* This rotten B8MB, New Reincarnation of the Same Old Song
  Home FAQ Contact Sign in
alt.fr.dev.null only
 
Advanced search
POPULAR GROUPS

more...

 Up
* This rotten B8MB, New Reincarnation of the Same Old Song         

Group: alt.fr.dev.null · Group Profile
Author: fff
Date: Dec 19, 2006 20:37


alt.config
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.config?hl=en

alt.config@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

* This rotten B8MB, New Reincarnation of the Same Old Song - 6
messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.config/browse_thread/thread/aa8f16daf4ce6355?hl...
* cmsg newsgroup alt.kook.patrick-m-sullivan - 4 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.config/browse_thread/thread/69d84c3bfed28f21?hl...
* cmsg newsgroup alt.kook.patrick-m-sullkivan - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.config/browse_thread/thread/6e9c8d1dd7958b12?hl...

==============================================================================
TOPIC: This rotten B8MB, New Reincarnation of the Same Old Song
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.config/browse_thread/thread/aa8f16daf4ce6355?hl...
==============================================================================

== 1 of 6 == Date: Tues, Dec 19 2006 2:00 pm From:
nukleus@invalid.addr (nukleus)

In article cairo.ks.uiuc.edu>,
tskirvin@killfile.org wrote:
>>FPHjYpEZA+6nh02duWE+6PY= =hXHx User-Agent: nn/6.7.3 Xref:
>>news.easynews.nl news.groups:9302 Status: N
>>
>>"Martin X. Moleski, SJ" canisius.edu> writes:
>>
>>>>>> ... Do you recall when the keys were handed over? Last I
>>>>>> read, he was still helping on the 'technical' details, like
>>>>>> using the keys to send stuff out.
>>
>>>> I believe that both Russ and Todd are helping to send stuff out.
>>
>>There are two bits that I don't currently handle myself: sending
>>out control messages (Russ' area - he's got the scripts already set
>>up)

Interesting...

So, Russ Allbery retired, but he did not give you the key?

What it means to me, is that you are just a bunch of nobodies. If you
don't have a key, then what is the difference between you and anybody
else?

Oh, Russ trusts YOU more?

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.
>>and modifying the moderators (Todd's area - it's bigger than the
>>Big-8 anyway).

Oh, and the other totalitarian dictator, Todd, is also on it?

Well...
>>I'm also not in charge of anything on isc.org, except in as much as
>>the control messages are archived there.

Well...

So what ARE you?

Just a dictator wannabe? A public servant? A Russ's slave?

What IS this B8MB thing?

Just a pussy in the sky with diamonds?
>>- Tim Skirvin (skirv@big-8.org)

== 2 of 6 == Date: Tues, Dec 19 2006 2:00 pm From:
nukleus@invalid.addr (nukleus)

In article sws5.ornl.gov>, Dave Sill big-8.org> wrote:
>>shellvm.peak.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: sws5.ornl.gov
>>Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>>X-Trace: sws1.ornl.gov 1166474838 20788 160.91.218.105 (18 Dec 2006
>>20:47:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@news.ornl.gov
>>NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 20:47:18 +0000 (UTC)
>>User-Agent: Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) XEmacs/21.4 (Security
>>Through Obscurity, linux) Cancel-Lock:
>>sha1:92a+pA7HvsrWWihZEru8eY9drbA= Xref: news.easynews.nl
>>news.groups:9338 Status: N
>>
>>stanley@shellvm.peak.org writes:
>>
>>>> In article sws5.ornl.gov>, Dave Sill big-8.org> wrote:
>>>>>>Making the board permanent was not an ultimatum. Russ and Todd
>>>>>>could have insisted upon some kind of election, and I'm pretty
>>>>>>sure we'd have complied.
>>>>
>>>> This is fascinating. Did you miss the mandate in your charter
>>>> that required elections by the end of October? How did you
>>>> comply with that? I'm pretty sure you HAD a mandate to produce
>>>> a system with elections and you did NOT comply with that.
>>
>>Obviously that wasn't a strict requirement.
>>
>>>>>>But I think they agreed that elections weren't necessary,
>>>>
>>>> Yes, they "changed their mind". They realized you had no
>>>> intention of complying and just gave in.
>>
>>No, like Marty/Jonathan said, we explained the situation and
>>requested that the voting requirement be waived. At that point,
>>they had all the power (what little there is) and could easily have
>>forced us to accept the voting requirement. Instead, they agreed
>>without a fight. Either they agreed with our explanation or they
>>lacked the will to put up a fight.

