Header download from the Plusnet server seems patchy. I'm finding
posts on Google groups that are not showing up in my newsreader.
Anyone else had this problem and found a cure?
--
Regards,
Mike Halmarack

Drop the EGG to email me.

Mike Halmarack wrote:

Header download from the Plusnet server seems patchy. I'm finding
posts on Google groups that are not showing up in my newsreader.

You said Plusnet.

Anyone else had this problem and found a cure?

Dump the fools and get to a real ISP.

I've have personal experience of them.

Tim

On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 09:38:01 +0000, Tim S wrote:

Mike Halmarack wrote:

Header download from the Plusnet server seems patchy. I'm finding
posts on Google groups that are not showing up in my newsreader.

You said Plusnet.

Anyone else had this problem and found a cure?

Dump the fools and get to a real ISP.

I've have personal experience of them.

Tim

I was thinking more aspirin rather than major surgery.
--
Regards,
Mike Halmarack

Drop the EGG to email me.

Mike Halmarack wrote:
Header download from the Plusnet server seems patchy. I'm finding
posts on Google groups that are not showing up in my newsreader.
Anyone else had this problem and found a cure?

news.individual.net .... )

In message , Mike Halmarack
writes
Regards,
Mike Halmarack

Drop the EGG to email me.

I'd watchout doing that - it's almost certainly against you AUP with
Plusnet. - Using a domain name to which you probably don't have the
right's to. Plusnet could take dim view of it.

If someone comes along and takes the name gooseeggisland.p.c (assuming
they already haven't, and you haven't) then they will be well ****ed off
to get all 'your' spam.

There are plenty of other ways of munging the address if you really feel
you have to.

http://www.2kevin.net/munging.html
--
Chris French

On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 09:59:40 -0000, "Steve Walker"
wrote:

Mike Halmarack wrote:
Header download from the Plusnet server seems patchy. I'm finding
posts on Google groups that are not showing up in my newsreader.
Anyone else had this problem and found a cure?

news.individual.net .... )

OK, I'm starting to get the drift here. :-)

--
Regards,
Mike Halmarack

Drop the EGG to email me.

On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 11:51:46 +0000, chris French
wrote:

In message , Mike Halmarack
writes
Regards,
Mike Halmarack

Drop the EGG to email me.

I'd watchout doing that -

Thanks for the tip. What you say is well worth considering. These days
there seem to be an increasing number of things to watchout for that
do exist, without rushing to add things that don't exist to the
watchout list.

it's almost certainly against you AUP with Plusnet.
- Using a domain name to which you probably don't have the
right's to. Plusnet could take dim view of it.

As I understand it Plusnet's T&C's are such that they can change them
to whatever they like at will. I'm not going to spend too much time
second guessing what is now and what's coming soon in the.
allowed/disallowed list.
I like to exercise as much personal freedom as I can, if it's not
hurting anyone else. If at any time my sins become too great for
Plusnet to bear, I'm sure they'll let me know about it.

If someone comes along and takes the name gooseeggisland.p.c (assuming
they already haven't, and you haven't) then they will be well ****ed off
to get all 'your' spam.

They will only be well ****ed off if and when they come into
existence. Like those people who might in future live in the currently
imaginary house next to mine. They may resent me parking in front of
their as yet non-existent garden gate. So, I should move my car now to
be on the safe side?

There are plenty of other ways of munging the address if you really feel
you have to.

http://www.2kevin.net/munging.html

Thanks that's interesting I'll have a look at that.

--
Regards,
Mike Halmarack

Drop the EGG to email me.

Mike Halmarack wrote:

As I understand it Plusnet's T&C's are such that they can change them
to whatever they like at will. I'm not going to spend too much time
second guessing what is now and what's coming soon in the.
allowed/disallowed list.

They don't really know either. I think their MD believes he can read his
used toilet paper like runes.

I like to exercise as much personal freedom as I can, if it's not
hurting anyone else. If at any time my sins become too great for
Plusnet to bear, I'm sure they'll let me know about it.

Yes indeed they will. You'll get about 6 hours warning that your account is
being cut off.

No I'm not bitter. But I like to stick the knife in whenever their miserable
cankered name is mentioned.

Cheers

Tim

In article
Mike Halmarack wrote:
snip
I like to exercise as much personal freedom as I can, if it's not
hurting anyone else.

You should use an address that cannot exist, to prevent DNS and mail
servers trying to find one that might exist - using INVALID as the TLD
is guaranteed to do this, as it has been set aside for this purpose.

On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 11:31:30 -0000, Rob Morley
wrote:

In article
Mike Halmarack wrote:
snip
I like to exercise as much personal freedom as I can, if it's not
hurting anyone else.

You should use an address that cannot exist, to prevent DNS and mail
servers trying to find one that might exist - using INVALID as the TLD
is guaranteed to do this, as it has been set aside for this purpose.

I'm tempted to say:
Well... yes... I mean, "INVALID" you couldn't give it away, could you?
Anything a little more upbeat or positive on offer?

BUT, as you Rob, are what I consider to be *the* Internet Fairy
Godmother of all time and one of my top 10 Usenet heroes to boot, I'm
going to give this change some serious consideration.
Anyway, I wouldn't want to risk being sent to bed with no gruel.
--
Regards,
Mike Halmarack

Drop the EGG to email me.

In article
Mike Halmarack wrote:
On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 11:31:30 -0000, Rob Morley
wrote:

In article
Mike Halmarack wrote:
snip
I like to exercise as much personal freedom as I can, if it's not
hurting anyone else.

You should use an address that cannot exist, to prevent DNS and mail
servers trying to find one that might exist - using INVALID as the TLD
is guaranteed to do this, as it has been set aside for this purpose.

I'm tempted to say:
Well... yes... I mean, "INVALID" you couldn't give it away, could you?
Anything a little more upbeat or positive on offer?

BUT, as you Rob, are what I consider to be *the* Internet Fairy
Godmother of all time and one of my top 10 Usenet heroes to boot

I must have missed that episode ...

On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 21:23:15 -0000, Rob Morley
wrote:

In article
Mike Halmarack wrote:
On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 11:31:30 -0000, Rob Morley
wrote:

I must have missed that episode ...

Glued to the wrong side of the telly, I presume?
--
Regards,
Mike Halmarack

Drop the EGG to email me.

On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 08:28:44 +0000, "Andy Luckman (AJL Electronics)"
wrote:

In article , Mike Halmarack
wrote:

Well... yes... I mean, "INVALID" you couldn't give it away, could you?
Anything a little more upbeat or positive on offer?

Privacy.net has been set aside for the very purpose. It is also useful where
the recipient checks for validity. Use . Send it an
email just to see what happens, it might amuse you.

I did and the response, if any, was way too subtle for my crude
sensibilities. I didn't detect any effect whatsoever. Perhaps I'll try
again, as it's in such a good cause. I love being amused by external
agencies, I usually have to d-i-y.
--
Regards,
Mike Halmarack

Drop the EGG to email me.