Usenet Tech Q: Deleting Posts?

As a rec.* hierarchy group, there should be a moderator. Threads and posts definitely get killed,
although an FAQ and/or charter is never posted, as they should be on a regular basis.

"Larry Weisenthal" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:20040123145859.11541.00000610@mb-
m12.aol.com...

Quoted message said:

Techno-munchkin asks techno-geeks:

My AOL Usenet browser allows me to delete my own posts, but (obviously)

not

Quoted message said:

someone else's posts.

Recently, I've written responses and posted them, only to find that they

are

Quoted message said:

not showing up when I go and click "list all" on the thread postings.

My Q is this: is is possible for someone other than the poster to delete posts? Meaning, is it
possible for a "usenet hacker" to delete my posts

or the

Quoted message said:

posts of others?

- Larry

On 23 Jan 2004 19:58:59 GMT, [email hidden] (Larry Weisenthal)

Quoted message said:

Techno-munchkin asks techno-geeks:

My AOL Usenet browser allows me to delete my own posts, but (obviously) not someone else's posts.

Be aware that his may only be deleting this post on your server. As mentioned below I only know
enough to be dangerous here, but I think it's possible to post something and delete it on your
server and have someone else still get the message from a different server.

Quoted message said:

Recently, I've written responses and posted them, only to find that they are not showing up when I
go and click "list all" on the thread postings.

My Q is this: is is possible for someone other than the poster to delete posts? Meaning, is it
possible for a "usenet hacker" to delete my posts or the posts of others?

- Larry

I'm somewhere between Techno-Munchkin and Techno-Geek but I believe the answer to your
question is no or highly unlikely. After you post something I believe, don't know for sure,
that is distributed to all news servers that request that group. Not at all sure how it
works, but my understanding is that once you post you would have to go to each and every
server and delete it individually from that server. Something, once again I believe, would
need proper access to each server in order to accomplish. Of course there must be something
else going on as there are moderated groups so the info must pass thru a central local at
some point. Now your machine being hacked and someone "diverting" things from your machine
might be a possibility also. OTOH all paranoia aside, even being somewhat techno savy I
always suspect operator error first, even for myself. Hopefully someone with more knowlege
than I, shouldn't be too difficult, can fill in the blanks and correct my errors.

~Matt

Larry,

Try going up to Tools on the Tool bar and selecting Send and Receive. You might actually have those
messages sitting in your Outbox and if so, if you go to Send and Receive and select Send All, your
messages should go out. Sometimes I have had to do this to get mine posted when they did not go out
as I thought.

Marianne

"Larry Weisenthal" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:20040123145859.11541.00000610@mb-
m12.aol.com...

Quoted message said:

Techno-munchkin asks techno-geeks:

My AOL Usenet browser allows me to delete my own posts, but (obviously)

not

Quoted message said:

someone else's posts.

Recently, I've written responses and posted them, only to find that they

are

Quoted message said:

not showing up when I go and click "list all" on the thread postings.

My Q is this: is is possible for someone other than the poster to delete posts? Meaning, is it
possible for a "usenet hacker" to delete my posts

or the

Quoted message said:

posts of others?

- Larry

In article said:

As a rec.* hierarchy group, there should be a moderator. Threads and posts definitely get killed,
although an FAQ and/or charter is never posted, as they should be on a regular basis.

Um, not really. Usenet groups are not moderated unless they are explicitly created as moderated,
which this group is NOT. I think it's one of the OLD groups, before there were charters and votes
for groups.

When spam got bad, people invented cancelling programs, which were sometimes misused by idiots. But
they did keep the spam to a dull roar, until the spammers realized that relatively few people read
Usenet and that the real money was to be made from email.

Now the emphasis seems to be on blocking posts and email from IPs and sites known to be spam
sources. More and more sites pay for out-sourced Usenet feeds from companies like Supernews, which
do actively try to keep spam and deliberate misbehavior off their newsspool. They will block users,
IPs, and whole sites.

While it is possible that a malicious geek is cancelling Larry's posts, it's much more likely that
the problem is software configuration.

--
Karen Lofstrom [email hidden]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Is this the Gordian knot? The thing doctors sever upon birth?
Personally, I like navel oranges the best." -- Ludwig Plutonium

"Karen Lofstrom" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article said:

As a rec.* hierarchy group, there should be a moderator. Threads and

posts

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

definitely get killed, although an FAQ and/or charter is never posted,

as

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

they should be on a regular basis.