But who ARE they on the first place? What authority do they have or
had? HOW did they get to be dictators?

Well, by the SAME totalitarian principle when tale, David Lawrence,
associated with the same ISC (Internet Software Consortium), sponsored
by the US military and intelligence agencies, hand picked Russ Allbery
to become the next dictator.

When Russ was utterly disgrace because of his highly totalitarian
bias, he had to split, and did the same thing as all dictators do:
Appoint the NEXT dictator on his place. Interestingly enough, the
dictators do not like to loose the grip on power. So... If what Tim
Skirvin said is true, Russ and Todd are still the "tsars" of this
rotten, totalitarian big-8 thing.

Because THEY have the key to PGP sign the control messages and THEY
have the "authority" to use the isc.org originated email address,
which means what?
>>-Dave
>>

== 3 of 6 == Date: Tues, Dec 19 2006 2:00 pm From:
nukleus@invalid.addr (nukleus)

In article <12odo7uoutvgn4a@news.supernews.com>, "Martin X. Moleski,
SJ"
canisius.edu> wrote:
>>On Mon, 18 Dec 2006 12:24:24 -0500, K. A. Cannon
>>insurgent.orgy> wrote in
>>blackhelicopter.databasix.com>:
>>
>>>> ... But I can...because some people on the B8B want to see
>>>>things in absolutes....and the same can be said of the B8B's
>>>>opposition. There can only be this or that, black or white, left
>>>>or right. There's no in-between. I enjoy the in-between. It's a
>>>>great place and I sincerely wish that more people would take a
>>>>look at it.
>>
[...]
>>>>Because here...In the middle ground....I can objectively look at
>>>>the B8B and I can look at the detractors of the B8B and I can see
>>>>that both parties are right...and wrong.
>>
>>It is in the nature of a decision to "cut things off." The root of
>>the word is found in "incision" and "circumcision." The board has
>>had to come up with a whole host of decisions about itself and how
>>it relates to the outside world. In the practical order, there is
>>always more than one way to get things done. We could have made
>>different decisions. We have modified or reversed some of our
>>early decisions. Things may continue to "evolve" (in the sense of
>>taking some unexpected turns) over the course of time.
>>
>>The board is doing the best that it can do. I mean this claim not
>>as an absolute (black-and-white thinking) but as a relative claim.
>>In making decisions, we sum up a lot of imperfect inputs (time,
>>talent, options, guesses about results & consequences, etc.), and
>>make a choice that we think we can and should live with. Then we
>>try to make it work.

So far, you have made some of the worst decisions ever in the entire
history of usenet:

1. Create a "moderated" news.groups.proposals group as an "official",
"authorized" place to discuss the issues of group creation, which goes
against the very principle of usenet. Usenet is a public, open place,
the issues of public interest can not be discussed in a "moderated"
group, which literally means a "private property".

By the very nature of "moderated" groups, ANY article can be junked by
"moderator" for ANY reason whatsoever. That means that you literally
eliminate any views but those that align with YOUR view of the world,
and YOUR view is as limited and as biased as any other.

That is why there is a concept of Democracy.

What YOU have is a totalitarian equivalent in PURE form.

That's a big booboo.

2. The decisions about group creation and group status are to be
discussed and voted for in public and by public and not by some
internal "vote" of so called board.

That is a big booboo.

3. You openly state that the opinions of others are irrelevant to your
decision. They don't change anything.

About the ONLY thing that matters is what YOUR clique decides BEHIND
THE SCENES.

4. You simply ignore the issues of significance and importance to
usenet, such as creation of news.admin.moderation group and removal of
"moderation" status from comp.ai, taken over by self-admitted nazi,
David Kinny.

That is a BIG booboo.

And the list goes on.

So...

What you have in place is a LITERAL model of a totalitarian system.

I mean LITERAL.
>>Many people see other options that the board could have made and
>>(in their view) should have made.

