|  | Posted by Gary L. Burnore on 01/06/08 16:44 
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 09:36:18 -0500, Jerry Stuckle<jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote:
 
 >Gary L. Burnore wrote:
 >> On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 23:57:07 -0500, Jerry Stuckle
 >> <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote:
 >>
 >>> Gary L. Burnore wrote:
 >>>> On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 23:00:21 -0500, Jerry Stuckle
 >>>> <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote:
 >>>>
 >>>>> Gary L. Burnore wrote:
 >>>>>> On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 10:14:24 GMT, Doug Baiter <doug-baiter@no.where>
 >>>>>> wrote:
 >>>>>>
 >>>>>>> On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 17:26:11 -0500, Gary L. Burnore
 >>>>>>> <gburnore@databasix.com> wrote:
 >>>>>>>
 >>>>>>>> On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 21:47:33 GMT, Doug Baiter <doug-baiter@no.where>
 >>>>>>>> wrote:
 >>>>>>>>
 >>>>>>>>> On Thu, 03 Jan 2008 20:49:31 -0500, Jerry Stuckle
 >>>>>>>>> <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote:
 >>>>>>>>>
 >>>>>>>>>> Dick Gaughan wrote:
 >>>>>>>>>>> In <XrqdnW_lGbgurODanZ2dnUVZ_u_inZ2d@comcast.com> on Thu, 03 Jan
 >>>>>>>>>>> 2008 14:03:11 -0500, Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net>
 >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
 >>>>>>>>>>>
 >>>>>>>>>>>> Dick Gaughan wrote:
 >>>>>>>>>>>>> In <C3A2D429.F13D%nospam@redcatgroup.co.uk> on Thu, 03 Jan 2008
 >>>>>>>>>>>>> 18:04:25 +0000, Andy Jacobs <nospam@redcatgroup.co.uk> wrote:
 >>>>>>>>>>>>>
 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't get it.  Why was the original post spam?
 >>>>>>>>>>>>> It wasn't. It was many things, including being a
 >>>>>>>>>>>>> pathetically-badly disguised festering heap of marketing shite,
 >>>>>>>>>>>>> but it wasn't spam.
 >>>>>>>>>>>>>
 >>>>>>>>>>>>> Those insisting it was spam are merely flaunting their
 >>>>>>>>>>>>> cluelessness. A post is *only* defined as being spam when it
 >>>>>>>>>>>>> breaches the Breidbart Index. Nobody has provided any evidence
 >>>>>>>>>>>>> that that particular bit of midge's effluence has exceeded the BI.
 >>>>>>>>>>>>>
 >>>>>>>>>>>> The Breidbart Index is woefully out of date.
 >>>>>>>>>>> When was that decided? I must have missed that debate.
 >>>>>>>>>>>
 >>>>>>>>>> It's been dismissed as virtually meaningless for quite a while, now.
 >>>>>>>>>> SPAM has changed, but the index hasn't.
 >>>>>>>>>>
 >>>>>>>>>>>> In a.w.w, ads of any kind are considered SPAM.
 >>>>>>>>>>> What aww might or might not consider is about as relevant outside
 >>>>>>>>>>> aww as a spider's fart. I'm not reading this thread in aww.
 >>>>>>>>>>>
 >>>>>>>>>> Fine.  I am reading this in a.w.w., and it is spam here.
 >>>>>>>>>>
 >>>>>>>>>>> The BI was adopted as a way of avoiding would-be Usenet vigilantes
 >>>>>>>>>>> deciding to classify posts as spam on the basis that they disliked
 >>>>>>>>>>> the contents. This discussion shows that the wisdom of that
 >>>>>>>>>>> concern still has relevance.
 >>>>>>>>>>>
 >>>>>>>>>> So you have some meaningless, out of date measurement which doesn't say
 >>>>>>>>>> something is spam or not, but only classifies the severity of the SPAM.
 >>>>>>>>>>
 >>>>>>>>>> Right.  Try again.
 >>>>>>>>>>
 >>>>>>>>>>> Until someone else comes up with a better content-blind objective
 >>>>>>>>>>> definition of spam, the BI is still the benchmark.
 >>>>>>>>>>>
 >>>>>>>>>> There is.  The charter and/or FAQs for the newsgroup.  And the FAQs for
 >>>>>>>>>> a.w.w., which were agreed to by the majority of the regulars here,
 >>>>>>>>>> classify this as spam.
 >>>>>>>>>>
 >>>>>>>>> LIA[SLAP]
 >>>>>>>> FAQs aren't charters and are not enforceable.  Charters in unmoderated
 >>>>>>>> alt gorups are also uninforceable.  Off charter in comp groups, on the
 >>>>>>>> other hand, is something that can get your news provider's attention.
 >>>>>>> My bad - didn't look first at the group list. While perfectly
 >>>>>>> acceptable in AWW, in a comp group you're right in that its off
 >>>>>>> charter which *is* enforcable. Perhaps the zealots in AWW should
 >>>>>>> attempt to have it reclassified into a group that has an official
 >>>>>>> charter, but in the meantime nobody cares :o)
 >>>>>> There's really no such thing as a valid charter in an alt.* group.
 >>>>>> Alt.config is a bogus group of morons who want to turn alt into
 >>>>>> another form of big8 groups.  Never gonna happen.  Of course,
 >>>>>> moderated groups can and do control content but non-moderated groups
 >>>>>> are freeform.  Stukkie will just have to learn to use a killfile
 >>>>>> there.
 >>>>>>
 >>>>>>> Nevertheless, please accept my apologies for the mistake.
 >>>>>> Accepted.  Unfortunately, Jerry won't stop crossposting back to
 >>>>>> comp.*.
 >>>>> Sorry, Gary.
 >>>> Liar.
 >>>>
 >>> Let's see you prove that statement, Gary.
 >>
 >> You're doing it for me, Jerry.  YOU are still posting to comp.lang.php
 >> and he's not "making you do it".  YOU are the one posting off charter.
 >> YOU. Not him.
 >>
 >
 >And your posts are on topic?  ROFLMAO!  Pot-Kettle-Black.
 >
 How's that ignoring me thing going, stukkie?  OOPS, did you LIE again?
 
