|
On Sat, 19 Jul 2003 09:48:34 -0400, James Nipper hath writ:
Hey, how about a posting that deals with smart cops and people who try to moderate legitimate postings? Just what is your definition of spamming? As far as I am concerned, this gentleman's posting could (should?) have been posted in each and every user group that relates in any fashion to ham radio. It wasn't cross-posted, Mr. Top Poster. It was multi-posted. Which required folks with slow dial-up lines -- that cannot read usenet on a shell account with a real newsreader -- to download the %$@#^%$ thing multiple times. 73 Jonesy W3DHJ |
On Sat, 19 Jul 2003 09:48:34 -0400, James Nipper hath writ:
Hey, how about a posting that deals with smart cops and people who try to moderate legitimate postings? Just what is your definition of spamming? As far as I am concerned, this gentleman's posting could (should?) have been posted in each and every user group that relates in any fashion to ham radio. It wasn't cross-posted, Mr. Top Poster. It was multi-posted. Which required folks with slow dial-up lines -- that cannot read usenet on a shell account with a real newsreader -- to download the %$@#^%$ thing multiple times. 73 Jonesy W3DHJ |
Ya got to love those net gods! Unfortunately, they aren't as perfect as the
one who makes all this possible! -- "Floyd Davidson" wrote in message ... pamme (VHFRadioBuff) wrote: As far as I am concerned, this gentleman's posting could (should?) have been posted in each and every user group that relates in any fashion to ham radio. Cross posting and off topic posting is a violation of many an ISP's TOS. No, it was *NOT* crossposted, and it *should* have been. Instead the message was multiposted to at least 5 newsgroups individually. *Multiposting* is *never* appropriate. Crossposting _to_ _appropriate_ newsgroups is _always_ appropriate. The fact is that every post has it's place. If that were not the case, we'd eliminate every amateur radio newsgroup except for rec.radio.amateur. Some posts have many places, and that is why crossposting is a facility available on Usenet. And while abuse is relatively common, that particular instance would have been perhaps reasonable *if* it had been crossposted instead of multiposted. And while we discuss Usenet protocols, your signature is 1) too long 2) lacks the appropriate delimiter line, "-- ", between it and the text of your message. It seems reasonable that if you are going to rant about the way someone else posts, you might want to be a little more correct yourself. :-) =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- 73! de Andy KC2SSB (ex: KF4KHC/HL9HCT) Beachwood, NJ USA! Grid FM29vw http://vhfradiobuff.tripod.com Fight Spam! http://spamcop.net National "Do Not Call" Registry: http://donotcall.gov -- Floyd L. Davidson http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) |
Ya got to love those net gods! Unfortunately, they aren't as perfect as the
one who makes all this possible! -- "Floyd Davidson" wrote in message ... pamme (VHFRadioBuff) wrote: As far as I am concerned, this gentleman's posting could (should?) have been posted in each and every user group that relates in any fashion to ham radio. Cross posting and off topic posting is a violation of many an ISP's TOS. No, it was *NOT* crossposted, and it *should* have been. Instead the message was multiposted to at least 5 newsgroups individually. *Multiposting* is *never* appropriate. Crossposting _to_ _appropriate_ newsgroups is _always_ appropriate. The fact is that every post has it's place. If that were not the case, we'd eliminate every amateur radio newsgroup except for rec.radio.amateur. Some posts have many places, and that is why crossposting is a facility available on Usenet. And while abuse is relatively common, that particular instance would have been perhaps reasonable *if* it had been crossposted instead of multiposted. And while we discuss Usenet protocols, your signature is 1) too long 2) lacks the appropriate delimiter line, "-- ", between it and the text of your message. It seems reasonable that if you are going to rant about the way someone else posts, you might want to be a little more correct yourself. :-) =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- 73! de Andy KC2SSB (ex: KF4KHC/HL9HCT) Beachwood, NJ USA! Grid FM29vw http://vhfradiobuff.tripod.com Fight Spam! http://spamcop.net National "Do Not Call" Registry: http://donotcall.gov -- Floyd L. Davidson http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) |
Some posts have many places
Oh yeah. A post about a email reflector having to due with legal issues belongs in a newsgroups for discussing amateur gear. Show me the logic in that! And while we discuss Usenet protocols, your signature is 1) too long 2) lacks the appropriate delimiter line, "-- ", between it and the text of your message. By what standard? Yours? =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- 73! de Andy KC2SSB (ex: KF4KHC/HL9HCT) Beachwood, NJ USA! Grid FM29vw http://vhfradiobuff.tripod.com Fight Spam! http://spamcop.net National "Do Not Call" Registry: http://donotcall.gov |
Some posts have many places
Oh yeah. A post about a email reflector having to due with legal issues belongs in a newsgroups for discussing amateur gear. Show me the logic in that! And while we discuss Usenet protocols, your signature is 1) too long 2) lacks the appropriate delimiter line, "-- ", between it and the text of your message. By what standard? Yours? =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- 73! de Andy KC2SSB (ex: KF4KHC/HL9HCT) Beachwood, NJ USA! Grid FM29vw http://vhfradiobuff.tripod.com Fight Spam! http://spamcop.net National "Do Not Call" Registry: http://donotcall.gov |
Andy, you've got your Usenet panties in a bunch again. A list
pertaining to amateur radio legal issues would be helpful to the hobby. A lot more useful than your trying to be a Usenet cop. Bob k5qwg I'm sorry, do I know you? =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- 73! de Andy KC2SSB (ex: KF4KHC/HL9HCT) Beachwood, NJ USA! Grid FM29vw http://vhfradiobuff.tripod.com Fight Spam! http://spamcop.net National "Do Not Call" Registry: http://donotcall.gov |
Andy, you've got your Usenet panties in a bunch again. A list
pertaining to amateur radio legal issues would be helpful to the hobby. A lot more useful than your trying to be a Usenet cop. Bob k5qwg I'm sorry, do I know you? =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- 73! de Andy KC2SSB (ex: KF4KHC/HL9HCT) Beachwood, NJ USA! Grid FM29vw http://vhfradiobuff.tripod.com Fight Spam! http://spamcop.net National "Do Not Call" Registry: http://donotcall.gov |
On 19 Jul 2003 04:18:50 GMT, pamme (VHFRadioBuff)
wrote: I have created a new list that deals specifically with legal issues pertaining to our hobby How about one dealing with SPAMMING? I think one post, on rec.radio.amateur would have been sufficient. Andy, you've got your Usenet panties in a bunch again. A list pertaining to amateur radio legal issues would be helpful to the hobby. A lot more useful than your trying to be a Usenet cop. Bob k5qwg =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- 73! de Andy KC2SSB (ex: KF4KHC/HL9HCT) Beachwood, NJ USA! Grid FM29vw http://vhfradiobuff.tripod.com Fight Spam! http://spamcop.net National "Do Not Call" Registry: http://donotcall.gov |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:13 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com