What "board"? You are just a bunch of wannabies.

Tim Skirvin just posted a post where he claims that your so called
board does not have a key and is not responsible for the most critical
things.

Amazingly enough, if this is true, it means that the previous
dictators can not just loose a grip on this imaginary power, just like
ANY other dictators.
>>That's life. I'm quite comfortable with the fact that people
>>disagree. In fact, I believe that "people disagree" is a statement
>>with which no rational person can disagree, since every attempt to
>>do so would simply provide fresh evidence for the truth of the
>>assertion.
>>Just got this in an e-mail:
>>
>>e e cummings once wrote a line: when strangers meet, life
>>begins. (1x1 collection of poems.)
>>
>>>> ... Compromise is dead in news.groups. It was murdered...a lot.
>>
>>Those sound like black-and-white statements. ;o)
>>
>>news.groups and its predecessors have always been contentious.
>>tale wanted to reform the system in 1993:
>>
>>Message-ID: <29klo7INN5sq@rodan.UU.NET>
>>
>>Brad Templeton got an auxilliary creation system passed by a vote
>>in 1991, but it went nowhere:
>>
>>http://www.templetons.com/brad/trial.html

Brad Templeton if full of it upto his ears. He even had guts to post
a message denying his own previous statement regarding the group
creation process, saying "that is not what I meant".

Here is the quote one more time:

======================== Quote begin =======================

Newsgroups: news.groups From: bt@templetons.com (Brad Templeton)
Subject: Re: USENET - it is over References:
<3A9353AB.4320847F@worldnet.att.net> <3C195139.EF45100@sfo.com>
<9vbl5t$4i3$1@panix3.panix.com> <9vejea$spf$1@slb6.atl.mindspring.net>
Organization: http://www.templetons.com/brad Originator:
brad@news.netfunny.com (Brad Templeton) Message-ID:
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 16 Dec
2001 20:10:04 GMT Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 20:10:04 GMT

[...]

But two decades later, I think that debating which newsgroups should
exist is entirely the wrong approach, and has been the source of a
good chunk of the negative aspects of managing USENET.

It started because resources were limited and tree organization tools
were (and continue to be) meagre, but the whole idea is flawed.

As is the voting, which was just a fraud to make people shut up once
they lost a vote.

(In those days, the debates would get long and the person pushing for
a group nobody else wanted would never go away and admit defeat.
Voting with the silly '100 more' rule was not to create democracy, but
to end the debate.)

======================= End of quote =======================

What is there to deny? The quote is actually a fair assesment of this
whole power trip. Even if there are 100k groups on big-8, it does not
make a DENT in terms of system load, because 99.9%% of those groups are
simply empty, which isn't a big deal of ANY kind because it does not
represent any kind of load on the system, considering the fact that
computing power and storage increased by several factors of magnitude
since the beginning of usenet.

Just look at IRC. A perfect example of a flexible system that works
like a champ without ANY problems. You just entier IRC and create ANY
channels you want. Just type in the name and hit return key. That is
ALL it takes.

So...

What is the difference between IRC and usenet? You can just
automatically harvest the empty groups with a suckiest perl
script. Just set up a timer and, if there is not posting to the group
withing the timeout period, it simply gets removed. When someone else
wants to create it again, they can just issue a control.

That is ALL there is to it. Simple as it gets.

Why do you need a totalitarian clique to "manage" the most propagated
hierarchy using the out of the box totalitarian principles? What does
THAT achieve?
>>I like what the board has done.

Sure. Because you are one of them.

Enough.
>>I think it's an improvement over the old system.
>>
>>I don't think it's perfect.
>>
>>I don't think it will ever satisfy everybody.
>>
>>I accept that as a fact of life.
>>
>>Marty

== 4 of 6 == Date: Tues, Dec 19 2006 2:00 pm From:
nukleus@invalid.addr (nukleus)

