If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
newgroup etiguette
Why did I cross post?
....because the emails came from persons in more than one group and one such email came with a security violation...making me unwilling to respond to the emails directly. A newbie? ....way off....off by nearly 14 years. to whomever tried to virus me... nice try. I have traced the first 4 routing servers, I should know who you are by the end of the day. Posted by MS " This is a discussion group. Advertisements are inappropriate. If Usenet were overrun by advertisers (and the only reason that it's not is that there's a large and active group of people working to prevent it every single day) it would not be useful for discussion, or much else." ....and we are so proud of you. So you have made it your mission to determine what we are allowed to see and to post? So what of those whom actually are trying to be helpful or share useful information....how do you seperate those from your rather widely cast spam net? Who are you to determine what is allowed and not allowed? What are your qualifications for determining what the rest of us are allowed to see and or read? " You know, there might be reason to think I have a better handle on this issue than you do, not the least of which is that I don't fall for phony ads posted as helpful hints." ....a better handle on this than I do...again you seem to think I am unable to determine what it is I choose to investigate or what I do not. Do you own any Sony products? Played a Sony CD on your computer? How about a MasterCard? Canon software? Disney cd's and or movies? Hardware from Creative? Innotek? Do you shop at Wal-Mart? I do not think you truely have a true grasp on spam sources at all... I do not like advertising in the groups anymore than anyone else...but I am not so inclined to make efforts to determine the intentions of others based on a single post. Your rather interesting ethical objection and apparent need to educate the rest of us "unwashed masses" on what we should and should not do in the groups is...quite truthfully...the first steps of censorship of the groups. I do not disagree with efforts to stop spam...I just think your particular view and or definition of it is dangerous. Just last week a friend of mine, who believes strongly in a certian product...believes it saved her dogs life...posted about it in another forum...a forum she sincerely enjoyed and found very helpful in dealing with her problematic dog. Someone like you started a crusade to have her kicked from the forum for spamming. All she wanted was to share her experience with the group in the hope that the product may help another dog/family. Your opinion is dangerous and irresponsible and in serious need of refinement. if you do not like what you read...filter it...it is why the filters were made. Shelly posted: " offend? i think you may be reading too much into the responses to your posts. just because someone takes issue with something you've written does not mean they found it offensive." ....I wish I would not have deleted the emails I recieved. There was no reading anything into anything...they were VERY clear! the last thing I am going to say about this... public is public...good and bad. It is not public so long as it agrees with your sensibilities...it is just simply public. While I do not appreciate a good number of posts I come across, I rarely find the need to comment on those posts. Why? Agree or disagree this is a public forum! I can appreciate posts, even those I do not agree with, so long as those posts hold some critcal value or are intended as helpful. Post that offer ONLY criticism and/or make attempts to limit posters or convey some abject morallity are not needed. People are free to take issue with anything...taking issue is one thing, finger pointing, accusations, self serving assumptions without proof or basis, and rude emails are another thing all together. My point is...go ahead and take issue, that what this is all about, but if you take issue be sure that the issue you have taken has merit and is based on some other source than your own peculiar sensibilities. "...there are no degrees of either truth or freedom. Limit either, in even the smallest fashion, and they cease to be." |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
newgroup etiguette
In article ,
RobDar wrote: nice try. I have traced the first 4 routing servers, I should know who you are by the end of the day. Chances are that it came from a zombie. Good luck with that. ...and we are so proud of you. So you have made it your mission to determine what we are allowed to see and to post? No, but with your "14 years of experience" you should be aware that ads really aren't acceptable anywhere on Usenet except in groups specifically created to carry ads, and that topicality and overall whateverness evolve on the basis of participant consensus. One of the characteristics of consensus is that it does tend to be pretty robust against some stranger wandering in and trying to blow it all to hell. What are your qualifications for determining what the rest of us are allowed to see and or read? If you're trying to use Usenet to do your shopping, you certainly can do that. Look for groups with things like ".forsale" and ".marketplace" in their