Pedt wrote:
Another troll ... How amusing.

Whilst I have only posted here before when taking a vote that involved
this group, you are so wrong ~ as a simple bit of Googling would tell
you.

Not you Pedt !! You know me )

It's that Janet Barramad who's taken me under her wing ... a bit of a
fantasist I fear. According to many in here, she's a bit 'lonely' and
has something with foreeneers I think.

Your advice are amazing. I had downloaded Thunderbird - and for 2 days
it seemed fine. Suddenly it went wrong. I've posted 3x same posts on
other forums and I don't have a good head on for this late at night. So
I'll ask someone to help me.

Thank you Pedt. But perhaps the cross posting could now stop?!

Janet Baraclough wrote:
Yes, that's why he was politely telling you that you're a lying
fantasist. As usual, you were too thick to understand what you read.

Shut up will you. JUST SHUT UP!!!! What is your problem Janet?!?!?!
Leave me be. I have known Pedt for years. Yes I know he helped start
this group. So what?!! So did Stewart from Boatrix! So bloody what?!
I've had my discussions with Pedt. Something you seem unable to do
because you've decided from the begining to give me a hard time. Like
you did to many in here. They keep telling me to keep posting, but you
know you're getting on my tits now.

And do you honestly think that you are the only one here with a life, a
story, a past?! Get a life and get of my case!

In message .com, at
15:11:33 on Mon, 27 Feb 2006, La Puce wibbled

[verbals snipped]
I have known Pedt for years. Yes I know he helped start this group.

Please get your facts straight, I had nothing to do with the creation of
this group in 1995. I merely took the allotments scion vote in 2004.
http://groups.google.ru/group/uk.net...531a2f268e43ef

--
Pedt
uk.announce ~ moderated group to announce news / events of specific interest to
a wider uk.* readership than the group(s) which their subjects would naturally
place them. See charter at http://www.usenet.org.uk/uk.announce.html

Janet Baraclough wrote:
LOL. That would be a novelty.

Why don't you go back to Rural and get your ass well beaten like
yesterday LOL!! Poor woman - you just don't know when to stop don't you.

In . uk within
uk.net.news.config, 'Rusty Hinge 2' wrote:

The message
from Dave Fawthrop contains these words:

On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 10:44:49 -0000, "Dr Zoidberg"
wrote:


Change the charter of uk.rec.gardening to forbid any crossposting, and
enforce it with a cancelbot would work.

No it wouldn't.

An AI cancelbot that could automatically remove messages that contain
nothing but off topic rants about trollery, perhaps along with code that
auto-removed any message deemed pointless other than its wind up capacity
for a potential troll, now that would have wondrous results I think.

Dave J.

Thu, 2 Mar 2006 22:12:26
uk.net.news.config Dave J.

In . uk within
uk.net.news.config, 'Rusty Hinge 2' wrote:

The message
from Dave Fawthrop contains these words:

On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 10:44:49 -0000, "Dr Zoidberg"
wrote:


Change the charter of uk.rec.gardening to forbid any crossposting, and
enforce it with a cancelbot would work.

No it wouldn't.

An AI cancelbot that could automatically remove messages that contain
nothing but off topic rants about trollery, perhaps along with code that
auto-removed any message deemed pointless other than its wind up capacity
for a potential troll, now that would have wondrous results I think.

You'd probably make a lot of money if you got it right.


--
Wm ...
Reply-To: address valid for at least 7 days from date of posting

Wm... wrote:
Thu, 2 Mar 2006 22:12:26
uk.net.news.config Dave J.
[...]
An AI cancelbot that could automatically remove messages that contain
nothing but off topic rants about trollery, perhaps along with code
that auto-removed any message deemed pointless other than its wind
up capacity for a potential troll, now that would have wondrous
results I think.

You'd probably make a lot of money if you got it right.

So much money, if it could do that properly, that it would never get
near Usenet. The CIA would snap it up.

--
Mike.

