On Sun, 08 May 2005 18:39:36 +1000, atec wrote:

Roy Lewallen wrote:
John Smith wrote:

. . .
Someone really should get off a dead duff somewhere and DO IT!!!!

Kinda makes ya wonder why not? Doesn't it?


I sure seem to hear that a lot.

Some *other* lazy bum oughtta get off his duff and do it.

Why don't you do it? If the problem is that you don't have the technical
know-how, well, how do you think those people who have it, got it? By
being lazy?

Typing a few sentences and hitting Send sure is easier than studying,
isn't it?
So it would appear is attacking another's comment .

Perhaps it is because Roy is, like your's truly, getting a bit tired
of seeing "John Smith's" conversations with himself. I don't use any
software filters on my newsreader but I've sure engaged a mental
filter.

Well, I just hope you are not getting to the point of contemplating
"Un-American Activities", you still support free speech--don't you?

Warmest regards,
John
--
I AM ONE-IN-A-MILLION!!!!!
Too bad the other 999,999 got there first.. frown

"Wes Stewart" wrote in message
...
| On Sun, 08 May 2005 18:39:36 +1000, atec wrote:
|
| Roy Lewallen wrote:
| John Smith wrote:
|
| . . .
| Someone really should get off a dead duff somewhere and DO IT!!!!
|
| Kinda makes ya wonder why not? Doesn't it?
|
|
| I sure seem to hear that a lot.
|
| Some *other* lazy bum oughtta get off his duff and do it.
|
| Why don't you do it? If the problem is that you don't have the
technical
| know-how, well, how do you think those people who have it, got it? By
| being lazy?
|
| Typing a few sentences and hitting Send sure is easier than studying,
| isn't it?
| So it would appear is attacking another's comment .
|
| Perhaps it is because Roy is, like your's truly, getting a bit tired
| of seeing "John Smith's" conversations with himself. I don't use any
| software filters on my newsreader but I've sure engaged a mental
| filter.
|
|

Wes Stewart wrote:
On Sun, 08 May 2005 18:39:36 +1000, atec wrote:


Roy Lewallen wrote:

John Smith wrote:


. . .
Someone really should get off a dead duff somewhere and DO IT!!!!

Kinda makes ya wonder why not? Doesn't it?


I sure seem to hear that a lot.

Some *other* lazy bum oughtta get off his duff and do it.

Why don't you do it? If the problem is that you don't have the technical
know-how, well, how do you think those people who have it, got it? By
being lazy?

Typing a few sentences and hitting Send sure is easier than studying,
isn't it?

So it would appear is attacking another's comment .


Perhaps it is because Roy is, like your's truly, getting a bit tired
of seeing "John Smith's" conversations with himself. I don't use any
software filters on my newsreader but I've sure engaged a mental
filter.

You might want to check out the idea of filtering. Cleans up the
newsgroups right fine.

- Mike KB3EIA -

On Sun, 08 May 2005 14:23:22 -0400, Mike Coslo
wrote:

Wes Stewart wrote:
On Sun, 08 May 2005 18:39:36 +1000, atec wrote:

Perhaps it is because Roy is, like your's truly, getting a bit tired
of seeing "John Smith's" conversations with himself. I don't use any
software filters on my newsreader but I've sure engaged a mental
filter.

You might want to check out the idea of filtering. Cleans up the
newsgroups right fine.

I use Free Agent. It doesn't do filtering, but as I said, I turn on my
mental filter that says, "When you see a post by 'John Smith'", ignore
it. I used the same filter for "Fractenna." Works fine.

Yes, I use my filter too--and support and expect others to use them as they
see fit... I certainly do mine!!! I can help if some are having
difficulty; I support filtering and have an understanding how to apply
them...



However, the very vocal ones--I am always left wondering if they really are
remarking about filtering their own content--or their wish to filter the
content of others (and, for what purpose would they do this?)... if that
goes on too far (controlling others), yanno, it leads to attempted thought
control--a guy wrote a book about that--George Orwell... Was that in 1984,
or was that about 1984? .. anyway, if you ask me--he was more a prophet,
some have already grown to accept what he (we?) feared...


Warmest regards,
John
--
When Viagra fails to work--you are DOOMED!!!

