Re: PING Old Codger

Bruce said:

John of Aix said:

(Sorry to all the groups this does not concern but as OC doesn't give
his home group(s) I've no way opf knowing where to reach him.)

Why not do what everybody else does and just ignore him?

I did mainly, but when I killfiled him recently he got the huff and
posted abuse complaints to my ISP. While I hate this crossposting, I
felt I needed to retort and as I said, I don't know his home group. He
is, of course, now in the killfile so ignoring him I shall be. Once
again my apologies to all those not concerned.

John of Aix said:

Bruce said:

John of Aix said:

(Sorry to all the groups this does not concern but as OC doesn't give
his home group(s) I've no way opf knowing where to reach him.)

Why not do what everybody else does and just ignore him?

I did mainly, but when I killfiled him recently he got the huff and
posted abuse complaints to my ISP.

Your foul mouth would ensure you get many ISP complaints, here's
another.

In message <[email hidden]>, Gloria
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

John of Aix said:

Bruce said:

John of Aix wrote:
> (Sorry to all the groups this does not concern but as OC doesn't give
> his home group(s) I've no way opf knowing where to reach him.)

Why not do what everybody else does and just ignore him?

I did mainly, but when I killfiled him recently he got the huff and
posted abuse complaints to my ISP.

Your foul mouth would ensure you get many ISP complaints, here's
another.

Why are you wasting your time complaining about foul language? Usenet is
an "adult medium", and ISPs are not interested in foul language.

Here is an excerpt from my ISP's AUP:

<quote>
Usenet is a robust medium that is intended for use by adults. Articles
may be posted that offend or annoy other users. These may contain foul
language or controversial viewpoints.

The Internet community does not generally consider it appropriate for
content-based decisions to be made by anyone except by an individual on
their own behalf. Therefore we do not consider this sort of article to
be "abuse" and directly actionable under the Usenet AUP. If you are
offended by articles made by one of the users of our network then you
should arrange not to read them in the future, by using facilities
provided within your newsreading software such as "killfiles".
</quote>
--
Jane
British OO, American and Australian HO, and DCC in the garden
http://www.yddraiggoch.demon.co.uk/railway/railway.html

X-No-Archive: yes
In message <[email hidden]>, Gloria
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

John of Aix said:

Bruce said:

John of Aix wrote:
> (Sorry to all the groups this does not concern but as OC doesn't give
> his home group(s) I've no way opf knowing where to reach him.)

Why not do what everybody else does and just ignore him?

I did mainly, but when I killfiled him recently he got the huff and
posted abuse complaints to my ISP.

Your foul mouth would ensure you get many ISP complaints, here's
another.

There's a world of a difference between abuse on the Usenet, and abuse
of the Usenet. Generally ISP's are concerned with the latter rather than
the former.

Cross-posting to ten disparate newgroups could be considered abuse.
Turnpike, which is about the only Usenet-compliant client around, kicks
up a fuss if one tries to cross-post to more than four newsgroups.

--
James Follett. Novelist. http://www.jamesfollett.dswilliams.co.uk
ICE, my third novel, is to be made into a TV mini-series by the Power
Corporation next year. See
http://www.powcorp.com/live/home.html

On Tue, 2 Oct 2007 10:47:59 +0100, JF <[email hidden]>
wrote:

Greetings JF... So you're still about then. Thought I hadn't seen
you down here. ;-)

Quoted message said:

Cross-posting to ten disparate newgroups could be considered abuse.
Turnpike, which is about the only Usenet-compliant client around, kicks
up a fuss if one tries to cross-post to more than four newsgroups.

Shouldn't somebody cross-post this to the sat-tv newsgroups. :-)

Nick.

Jane Sullivan said:

Why are you wasting your time complaining about foul language? Usenet is
an "adult medium", and ISPs are not interested in foul language.

Here is an excerpt from my ISP's AUP:

<quote>
Usenet is a robust medium that is intended for use by adults. Articles
may be posted that offend or annoy other users. These may contain foul
language or controversial viewpoints.

The Internet community does not generally consider it appropriate for
content-based decisions to be made by anyone except by an individual on
their own behalf. Therefore we do not consider this sort of article to
be "abuse" and directly actionable under the Usenet AUP.

Your ISP has a track record of liberalism in respect of its attitude
to the content of its clients' Usenet postings, web sites, etc.
However, they would do well to recall that they have been caught with
their pants well and truly down once before when they tried to argue
that user-posted content was "not their responsibility".

The oft-quoted and celebrated incident is reported here:

http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2111824/demon-settles-internet-libel-case

In any case, I have always been at a loss to understand why "adult" in
this context is taken to equate to the unbridled use of foul language.
I would have thought quite the opposite is the case. I regard the use
of four-letter expletives to punctuate one's postings as puerile in
the extreme. It demonstrates a lack of command of the English
language (which is perhaps understandable in the case of Welsh
people).

Kind regards,

--
Walt Davidson Email: g3nyy @despammed.com