On Thu, 02 Mar 2006 22:12:26 +0000, Dave J. wrote:

|In . uk within
|uk.net.news.config, 'Rusty Hinge 2' wrote:
|
|The message
|from Dave Fawthrop contains these words:
|
| On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 10:44:49 -0000, "Dr Zoidberg"
| wrote:
|
|
| Change the charter of uk.rec.gardening to forbid any crossposting, and
| enforce it with a cancelbot would work.
|
|No it wouldn't.
|
|An AI cancelbot that could automatically remove messages that contain
|nothing but off topic rants about trollery, perhaps along with code that
|auto-removed any message deemed pointless other than its wind up capacity
|for a potential troll, now that would have wondrous results I think.

If you read what you quoted, the cancellbot would only catch crosposting.
--
Dave Fawthrop dave hyphenologist co uk
Freedom of Speech, Expression, Religion, and Democracy are
the keys to Civilization, together with legal acceptance of
Fundamental Human rights.

In Dave J. writes:

An AI cancelbot that could automatically remove messages that contain
nothing but off topic rants about trollery, perhaps along with code that
auto-removed any message deemed pointless other than its wind up capacity
for a potential troll, now that would have wondrous results I think.

That is a technique known as "retro-moderation". It is specifically
forbidden by our Guidelines.

--
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5

On Fri, 3 Mar 2006 17:15:01 GMT, "Charles Lindsey"
wrote:

|In Dave J. writes:
|
|An AI cancelbot that could automatically remove messages that contain
|nothing but off topic rants about trollery, perhaps along with code that
|auto-removed any message deemed pointless other than its wind up capacity
|for a potential troll, now that would have wondrous results I think.
|
|That is a technique known as "retro-moderation". It is specifically
|forbidden by our Guidelines.

I was *not* proposing moderation at all.
--
Dave Fawthrop dave hyphenologist co uk
Freedom of Speech, Expression, Religion, and Democracy are
the keys to Civilization, together with legal acceptance of
Fundamental Human rights.

On Sat, 04 Mar 2006 07:40:02 +0000, Dave Fawthrop put finger to
keyboard and typed:

On Fri, 3 Mar 2006 17:15:01 GMT, "Charles Lindsey"
wrote:

|In Dave J. writes:
|
|An AI cancelbot that could automatically remove messages that contain
|nothing but off topic rants about trollery, perhaps along with code that
|auto-removed any message deemed pointless other than its wind up capacity
|for a potential troll, now that would have wondrous results I think.
|
|That is a technique known as "retro-moderation". It is specifically
|forbidden by our Guidelines.

I was *not* proposing moderation at all.

You suggested using a cancelbot to enforce the charter. That is
retromoderation, as defined (and banned) in the guidelines.

Mark
--
Visit: http://www.MineOfUseless.info - everything you never needed to know!
Listen: http://www.goodge.co.uk/files/dweeb.mp3 - you'll love it!

On Sat, 04 Mar 2006 08:08:52 +0000, Mark Goodge
wrote:

|On Sat, 04 Mar 2006 07:40:02 +0000, Dave Fawthrop put finger to
|keyboard and typed:
|
|On Fri, 3 Mar 2006 17:15:01 GMT, "Charles Lindsey"
|wrote:
|
||In Dave J. writes:
||
||An AI cancelbot that could automatically remove messages that contain
||nothing but off topic rants about trollery, perhaps along with code that
||auto-removed any message deemed pointless other than its wind up capacity
||for a potential troll, now that would have wondrous results I think.
||
||That is a technique known as "retro-moderation". It is specifically
||forbidden by our Guidelines.
|
|I was *not* proposing moderation at all.
|
|You suggested using a cancelbot to enforce the charter. That is
|retromoderation, as defined (and banned) in the guidelines.

Strictly no! I was *not* suggesting moderation in any form.

The *principle* of cancellation for posts with a BI of more than 20 has
already been accepted for *years*. My suggestion is only an extension of
this.
--
Dave Fawthrop dave hyphenologist co uk
Freedom of Speech, Expression, Religion, and Democracy are
the keys to Civilization, together with legal acceptance of
Fundamental Human rights.