In article <12oe9175m622fb1@news.supernews.com>, "Martin X. Moleski,
SJ"
canisius.edu> wrote:
>>On Mon, 18 Dec 2006 09:50:31 +0000, Thomas Lee psp.co.uk>
>>wrote in mail.psp.co.uk>:
>>
>>>>In message newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
>>>>Jim Riley pipeline.com> writes
>>
>>>>>>On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 10:44:01 +0000 (UTC),
>>>>>>stanley@shellvm.peak.org
>>>>>>wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>RFC?
>>
>>>>>>Are you suggesting that RFC's don't recognize that the
>>>>>>moderator may modify the proto-article prior to injection?
>>
>>>>I'd like to know what RFCs cover moderator behaviour.
>>
>>I stumbled across this text while searching for something else.
>>
>>This is a draft. It is only a draft. But it's interesting to see
>>that the USEFOR folks are thinking about the issue.
>>
>>USEFOR-USEPRO and USEFOR-USEFOR are intended to supersede RFC 1036.

Wut?

Supersed RFC 1036? What a lunatic.

There ARE not "duties" of a "moderator". He can do whatever he
pleases, and no matter what kind of donkey interprets it, just like
the one you cite here, it does not change the nature of it.
>>.... Moderators are entirely free within the Netnews protocol to
>>accept or reject messages based on any criteria and to make
>>arbitrary modifications to articles (both header fields and body).

Just a bunch of crap from some wannabe that makes it look like he is a
virtual "god", to tell everybody else how to think, how to walk and
things like that.

Just bring this sucker here. We'll have a friendly chat with him. I
think after a couple of kwestions, he'll run away in shame.
>>Marty

What kinda horseshit are you citing and what does it mean on the first
place?

Here is MY definition:

"Moderators", in vast majority of cases, are power hungry maniacs,
intolerant of any opinion but the one that aligns with their crooked
view of reality and their power hunger.

As a result, they organize the campaigns behind the scense, just like
Tim Skirvin invited to do just the other day, to take over some
existing and active group and covert it into a totalitarian outlet of
the lowest common denominator, the propaganda and advertizement
machine.

We could add plenty more here, but it pretty much covers the issue of
"moderation".

As far as RFC 1036 goes, and all other RFCs relevant to NNTP prototol,
ALL they are saying is to describe the underlying mechanisms of how
things are done. They can not possibly talk about ideological aspects
of how usenet operates.

Because they simply have no authority of ANY kind, unless they are
sick with the same desease as most of those "moderators" and think
THEIR word is better than mine.

They still can not grasp the very concept of democracy. ALL their
netti-quetti-betti-fetti is but fetishes.

That is ALL there is to it.

The netti is inside your heart.

Clear enough?

== 5 of 6 == Date: Tues, Dec 19 2006 2:00 pm From:
nukleus@invalid.addr (nukleus)

In article <12oecghiop127bd@news.supernews.com>, "Martin X. Moleski,
SJ"
canisius.edu> wrote:
>>On Mon, 18 Dec 2006 21:51:50 +0000 (UTC), stanley@shellvm.peak.org
>>wrote in shellvm.peak.org>:
>>
>>>>In article sws5.ornl.gov>, Dave Sill big-8.org> wrote:
>>>>>>stanley@shellvm.peak.org writes:
>>
>>>>>>>> ... I'm pretty sure you HAD a mandate to produce a system
>>>>>>>> with elections and you did NOT comply with that.
>>
>>Agreed. We did not comply with Todd's original design for the
>>board as announced on October 19, 2005 (Message-ID:
>><1129740562.29969@isc.org>).

First of all, Tod is one of the evillest people you can find. He is
basically a satanist.

On that "usenet-2" site, www.usenet2.org if i recall correctly, they
had their un-so-famoust mugs page with the pictures of many of local
"tsars" for each hierarchy as designed by the dictator General, Russ
Allbery in his not-so-famous rants about how screwed up the current
system of usenet is because it is not controlled and dominated by the
local "tsars".

Yes, TSARS. LITERALLY. This is how these nazis think. Just look up
that web page if it still exists. It is about the sickest thing
imaginable.

Now, the picture of Todd on that mug page was a picture of a devil
with red horns and red bloody eyes.

This man is about the sickest one you can find.

So...

Whatever he says is the manifestation of evil in PURE form.

Furthermore, he is just a wannabe like you all. You see, Russ has
NEVER lost a grip on the key, and that is about the ONLY thing that
makes you a REAL dictator.

