks on the advocates because we don't
> share a disgusting troll's interpretation of what someone said.
>
TomB fucked up. Move on.

[Sneaky Weasel]

Quotes about him? Quote him. Anyone can say anything about anyone.