"Wes Stewart" wrote in message
...
| On Sun, 08 May 2005 14:23:22 -0400, Mike Coslo
| wrote:
|
| Wes Stewart wrote:
| On Sun, 08 May 2005 18:39:36 +1000, atec wrote:
|
| Perhaps it is because Roy is, like your's truly, getting a bit tired
| of seeing "John Smith's" conversations with himself. I don't use any
| software filters on my newsreader but I've sure engaged a mental
| filter.
|
| You might want to check out the idea of filtering. Cleans up the
| newsgroups right fine.
|
| I use Free Agent. It doesn't do filtering, but as I said, I turn on my
| mental filter that says, "When you see a post by 'John Smith'", ignore
| it. I used the same filter for "Fractenna." Works fine.
|
|

John Smith wrote:


However, the very vocal ones--I am always left wondering if they really are
remarking about filtering their own content--or their wish to filter the
content of others (and, for what purpose would they do this?)... if that
goes on too far (controlling others), yanno, it leads to attempted thought
control-

I don't know you "Mr. Smith" or have any bone to pick with you but I use
filters to avoid what I find as either offensive or provocative.
I invoke enough cat-fights of my own on Usenet and don't need to be
drawn into others. Some posters have a tendency to attract fire, and I
have a weakness to jump in sometimes. I'd really rather just avoid it.
My sanity and blood-pressure will be the better. So, thats why I
filter out the provocateurs if I feel that strongly.

My filters don't prevent anyone from saying what they want to say. But
historically, some posters can be counted upon to say what I'd rather
not have to read and wind up being diverted from the topic or grappling
to bite my tongue, etc. Its easier just to filter them away. Call me
Ostrich-Man. Its my means of finding satisfaction with Usenet.

For my part, feel free to choose to speak. And respect my freedom to
choose whether or not to listen.

-Bill M

Ohhh, well, you are correct. I am rather blind to "politics" and come from
areas where new thought, conversation--indeed, even argument and debate are
encouraged and viewed as "good things."

While not attempting to invoke "havoc", "discord" and "chaos", I view the
manner in which topics are handled as being the deciding factor--foul
language, character assassinations and promoting outwardly dangerous evils
which threaten the moral fabric of society are as disgusting to me as the
next guy...

If the material is just gauged on whether it provokes debate, argument and
thought--and if the measure of this is simply how many posts are invoked as
responses--with the desirable number set as one or NONE--then further delays
in progress should be expected...

A silent discussion is beneficial to no one... and certainly don't view
such as desirable!

Warmest regards,
John
--
When Viagra fails to work--you are DOOMED!!!

"-exray-" wrote in message
...
| John Smith wrote:
|
|
| However, the very vocal ones--I am always left wondering if they really
are
| remarking about filtering their own content--or their wish to filter the
| content of others (and, for what purpose would they do this?)... if
that
| goes on too far (controlling others), yanno, it leads to attempted
thought
| control-
|
| I don't know you "Mr. Smith" or have any bone to pick with you but I use
| filters to avoid what I find as either offensive or provocative.
| I invoke enough cat-fights of my own on Usenet and don't need to be
| drawn into others. Some posters have a tendency to attract fire, and I
| have a weakness to jump in sometimes. I'd really rather just avoid it.
| My sanity and blood-pressure will be the better. So, thats why I
| filter out the provocateurs if I feel that strongly.
|
| My filters don't prevent anyone from saying what they want to say. But
| historically, some posters can be counted upon to say what I'd rather
| not have to read and wind up being diverted from the topic or grappling
| to bite my tongue, etc. Its easier just to filter them away. Call me
| Ostrich-Man. Its my means of finding satisfaction with Usenet.
|
| For my part, feel free to choose to speak. And respect my freedom to
| choose whether or not to listen.
|
| -Bill M

John Smith wrote:

Ohhh, well, you are correct.

Of course I am. I simply expressed an opinion of mine

While not attempting to invoke "havoc", "discord" and "chaos", I view the
manner in which topics are handled as being the deciding factor--foul
language, character assassinations and promoting outwardly dangerous evils
which threaten the moral fabric of society are as disgusting to me as the
next guy...

And you are also correct on this aspect.


If the material is just gauged on whether it provokes debate, argument and
thought--and if the measure of this is simply how many posts are invoked as
responses--with the desirable number set as one or NONE--then further delays
in progress should be expected...

I don't think anybody filters because of this. If the presenter of such
debate has a reputation as in your first example...all bets are off.
That is for me to imply that mud-slinging, name-calling, goading or any
wild-eyed radical or raffish behaviour, in spite of the best intentions
of the poster, will cause his occasional good points to be overwhelmed
by the cacophony of kill-filters at work.

-Bill

Speaking of "Fractenna", I have place a letter from him on eBay - -

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...MESE%3AIT&rd=1


He's been carrying on in QRZ forums since AOL dropped usenet groups.
Same old Chip.

Mr. Ewald, if you would be so kind as to keep me informed of the value of
this famous letter.

I also have several that I can only hope will bring in enough need funds to
enable me to buy a new pack of Redman!

"Bill" wrote in message
oups.com...
Speaking of "Fractenna", I have place a letter from him on eBay - -


http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...MESE%3AIT&rd=1


He's been carrying on in QRZ forums since AOL dropped usenet groups.
Same old Chip.