 >>> you're just as bad  as the troll is.
 >>
 >>>>> I have been attacked and maligned by two trolls in a.w.w
 >>>>> who have cross-posted to c.l.p. and other newsgroups.  I will not let
 >>>>> those go away.
 >>>> Because you're owned.  Owned owned owned.
 >>>>
 >>> Ok, let's tell your employer you're a criminal and a fraud.  See if you
 >>> like it?
 >>
 >> Go for it, dipshit.  I've been called far worse.  My employer is
 >> DataBasix.com.  OOPS!  Too bad for you.
 >>
 >
 >Oh, you mean the one who can't even keep a website running?  ROFLMAO!
 
 Hahahahaha.  DataBasix isn't a WEBSITE, dumbass.
 
 >>> But you're obviously a troll - familiar over a bunch of newsgroups and
 >>> message boards on the usenet.   A quick search brings up several
 >>> complaints about your trolling.
 >>
 >> Poor little tard.  You should surely soon be quoting that Jerry
 >> Terranson website and stepping right into kookdom.   Once you find it,
 >> you'll see why I feel safe in saying that people who make up false
 >> shit about you don't matter.  YOU're the one who's making a fool of
 >> yourself.
 >>
 >
 >A lot more than just one website, troll.
 
 Bring it on, stuckkie.  You know you want to.
 
 >
 >>
 >>> So from now on I'll just ignore you - like the ignorant should be.
 >>>
 >>>>> However, it may not be a problem from at least one of these for much longer.
 >>>> If he loses an account because you lied to his NSP, I'll see to it he
 >>>> gets a free account.   Since you've decided to go play NetKKKop, I'll
 >>>> take every one of your off charter posts to your provider, comcast. K?
 >>>>
 >>>>
 >>> No lies.  Just showing the ISP's what they've done.
 >>
 >> Liar.
 >>
 >
 >Sorry, troll.  No lies.
 
 Liar.
 
 
 --
 gburnore at DataBasix dot Com
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 How you look depends on where you go.
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Gary L. Burnore                       |  ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
 |  ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
 Official .sig, Accept no substitutes. |  ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
 |  ÝÛ 0 1 7 2 3 / Ý³Þ 3 7 4 9 3 0 Û³
 Black Helicopter Repair Services, Ltd.|     Official Proof of Purchase
 ===========================================================================
  Navigation: [Reply to this message] |