|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: SteveSteve
Date: Feb 2, 2007 17:25
> Just prior to Xmas he went a bit off the deep end and vowed off of Usenet:
>
> Message-ID: 192.168.0.147>
>
> I've had enough of the bullkshit there, thanks. I'm sure you will all be
> pleased to know that I am dumping Usenet altogether at the end of this
> year, but for now, NANAB is off the radar anyhow.
>
>
>
Usenet is poison to the attitude. The constant bickering over
everything, insults slung left and right, snide comments, and
everything that is usenet put one in a frame of mind that is not
compatible with every day life. In other words if you are keyed to
always looking for the argument, snide comment, or perceived slight,
you'll find it, and Usenet helps you stay keyed.
|
| Show full article (0.98Kb) |
|
| |
no comments
|
|
|
|
|
|
Author: glgxgglgxg
Date: Feb 2, 2007 16:45
Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr. wrote:
> Joe Wagner wrote:
>> On Sat, 27 Jan 2007 10:24:45 -0600, "Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr."
>> cox.net> wrote:
>> >>> "Ex turpi causa non oritur actio" is the latin phrase lawyers use for
>>> the point I was trying to make--I don't know exactly what it means, but
>>> I understand it to be along the lines of "don't come to court with dirty
>>> hands".
>>
>> Of course to clarify, dirty hands (and/or latches) is not a relevant
>> question under CAN-SPAM nor California' (and likely most other
>> states') spam laws.
>
> Of course to clarify, I mentioned that in the context of a suggestion
> that one could sign up themselves, then when there was not apparent
> "confirmation" cry "spam".
>
> If you signed yourself up, it is not spam.
> ...
|
| Show full article (0.80Kb) |
|
no comments
|
|
|
Author: glgxgglgxg
Date: Feb 2, 2007 16:30
>
> I'm not sure I know why I posted the piece, [snip]
Qualudes?
|
| |
|
no comments
|
|
|
Author: glgxgglgxg
Date: Feb 2, 2007 16:26
jrg wrote:
> On 2/1/2007 12:03 PM Vernon Schryver opined:
>>
>> Anyone who sees running a computer as an entirely passive activity is
>> not only a memer of the marching morrons that are currently the biggest
>> part of the Internet's spam, phishing, and DDoS problems, but too
>> negligent to be allowed near knives and forks at the dinner table.
>
> glad I never said anything close to that so I'm not a "memer of the morrons"
Careful, Vernon will accuse you of misquoting him. He wrote:
"memer of the marching morrons"
^^^^^^^^
Looks like good sig fodder to me.
|
| |
|
no comments
|
|
|
Author: Rev. BeergogglesRev. Beergoggles
Date: Feb 2, 2007 16:17
Still messing with the code required to
automate posting.
csv with header
-----
host,ip,dns
asediumm.com,[ 201.71.0.50], LESTEM.COM
ceremiaa.com,[ 201.71.0.50], LESTEM.COM
delecrtiaa.com,[ 201.71.0.50], LESTEM.COM
demiann.com,[ 201.71.0.50], LESTEM.COM
kaisipee.com,...
|
| Show full article (2.89Kb) |
|
no comments
|
|
|
Author: glgxgglgxg
Date: Feb 2, 2007 16:16
NetworkElf wrote:
>
> Exactly how many jobs have you resigned from in a circumstance of this
> type? My guess would be none, at least none that aren't imaginary. I
> think we both know that 1) you could not produce verifiable evidence of
> someone resigning their job over this issue and 2) you would no more do
> it than you could flap your arms and fly to the moon.
>
> Talk is cheap.
One. Unfortunately, or perhaps fortunately depending upon how one looks
at it, it was my last large corporate job. In retrospect it was a really
stupid action financially. However since then my *physical* health has
improved and now I have lots of time to hang out with all the wonderful
folks at nanae :-)
|
| |
|
no comments
|
|
|
Author: glgxgglgxg
Date: Feb 2, 2007 16:10
Patricia A. Shaffer wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Feb 2007 00:06:43 -0800, "BEI Design"
> comcast.net.invalid> wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 01 Feb 2007 04:40:03 -0800, NetworkElf
>>> networkelf.net> wrote:>>>>> Adam was the group's proponent and has never been a
>>>>> moderator. Again, this is in the CFV.
>>>>
>>>> Why refer to published information when one can simply make it
>>>> up as one goes along? Haven't you been educated in the Morely
>>>> Dotes school of thought?
>>>
>>> Speaking of Morely, I haven't seen any of his posts around here ...
|
| Show full article (1.47Kb) |
|
no comments
|
|
|
Author: glgxgglgxg
Date: Feb 2, 2007 15:57
Add Homonym wrote:
> Joe Wagner wrote:
>> On Sat, 27 Jan 2007 10:24:45 -0600, "Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr."
>> cox.net> wrote:
>>
>> >>>"Ex turpi causa non oritur actio" is the latin phrase lawyers use for
>>>the point I was trying to make--I don't know exactly what it means, but
>>>I understand it to be along the lines of "don't come to court with dirty
>>>hands".
>>
>>
>> Of course to clarify, dirty hands (and/or latches) is not a relevant
>> question under CAN-SPAM nor California' (and likely most other
>> states') spam laws.
>>
>> Joe
>
> Indeed. The dirty hands doctrine is (IANAL) from what I understand
> mostly applied is civil cases. ...
|
| Show full article (1.14Kb) |
|
no comments
|
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Vernon SchryverVernon Schryver
Date: Feb 2, 2007 15:56
>> Forging subs is wrong, period.
>
>Perhaps, but, anecdotally, forging UNsubs of MCI/UUNET execs with MCI/UU
>spammers has been effective in the past.
There are no complicated or subtle ethical questions here. The
fact that most crimes have desired effects does not excuse them or
make the perpetrators other than what they are.
Doing anything with the intent of causing someone to receive unsolicited
bulk email makes you at least partly responsible for that unsolicited
bulk email and so a spammer. Thus, forging "removes" with the expectation
and intent of causing someone to receive bulk email makes you a spammer.
|
| Show full article (1.25Kb) |
|
no comments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