On Sat, 04 Mar 2006 09:22:43 +0000, Dave Fawthrop put finger to
keyboard and typed:

On Sat, 04 Mar 2006 08:08:52 +0000, Mark Goodge
wrote:

|On Sat, 04 Mar 2006 07:40:02 +0000, Dave Fawthrop put finger to
|keyboard and typed:
|
|On Fri, 3 Mar 2006 17:15:01 GMT, "Charles Lindsey"
|wrote:
|
||In Dave J. writes:
||
||An AI cancelbot that could automatically remove messages that contain
||nothing but off topic rants about trollery, perhaps along with code that
||auto-removed any message deemed pointless other than its wind up capacity
||for a potential troll, now that would have wondrous results I think.
||
||That is a technique known as "retro-moderation". It is specifically
||forbidden by our Guidelines.
|
|I was *not* proposing moderation at all.
|
|You suggested using a cancelbot to enforce the charter. That is
|retromoderation, as defined (and banned) in the guidelines.

Strictly no! I was *not* suggesting moderation in any form.

Enforcing the charter by means of deciding which articles are
permitted, either pre-publication or post-publication, is moderation.
You would also need someone (or a group of people) with the authority
to run the cancelbot on behalf of the group; this would make them
de-facto moderators.

The *principle* of cancellation for posts with a BI of more than 20 has
already been accepted for *years*. My suggestion is only an extension of
this.

Spam cancellation is content-neutral and independent of any charter.
Even so, it remains somewhat controversial. Cancelling posts by
reference to individual group charters is retromoderation, however you
try to dress it up.

Mark
--
Visit: http://www.GoogleFun.info - fun and games with Google!
Listen: http://www.goodge.co.uk/files/dweeb.mp3 - you'll love it!

In message , Dave Fawthrop
writes
On Sat, 04 Mar 2006 08:08:52 +0000, Mark Goodge
wrote:

|On Sat, 04 Mar 2006 07:40:02 +0000, Dave Fawthrop put finger to
|keyboard and typed:
|
|On Fri, 3 Mar 2006 17:15:01 GMT, "Charles Lindsey"
|wrote:
|
||In Dave J.
writes:
||
||An AI cancelbot that could automatically remove messages that contain
||nothing but off topic rants about trollery, perhaps along with code that
||auto-removed any message deemed pointless other than its wind up capacity
||for a potential troll, now that would have wondrous results I think.
||
||That is a technique known as "retro-moderation". It is specifically
||forbidden by our Guidelines.
|
|I was *not* proposing moderation at all.
|
|You suggested using a cancelbot to enforce the charter. That is
|retromoderation, as defined (and banned) in the guidelines.

Strictly no! I was *not* suggesting moderation in any form.

The *principle* of cancellation for posts with a BI of more than 20 has
already been accepted for *years*. My suggestion is only an extension of
this.
Dave - pack it in. History shows that spammers seem to stick to you
like the proverbial unmentionable stuff to a blanket. We don't want any
more here.
--
June Hughes

On Sat, 04 Mar 2006 09:22:43 +0000, Dave Fawthrop
wrote:

On Sat, 04 Mar 2006 08:08:52 +0000, Mark Goodge
wrote:

|On Sat, 04 Mar 2006 07:40:02 +0000, Dave Fawthrop put finger to
|keyboard and typed:
|
|On Fri, 3 Mar 2006 17:15:01 GMT, "Charles Lindsey"
|wrote:
|
||In Dave J. writes:
||
||An AI cancelbot that could automatically remove messages that contain
||nothing but off topic rants about trollery, perhaps along with code that
||auto-removed any message deemed pointless other than its wind up capacity
||for a potential troll, now that would have wondrous results I think.
||
||That is a technique known as "retro-moderation". It is specifically
||forbidden by our Guidelines.
|
|I was *not* proposing moderation at all.
|
|You suggested using a cancelbot to enforce the charter. That is
|retromoderation, as defined (and banned) in the guidelines.

Strictly no! I was *not* suggesting moderation in any form.

The *principle* of cancellation for posts with a BI of more than 20 has
already been accepted for *years*. My suggestion is only an extension of
this.


Please **** off from uk.rec.gardening

We really arent interested in your pompous know it all crap