On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 23:08:49 +0800, Old Nick wrote:

I did not NEED to snip the "offensive" (in the truest sense of the
word) part. It was missing. If you find the words offensive that's
your problem.....get off the net. **** happens here!

His point, which you are missing, is that that message didn't make
it to a whole lot of newsservers around the word. However, your response
did. In effect, you helped the spammer get their message out by
replying to it and leaving it in.

The content of the message, sans any of the usual url or attachment,
was the whole _point_ of my reply.

I'm sure that the spammer who doesn't visit this group will be
very impressed by your well-crafted response.

My "offenc(iv)e is against the intent of these posts, which for the
time being aim at sexual stuff, but cause viruses and worms on your
system.

Won't do anything to _my_ systems...

Since you had to _read_ the contents of my post to see the text, who's
the idiot? I read headers (it's called a "thinking ahead job" in Net
parlance)

It is? Never heard the term, ever, in the last dozen years.

In my messianic fervour, I feel that stopping these arseholes with
their nasty little viruses and spams is more important than not
offending the odd ball who wants to pick a fight rather than think for
themselves once in a while.

Whining about (and quoting) spam in a newsgroup doesn't stop 'em,
and quoting it helps 'em. So, why not report it through spamcop or
directly instead, which actually has a positive effect in stopping
them? Same effort, much different results.