Those, who just blabber a lot, but do not have the key, are just plain
wannabies.

If Russ goes kapunkt, all of a sudden, it is going to be about the
biggest problem for big-8. Because he himself wired-in the INN news
server to accept the PGP signe messages originating at isc.org.

Zo...

Get the drift?

Enough of this totalitarian garbage. After a while, it makes you sick
to your stomach.
>>>>>>Obviously that wasn't a strict requirement.
>>
>>>>At the time you accepted the position, it was a MANDATORY
>>>>item. It was so important that your positions were to be
>>>>eliminated and the process start over if you did not have
>>>>elections in place by October.
>>
>>Agreed.
>>
>>We talked about it on and off for a little over four months, among
>>many other things. In the end, we made the decision to ask to be
>>released from that requirement.
>>
>>I can't say why other board members voted as they did. For myself,
>>it was because the model of "representative government" seemed to
>>be the wrong model to use for renewing board membership. I've
>>spelled this out many times and have a position paper here:
>>
>>http://www.big-8.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=member:mxm#a_personal_view_of_the_big
>>-8_management_board
>>
>>>>... They realized you had no intention of complying and gave up.
>>
>>Todd and Russ have both spoken for themselves in their messages of
>>September 30, 2006.
>>
>>http://groups.google.com/group/news.groups/msg/b9a5ee8f65691199?dmode=source&hl
>>=en
>>
>>http://groups.google.com/group/news.groups/msg/de9d6df080896139?hl=en
>>
>>>>They could have dumped you all and started over, keeping
>>>>themselves involved. Or they could give up and walk away after
>>>>dumping you all. Or they could walk away. They chose the latter.
>>
>>Yes.
>>
>>>>That does not change the fact that you accepted the job with a
>>>>very specific mandate and decided not to carry it out. If you
>>>>didn't think you could do what you were promising to do, the
>>>>ethical course of action was to not volunteer.
>>
>>(I pass over the split infinitive in silence.)
>>
>>Between accepting the mandate and deciding not to carry it out, we
>>spent a massive amount of time discussing how a meaningful election
>>could take place (among other things). I accepted the nomination
>>to the committee honestly thinking that we would work something
>>out; when it became evident that we could not, I voted to propose
>>ourselves as the successors to the troika.
>>
>>>>And to tell us now that you would have complied had they insisted
>>>>is just -- well, revisionist history.
>>
>>I'm pretty sure that my view in the spring of this year was that I
>>would be happy to resign if Russ and Todd did not accept our
>>proposal. Yes--I was replying to you, in fact:
>>
>>Message-ID: <57l762hfljv2pljujoudlfdbs7hjb8stks@4ax.com>
>>
>>>> In rather clumsy and awkward language, we have "proposed
>>>> ourselves" as the permanent board. skirv says the announcement
>>>> about the proposal came out in March. He may be right.
>>
>>>> The proposal has been made to Russ and Todd. They can accept or
>>>> reject it.
>>
>>>> As I think jik said, and looking at things only from my personal
>>>> standpoint, we win if they accept the proposal because then the
>>>> work we've done learning how to make decisions as a group won't
>>>> be wasted; if they reject the proposal, I win by getting some
>>>> free time back for other hobbies.
>>
>>Marty

== 6 of 6 == Date: Tues, Dec 19 2006 2:08 pm From:
nukleus@invalid.addr (nukleus)

In article <1hqh9gk.1r0lnnelzj6trN%%kmorgan@spamcop.net>,
kmorgan@spamcop.net
Kathy Morgan) wrote:
>>shellvm.peak.org> wrote:
>>>> the issue it not with respect to rec.ponds.moderated, it is with
>>>> respect to news.servers. The issue is that the board knows that
>>>> the proponent will not use ngp, but is falling all over itself
>>>> saying that he has to do things they are telling him to do -- in
>>>> ngp -- or else his group won't get created.
>>>> So the promise that you'd all be here in news.groups too is
>>>> just, well, too much work and you aren't going to do it after
>>>> all.
>>Some (maybe all) of us are here and we are reading at least some
>>posts, but _official_ discussion of active proposals takes place in
>>news.groups.proposals.