Um, not really. Usenet groups are not moderated unless they are explicitly created as moderated,
which this group is NOT. I think it's one of the OLD groups, before there were charters and votes
for groups.

When spam got bad, people invented cancelling programs, which were sometimes misused by idiots.
But they did keep the spam to a dull roar, until the spammers realized that relatively few people
read Usenet and that the real money was to be made from email.

Now the emphasis seems to be on blocking posts and email from IPs and sites known to be spam
sources. More and more sites pay for out-sourced Usenet feeds from companies like Supernews, which
do actively try to keep spam and deliberate misbehavior off their newsspool. They will block
users, IPs, and whole sites.

While it is possible that a malicious geek is cancelling Larry's posts, it's much more likely that
the problem is software configuration.

Perhaps no moderation, but threads, particularly those somewhat off-topic and contentious in nature,
are killed here by someone, I'm quite sure of that.

Overall, this is a very pleasant and werll-behaved group, to the point of being overly
serious at times.

Quoted message said:

--
Karen Lofstrom [email hidden]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Is this the Gordian knot? The thing doctors sever upon birth?
Personally, I like navel oranges the best." -- Ludwig Plutonium

In article said:

Perhaps no moderation, but threads, particularly those somewhat off-topic and contentious in
nature, are killed here by someone, I'm quite sure of that.

You ARE posting through Supernews, thus reading through Supernews, as am
I. They clean their feed, dropping everything known to be spam, from a spam site, from abusive
users, and crossposted to more than five groups. I'm usually against censorship, but all that is
just common sense.

--
Karen Lofstrom [email hidden]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
On Usenet since 1992

Larry Weisenthal said:

Techno-munchkin asks techno-geeks:

My AOL Usenet browser allows me to delete my own posts, but (obviously) not someone else's posts.

Recently, I've written responses and posted them, only to find that they are not showing up when I
go and click "list all" on the thread postings.

My Q is this: is is possible for someone other than the poster to delete posts? Meaning, is it
possible for a "usenet hacker" to delete my posts or the posts of others?

At the base of all this is the newsgroup system, which has been around since long before AOL came
into existence. Each message gets an identifier in that system, and it percolates throughout the
entire system, eventually reaching every news server in the world that cares to acquire it. Each
newsgroup at a news server is assigned a retention period. A typical retention period is two weeks.
Messages remain available in the newsgroup at that news server for two weeks. The retention period
can be much shorter than that in high traffic newsgroups. With the advent of cheaper and bigger
disks, retention periods have been increased, I suppose.

I don't know what AOL does, but they might set longer retention periods than typical Usenet sites
use. Maybe they have set them lower temporarily to clean out old messages? It *is* possible to
delete a thread from a particular unmoderated newsgroup in the entire newsgroup system, but I think
this is rarely done anymore.

I suspect the problem you are seeing is a system administration problem within AOL. We can try
this if you

replaced by computas. Keep a copy of all your posts to this group. When one doesn't appear for you,
send me a copy, and I will see if it appeared here. I'm betting they all will appear here.

martin

Count Scrofula said:

"Karen Lofstrom" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article said:

As a rec.* hierarchy group, there should be a moderator. Threads and

posts

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

definitely get killed, although an FAQ and/or charter is never posted,

as

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

they should be on a regular basis.

Um, not really. Usenet groups are not moderated unless they are explicitly created as moderated,
which this group is NOT. I think it's one of the OLD groups, before there were charters and votes
for groups.

When spam got bad, people invented cancelling programs, which were sometimes misused by idiots.
But they did keep the spam to a dull roar, until the spammers realized that relatively few people
read Usenet and that the real money was to be made from email.

Now the emphasis seems to be on blocking posts and email from IPs and sites known to be spam
sources. More and more sites pay for out-sourced Usenet feeds from companies like Supernews,
which do actively try to keep spam and deliberate misbehavior off their newsspool. They will
block users, IPs, and whole sites.

While it is possible that a malicious geek is cancelling Larry's posts, it's much more likely
that the problem is software configuration.

Perhaps no moderation, but threads, particularly those somewhat off-topic and contentious in
nature, are killed here by someone, I'm quite sure of that.

How are you sure of that? Seems Like it'd be fairly easy to test. Just post something really
obscene and off topic and see if it goes through.