names. However, if you really think that the namespace should be flat (unstructured) and that everybody should post about everything everywhere, I encourage you to take dog discussions to comp.unix.wizards and see how it goes. I do not think you truely have a true grasp on spam sources at all... I think I probably do. Aside from over 20 years experience on Usenet as both an administrator (in the 1980s) and as a user, I'm a technical leader in the advanced cryptographic development organization of the security technologies group with the largest network equipment vendor. Among other things I've been involved in anti-spam technology development efforts both within the company and within international standards bodies (and ain't it going *great*?). Mostly, however, I work on access controls and authorization mechanisms. if you do not like what you read...filter it...it is why the filters were made. Encouraging people to killfile your posts would seem, at least, to be consistent with creating webpages that people can't read. You're apparently what we call a "write-only" participant. "...there are no degrees of either truth or freedom. Limit either, in even the smallest fashion, and they cease to be." Good heavens - libertoonian claptrap. It's precisely constraints on behavior (for example, criminalizing things like robbery, murder, and fraud) that allow broad social and economic freedoms in the first place. Americans understood markets and capitalism better 100 years ago than we do today. -- Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis - Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
newgroup etiguette
on 2005-11-22 at 10:46 wrote:
Why did I cross post? i didn't accuse you of cross posting. you didn't. you posted two separate articles in two separate newsgroups. one of those newsgroups is one in which off-topic discussions are frowned upon. considering that there was no discussion of the points you addressed in that newsgroup, it strikes me as odd that you'd repost your OP there. A newbie? newbieness is not a matter of chronology. ...and we are so proud of you. So you have made it your mission to determine what we are allowed to see and to post? no. the newsgroup charter is where appropriate content for this group is laid out. So what of those whom actually are trying to be helpful or share useful information....how do you seperate those from your rather widely cast spam net? it's usually fairly simple. Who are you to determine what is allowed and not allowed? What are your qualifications for determining what the rest of us are allowed to see and or read? it's an unmoderated group. that means that anyone can post anything to it. so, yeah, you can spam the group to your heart's content. however, if you do, others can call you on your rude and obnoxious behavior. ...a better handle on this than I do... the rest of us "unwashed masses" on what we should and should not do in the groups is...quite truthfully...the first steps of censorship of the groups. i'm always amused when someone cries "censorship!" in an unmoderated forum. it is for to laugh! if you do not like what you read...filter it...it is why the filters were made. hey pot, i think the kettle is calling you. ...I wish I would not have deleted the emails I recieved. There was no reading anything into anything...they were VERY clear! i don't give a rat's arse about e-mails you might have received. unless they were posted to this group, they are irrelevant to the discussion. disagree this is a public forum! I can appreciate posts, even those I do not agree with, so long as those posts hold some critcal value or are intended as helpful. Post that offer ONLY criticism and/or make attempts to limit posters or convey some abject morallity are not needed. wait, weren't you just bitching about other people holding your posts to a certain standard? and you're doing the same thing? sheesh. together. My point is...go ahead and take issue, that what this is all about, but if you take issue be sure that the issue you have taken has merit and is based on some other source than your own peculiar sensibilities. guess what? you don't get to dictate what i or anyone else takes issue with, or how we express our dissatisfaction. "...there are no degrees of either truth or freedom. Limit either, in even the smallest fashion, and they cease to be." that would perhaps be more meaningful if you hadn't just told people how to comport themselves. -- shelly http://www.cat-sidh.net http://cat-sidh.blogspot.com/ |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
newgroup etiguette
"RobDar" said in
rec.pets.dogs.behavior: A newbie? ...way off....off by nearly 14 years. Why did you remove the references? As a stand-alone post, and with the formatting and quoting styles you choose, your post doesn't make a lot of sense. -- --Matt. Rocky's a Dog. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
newgroup etiguette
on 2005-11-22 at 17:57 wrote:
Why did you remove the references? As a stand-alone post, and with the formatting and quoting styles you choose, your post doesn't make a lot of sense. he's not a newbie, though. -- shelly http://www.cat-sidh.net http://cat-sidh.blogspot.com/ |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
newgroup etiguette
You are truely entertaining person....