There can be nothing official with your totalitarian clique appointed
by the totalitarian dictator Russ Allbery, appointed by yet another
dictator, David Lawrence (tale).

What is so difficult to grasp?

Are you so power hungry as not to realize that this "official" status
is just a pipe dream?

Do you have a PGP signed key?

Then what kind of an "official" you are?

You see, that previous, and, actually, present, for all practical
purposes, dictator, Russ Allbery wired the INN server in such a way,
that would allow HIM and him ONLY to be the "authorized" dictator,
whose control messages would even appear on the news admin's screen.

All of you are just a power hungry maniacs. That is all.
>>The proponent for news.servers does not need to post in n.g.p. if
>>he doesn't wish to, but he does need to respond in some fashion to
>>the comments there.

Did YOU respond to a news.admin.moderation RFD posted at least 5 times
to date?

Well, i tellya, YOU need to respond to that.

Enough of this totalitarian horseshit talk.
>>That response could be a new RFD addressing the concerns, or he
>>could just ask to have the Last Call for Comments posted using the
>>original RFD.
>>
>>The proponent was able to overcome his new-found scruples about
>>moderated forums to have an RFD posted to nan and ngp; he needs to
>>overcome them again and post either a second RFD or an LCC to have
>>the proposal move forward.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: cmsg newsgroup alt.kook.patrick-m-sullivan
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.config/browse_thread/thread/69d84c3bfed28f21?hl...
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 == Date: Tues, Dec 19 2006 9:48 am From: "Steve Ratcliffe"

For your newsgroups file: alt.kook.patrick-m-sullivan

Charter: alt.kook.patrick-m-sullivan is for duscussion of one Patrick
Michael Sullivan, his criminal history, his spamming and his stalking.

Unmarked off-topic materials, advertising (spam), excessive posting,
cancel attacks, and abusive cross postings are prohibited, as are
binaries of any sort.

All posts must be crossposted to one of either, alt.suicide.holiday,
alt.religiion.scientology, van.general or alt.usenet.stalker.

""Herbert's Batallion" had trouble with this yesterday so I emailed
him and offeredto do it. This is NOT my group.

-- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------ Unlimited Access,
Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

== 2 of 4 == Date: Tues, Dec 19 2006 9:51 am From: dave hillstrom

On Tue, 19 Dec 2006 17:48:32 -0000, "Steve Ratcliffe"
gmail.com> wrote:
>>For your newsgroups file: alt.kook.patrick-m-sullivan
>>
>>Charter: alt.kook.patrick-m-sullivan is for duscussion of one
>>Patrick Michael Sullivan, his criminal history, his spamming and
>>his stalking.
>>
>>Unmarked off-topic materials, advertising (spam), excessive
>>posting, cancel attacks, and abusive cross postings are prohibited,
>>as are binaries of any sort.
>>
>>All posts must be crossposted to one of either,
>>alt.suicide.holiday, alt.religiion.scientology, van.general or
>>alt.usenet.stalker.
>>
>>
>>""Herbert's Batallion" had trouble with this yesterday so I emailed
>>him and offeredto do it. This is NOT my group.

dont you need a "Control:" header?

-- dave hillstrom mhm15x4 zrbj this fucking sig is for mimus. deal. ==
3 of 4 == Date: Tues, Dec 19 2006 10:09 am From: "Steve Ratcliffe"
"dave hillstrom" meow.org> wrote in message
news:dk9go2tbta2k0q3s4cr5rpbvakgq1b2o2k@4ax.com... > > On Tue, 19 Dec
2006 17:48:32 -0000, "Steve Ratcliffe"
>> gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>For your newsgroups file: alt.kook.patrick-m-sullivan
>>>>
>>>>Charter: alt.kook.patrick-m-sullivan is for duscussion of one
>>>>Patrick Michael Sullivan, his criminal history, his spamming and
>>>>his stalking.
>>>>
>>>>Unmarked off-topic materials, advertising (spam), excessive
>>>>posting, cancel attacks, and abusive cross postings are
>>>>prohibited, as are binaries of any sort.
>>>>
>>>>All posts must be crossposted to one of either,
>>>>alt.suicide.holiday, alt.religiion.scientology, van.general or
>>>>alt.usenet.stalker.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>""Herbert's Batallion" had trouble with this yesterday so I
>>>>emailed him and offeredto do it. This is NOT my group.
>>
>> dont you need a "Control:" header?