~Matt

Quoted message said:

Overall, this is a very pleasant and werll-behaved group, to the point of being overly serious
at times.

Quoted message said:

--
Karen Lofstrom [email hidden]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Is this the Gordian knot? The thing doctors sever upon birth?
Personally, I like navel oranges the best." -- Ludwig Plutonium

"Larry Weisenthal" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Techno-munchkin asks techno-geeks:

My AOL Usenet browser allows me to delete my own posts, but (obviously)

not

Quoted message said:

someone else's posts.

Recently, I've written responses and posted them, only to find that they

are

Quoted message said:

not showing up when I go and click "list all" on the thread postings.

My Q is this: is is possible for someone other than the poster to delete posts? Meaning, is it
possible for a "usenet hacker" to delete my posts

or the

Quoted message said:

posts of others?

- Larry

yes, it's possible. It is also possible for posts to not make it to all servers.

"Count Scrofula" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Karen Lofstrom" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article said:

As a rec.* hierarchy group, there should be a moderator. Threads and

posts

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

definitely get killed, although an FAQ and/or charter is never posted,

as

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

they should be on a regular basis.

Um, not really. Usenet groups are not moderated unless they are

explicitly

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

created as moderated, which this group is NOT. I think it's one of the

OLD

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

groups, before there were charters and votes for groups.

When spam got bad, people invented cancelling programs, which were sometimes misused by idiots.
But they did keep the spam to a dull roar, until the spammers realized that relatively few
people read Usenet and that the real money was to be made from email.

Now the emphasis seems to be on blocking posts and email from IPs and sites known to be spam
sources. More and more sites pay for out-sourced Usenet feeds from companies like Supernews,
which do actively try to

keep

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

spam and deliberate misbehavior off their newsspool. They will block users, IPs, and whole
sites.

While it is possible that a malicious geek is cancelling Larry's posts, it's much more likely
that the problem is software configuration.

Perhaps no moderation, but threads, particularly those somewhat off-topic and contentious in
nature, are killed here by someone, I'm quite sure of that.

actually, most of Usenet groups are not moderated, which means, noone is watching over the content,
and cleaning up the posts according to their appropriateness. There are some moderated groups on
Usenet, but those are usually clearly labeled as 'moderated'. Posts don't get killed in unmoderated
groups, unless authors cancel their own posts, or hackers get in and start deleting posts. I've seen
both things happen.

From: "Smith, Martin"

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

When one doesn't appear for you, send me a copy, and

I will see if it appeared here.<<

thnx...will do.

"Smith, Martin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

server in the world that cares to acquire it. Each newsgroup at a news server is assigned a
retention period. A typical retention period is two weeks. Messages remain available in the
newsgroup at that news server for two weeks. The retention period can be much shorter than that in
high traffic newsgroups. With the advent of cheaper and bigger disks, retention periods have been
increased, I suppose.

And yet, most of those messages are archived at some point, somewhere (do a search on Google groups
and you'll often find postings from six or seven years ago).

I think, once you hit send and the message goes through your server, it's extremely difficult to get
it 'recalled' or deleted. About the only way to keep it from being archived, to my knowledge, is to
put the following

x-no-archive: yes

in the 'keywords' header (although it may also work in the message text or subject line) and
specifying 'world' or 'all' under the distribution header. I have done that to this particular
message, so you shouldn't be able to find it after a few weeks (unless you copy and repost it, of
course). ;-)

noob said:

"Smith, Martin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

server in the world that cares to acquire it. Each newsgroup at a news server is assigned a
retention period. A typical retention period is two weeks. Messages remain available in the
newsgroup at that news server for two weeks. The retention period can be much shorter than that in
high traffic newsgroups. With the advent of cheaper and bigger disks, retention periods have been
increased, I suppose.

And yet, most of those messages are archived at some point, somewhere (do a search on Google
groups and you'll often find postings from six or seven years ago).

Google bought Dejanews, where all news is archived unless you put x-no-archive: yes in your message.

Quoted message said:

I think, once you hit send and the message goes through your server, it's extremely difficult to
get it 'recalled' or deleted. About the only way to keep it from being archived, to my knowledge,
is to put the following

x-no-archive: yes

in the 'keywords' header (although it may also work in the message text or subject line) and
specifying 'world' or 'all' under the distribution header. I have done that to this particular
message, so you shouldn't be able to find it after a few weeks (unless you copy and repost it, of
course). ;-)