"Melinda Shore" wrote in message ... In article , RobDar wrote: nice try. I have traced the first 4 routing servers, I should know who you are by the end of the day. Chances are that it came from a zombie. Good luck with that. ...and we are so proud of you. So you have made it your mission to determine what we are allowed to see and to post? No, but with your "14 years of experience" you should be aware that ads really aren't acceptable anywhere on Usenet except in groups specifically created to carry ads, and that topicality and overall whateverness evolve on the basis of participant consensus. One of the characteristics of consensus is that it does tend to be pretty robust against some stranger wandering in and trying to blow it all to hell. What are your qualifications for determining what the rest of us are allowed to see and or read? If you're trying to use Usenet to do your shopping, you certainly can do that. Look for groups with things like ".forsale" and ".marketplace" in their names. However, if you really think that the namespace should be flat (unstructured) and that everybody should post about everything everywhere, I encourage you to take dog discussions to comp.unix.wizards and see how it goes. I do not think you truely have a true grasp on spam sources at all... I think I probably do. Aside from over 20 years experience on Usenet as both an administrator (in the 1980s) and as a user, I'm a technical leader in the advanced cryptographic development organization of the security technologies group with the largest network equipment vendor. Among other things I've been involved in anti-spam technology development efforts both within the company and within international standards bodies (and ain't it going *great*?). Mostly, however, I work on access controls and authorization mechanisms. if you do not like what you read...filter it...it is why the filters were made. Encouraging people to killfile your posts would seem, at least, to be consistent with creating webpages that people can't read. You're apparently what we call a "write-only" participant. "...there are no degrees of either truth or freedom. Limit either, in even the smallest fashion, and they cease to be." Good heavens - libertoonian claptrap. It's precisely constraints on behavior (for example, criminalizing things like robbery, murder, and fraud) that allow broad social and economic freedoms in the first place. Americans understood markets and capitalism better 100 years ago than we do today. -- Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis - Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
newgroup etiguette
In article ,
RobDar wrote: You are truely entertaining person.... So I've been told. -- Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis - Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
newgroup etiguette
Melinda:
you have completely missed the point... I agree ads do not belong here. This was never in question. and as impressive as your professional qualifications may be...again, not the point. You make assumptions, without basis...that is the point. "Melinda Shore" wrote in message ... In article , RobDar wrote: nice try. I have traced the first 4 routing servers, I should know who you are by the end of the day. Chances are that it came from a zombie. Good luck with that. ...and we are so proud of you. So you have made it your mission to determine what we are allowed to see and to post? No, but with your "14 years of experience" you should be aware that ads really aren't acceptable anywhere on Usenet except in groups specifically created to carry ads, and that topicality and overall whateverness evolve on the basis of participant consensus. One of the characteristics of consensus is that it does tend to be pretty robust against some stranger wandering in and trying to blow it all to hell. What are your qualifications for determining what the rest of us are allowed to see and or read? If you're trying to use Usenet to do your shopping, you certainly can do that. Look for groups with things like ".forsale" and ".marketplace" in their names. However, if you really think that the namespace should be flat (unstructured) and that everybody should post about everything everywhere, I encourage you to take dog discussions to comp.unix.wizards and see how it goes. I do not think you truely have a true grasp on spam sources at all... I think I probably do. Aside from over 20 years experience on Usenet as both an administrator (in the 1980s) and as a user, I'm a technical leader in the advanced cryptographic development organization of the security technologies group with the largest network equipment vendor. Among other things I've been involved in anti-spam technology development efforts both within the company and within international standards bodies (and ain't it going *great*?). Mostly, however, I work on access controls and authorization mechanisms. if you do not like what you read...filter it...it is why the filters were made. Encouraging people to killfile your posts would seem, at least, to be consistent with creating webpages that people can't read. You're apparently what we call a "write-only" participant. "...there are no degrees of either truth or freedom. Limit either, in even the smallest fashion, and they cease to be." Good heavens - libertoonian claptrap. It's precisely constraints on behavior (for example, criminalizing things like robbery, murder, and fraud) that allow broad social and economic freedoms in the first place. Americans understood markets and capitalism better 100 years ago than we do today. -- Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis - Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
newgroup etiguette
on 2005-11-22 at 12:46 wrote:
you have completely missed the point... you had a point? also, you might want to take a moment to consider acceptable posting formats, which include bottom posting and trimming. not that i'm accusing you of being a newbie or anything... -- shelly http://www.cat-sidh.net http://cat-sidh.blogspot.com/ |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
newgroup etiguette
In article ,
RobDar wrote: you have completely missed the point... I agree ads do not belong here. This was never in question. Of course it was, as soon as you introduced the censorship argu[e!]ment. -- Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis - Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|