Thanks for the pointer. I was sure I put one in. I'll try again with
XNews.
>>
>> -- dave hillstrom mhm15x4 zrbj
>>
>> this fucking sig is for mimus. deal.

-- Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com<<<<<<------ Unlimited Access,
Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

== 4 of 4 == Date: Tues, Dec 19 2006 10:18 am From: -= Hawk =-

On Tue, 19 Dec 2006 17:48:32 -0000, "Steve Ratcliffe"
gmail.com> scribbled:
>>For your newsgroups file: alt.kook.patrick-m-sullivan
>>
>>Charter: alt.kook.patrick-m-sullivan is for duscussion of one
>>Patrick Michael Sullivan, his criminal history, his spamming and
>>his stalking.
>>
>>Unmarked off-topic materials, advertising (spam), excessive
>>posting, cancel attacks, and abusive cross postings are prohibited,
>>as are binaries of any sort.
>>
>>All posts must be crossposted to one of either,
>>alt.suicide.holiday, alt.religiion.scientology, van.general or
>>alt.usenet.stalker.
>>
>>
>>""Herbert's Batallion" had trouble with this yesterday so I emailed
>>him and offeredto do it. This is NOT my group.

You're just as much of a fuckup as he was. Quit while you're behind.

-- Want to propose a newsgroup? Browse these links for help: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/by-newsgroup/alt/alt.config.html http://www.gweep.ca/~edmonds/usenet/good-newgroup.html http://nylon.net/alt/ For information on moderating a newsgroup: http://www.swcp.com/~dmckeon/mod-faq.html http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/faqs/mod-pitfalls.html Tale discusses control messages: ftp://ftp.isc.org/pub/usenet/CONFIG/README For proposals that belong in the UK hierarchy: http://www.usenet.org.uk/ To locate a newsgroup control message: ftp://ftp.isc.org/pub/usenet/control/[hierarchy]/[group.name].gz Open with WinZip. Newsgroup Propagation Search: http://groupsearch.aacity.net Blame 'ratz, you know you want to... Anyone else want to make changes to my sig? They're $5 each. ============================================================================== TOPIC: cmsg newsgroup alt.kook.patrick-m-sullkivan http://groups.google.com/group/alt.config/browse_thread/thread/6e9c8d1dd7958b12?hl... ============================================================================== == 1 of 1 == Date: Tues, Dec 19 2006 10:43 am From: Bob Officer On Mon, 18 Dec 2006 15:34:17 -0500, in alt.config, -= Hawk =- Spam-Me-Not.cfl.rr.com> wrote:
>>On Mon, 18 Dec 2006 17:34:42 -0000, "Herbert's Batallion"
>>gmail.com> scribbled:
>>
>>>>
>>>>"Herbert's Batallion" gmail.com> wrote in
>>>>message news:4586c37c$0$15558$88260bb3@free.teranews.com...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- Posted via a free Usenet account from
>>>>>> http://www.teranews.com
>>>>
>>>>Fucking OE. Sorry.
>>
>>Fucking "Herbert's Batallion", not sorry.

Did it take very long...?

Did you leave with a smile?

Is that like Saving Private Ryan?

-- Bob Officer observed in message: blue.rahul.net> that
On Tue, 20 Jun 2006, "2Rowdy" transparently proposed: Oh how nice,
you are jealous of my farting car. and then
Aratziosneakemail.com> wrote: Why do kooks always
confuse sarcasm with jealousy? To which Charlotte said: If they
correctly parsed sarcasm, they wouldn't be kooks! On Mon, 26 Jun
2006, in alt.config, "2Rowdy" in Message-ID:
<93ad974a5f73f22de20b6f34852f061b@nntp.aacity.net> exclaimed: Now,
is this sarcasm?
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "alt.config" group. To post to this group, visit
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.config?hl=en To unsubscribe from
this group, send email to alt.config-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.config/subscribe?hl=en To report
abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com
==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com?hl=en
no comments
diggit! del.icio.us! reddit!