In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

I agree 100%, Carl.

So what should folks like you and I do about it?

Jim,

I hate to "kill-file" folks - they *might* just say something relevant at
some point, but I'm considering it for a few individuals whose posts are
mostly personal vendetta-like attacks and insults ...

Me, too. The amount of relevant stuff is overwhelmed by the nasty stuff. In
practice I often don't get past the first line or two before deleting because
of an author's demonstrated behavior here.

In particular, when someone posts information that is flat out wrong,
should we simply ignore it or challenge it?

If we see it and know it to be wrong, I think we should challenge it.
However, it is not my job (nor, I suspect yours) to wade through all of
their drivel in search of a relevant, incorrect assertion so that it might
be challenged.

Agreed. But sometimes the errors just leap out at you.

I tend to think that most people will give little credence to whatever some
of these folks say, just on the basis of the tone and content of most of
their messages.

Hopefully.

I am just finding it annoying to have the newsgroup
polluted with so much OT stuff - newsgroup BPL, I think Mike called it.

That's an excellent term.

73 de Jim, N2EY