NEWSGROUP "SPAM" - No Such Thing. Newsgroups are public.

What is "SPAM"? Unsolicited messages? Then everyone that
post to a newsgroups is "spamming" unless they are responding
to a direct question.

What is Off Topic? Anything that isn't relevant to the
group description? Then 99% of newsgroup posters are
spammers. You've never posted an off topic comment?
You can't lie. It's archived in Google.

Links to websites are spam? Then what are those links
in your signature? OH....it's ok to "SPAM" a little bit.
As a matter of fact its ok to "SPAM" a lot because you
include those links in your signature everytime you
post.

If you want a MODERATED group. Shut the hell up and go
join one or create one yourself.

NEWSGROUPS ARE PUBLIC.

Well, here is an excerpt from Yahoo!'s Terms of Service, detailing
prohibited conduct:

"Uploading, posting, emailing, or transmitting the same message, URL, or
post multiple times."

If a message is posted to multiple UseNet newsgroups, it may not
technically be "Spam!" but it's still against Yahoo!'s Terms of Service.
And many other ISPs have similar policies.

Perce


On 10/24/05 01:29 pm tossed the following
ingredients into the ever-growing pot of cybersoup:

NEWSGROUP "SPAM" - No Such Thing. Newsgroups are public.

What is "SPAM"? Unsolicited messages? Then everyone that
post to a newsgroups is "spamming" unless they are responding
to a direct question.

What is Off Topic? Anything that isn't relevant to the
group description? Then 99% of newsgroup posters are
spammers. You've never posted an off topic comment?
You can't lie. It's archived in Google.

Links to websites are spam? Then what are those links
in your signature? OH....it's ok to "SPAM" a little bit.
As a matter of fact its ok to "SPAM" a lot because you
include those links in your signature everytime you
post.

If you want a MODERATED group. Shut the hell up and go
join one or create one yourself.

NEWSGROUPS ARE PUBLIC.

And you sir are a TROLL....

and I sir, am a Top Poster!

;-]


wrote in message
oups.com...
NEWSGROUP "SPAM" - No Such Thing. Newsgroups are public.

What is "SPAM"? Unsolicited messages? Then everyone that
post to a newsgroups is "spamming" unless they are responding
to a direct question.

What is Off Topic? Anything that isn't relevant to the
group description? Then 99% of newsgroup posters are
spammers. You've never posted an off topic comment?
You can't lie. It's archived in Google.

Links to websites are spam? Then what are those links
in your signature? OH....it's ok to "SPAM" a little bit.
As a matter of fact its ok to "SPAM" a lot because you
include those links in your signature everytime you
post.

If you want a MODERATED group. Shut the hell up and go
join one or create one yourself.

NEWSGROUPS ARE PUBLIC.

Off our meds today? Just feeling cranky? No respect?

Get over it, and go away. Quietly, please.

J

wrote:
NEWSGROUP "SPAM" - No Such Thing. Newsgroups are public.

wrote in message
oups.com...
NEWSGROUP "SPAM" - No Such Thing. Newsgroups are public.

What is "SPAM"? Unsolicited messages? Then everyone that
post to a newsgroups is "spamming" unless they are responding
to a direct question.

What is Off Topic? Anything that isn't relevant to the
group description? Then 99% of newsgroup posters are
spammers. You've never posted an off topic comment?
You can't lie. It's archived in Google.

Links to websites are spam? Then what are those links
in your signature? OH....it's ok to "SPAM" a little bit.
As a matter of fact its ok to "SPAM" a lot because you
include those links in your signature everytime you
post.

If you want a MODERATED group. Shut the hell up and go
join one or create one yourself.

NEWSGROUPS ARE PUBLIC.


Then, just do as you will. Morons usually just get killfiled, but then
there are enough newbies and clueless to keep the trolls going. And then
there is the TOS violation letter to the ISP. I have personally had many
people's accounts shut down by just sending a copy of their drivel to
and suggest that they Google the person and see what they
have filed. Most of the time it is a home alone juvenile posting on
parent's computer.

Yes, newsgroups are public, just like talking no the street is okay. But,
just like talking on the street, people have the right to choose which
people they talk to and which conversations they enter into.

But, alas, sometimes they lack the sense to do so.

HTH, but I doubt it.

STeve

"Dr. Hardcrab" wrote in message
news:c9b7f.3346$HW5.128@trnddc04...
And you sir are a TROLL....

and I sir, am a Top Poster!

;-]


This is Turtle.

OH My LORD , You have cross the line here and will have to pay the price.
Anybody who is a top poster has to tomorrow morning get up and wash your face
and then slap yourself 3 time across the face and tell no one about it. This
will prevent you from being a regular top poster but makes you a part time top
poster.

TURTLE

"TURTLE" wrote in message
...

"Dr. Hardcrab" wrote in message
news:c9b7f.3346$HW5.128@trnddc04...
And you sir are a TROLL....

and I sir, am a Top Poster!

;-]


This is Turtle.

OH My LORD , You have cross the line here and will have to pay the price.
Anybody who is a top poster has to tomorrow morning get up and wash your
face and then slap yourself 3 time across the face and tell no one about
it. This will prevent you from being a regular top poster but makes you a
part time top poster.

THANK YOU SIR MAY I have another??!!!!

;-]

Fortunately, your efforts are doomed to fail.

Usenet convention defines spamming as excessive multiple posting, that
is, the repeated posting of a message (or substantially similar
messages). During the early 1990s there was substantial controversy
among Usenet system administrators (news admins) over the use of cancel
messages to control spam. A wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancel+message"
title="cancel message" class="new" target="+blank" cancel message is a
directive to news servers to delete a posting, causing it to be
inaccessible to those who might read it. Some regarded this as a bad
precedent, leaning towards censorship, while others considered it a
proper use of the available tools to control the growing spam problem.

A culture of neutrality towards content precluded defining spam on the
basis of advertisement or commercial solicitations. The word "spam" was
usually taken to mean excessive multiple posting (EMP), and other
neologisms were coined for other abuses - such as "velveeta" (from
the processed cheese product) for excessive cross-posting.
www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/V/velveeta.html"
title="http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/V/velveeta.html"
http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/V/velveeta.html A subset of spam
was deemed cancellable spam, for which it is considered justified to
issue third-party cancel messages. www.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/spam-faq/"
title="http://www.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/spam-faq/"
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/spam-faq/

In the late 1990s, spam became used as a means of vandalising
newsgroups, with malicious users committing acts of sporgery to make
targeted newsgroups all but unreadable without heavily filtering. A
prominent example occurred in alt.religion.scientology. Another known
example is the Meow Wars.

The prevalence of Usenet spam led to the development of the Breidbart
Index as an objective measure of a message's "spamminess". The use of
the BI and spam-detection software has led to Usenet being policed by
anti-spam volunteers, who purge newsgroups of spam by sending cancels
and filtering it out on the way into servers. This very active form of
policing has meant that Usenet is a far less attractive target to
spammers than it used to be, and most of the industrial-scale spammers
have now moved into e-mail spam instead.