In article , Old Nick
wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 12:43:33 GMT, (Doug Miller)
vaguely proposed a theory
.......and in reply I say!:

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!

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

And what point would that be? Your major accomplishment was to further
propagate the spam.

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.

Maybe on yours, not on mine.

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) only and worry about the content if I am stupid enough to
read it. If you can't mentally filter out "shower scene" in a tech
forum, then ......

The *header* was offensive, but you propagated it anyway; I didn't have to
read the content of your post to see that. So, indeed, who's the idiot?

Hint: the original had a few additional words in it, which I edited out, along
with the offensive content.

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.

And exactly how does quoting and reposting the _entire_ message do anything to
"stop these arseholes"? Perhaps you should try doing a little thinking for
yourself once in a while, if you can manage to cool your messianic fervor
enough to permit the use of whatever rudimentary logical faculties you may
happen to possess.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)

Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter
by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com
You must use your REAL email address to get a response.