Effected Butterfly retched A moderated group! onto my recliner:

In article , Roy
wrote:
On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 13:10:05 GMT, Harry Bloomfield
wrote:
[crap]

To save all the arguing, set one up and see what happens, those who
object do not have to join....

He can't. He's too stupid. Instead he's running around like the mutant
offspring of Norman Wisdom and Kenneth Williams, trying to pretend he
knows what he's talking about, and making a complete arse of himself.


POTM!

--

Phil K.

http://philkyle2003.reachme.at/

I am everyone on usenet! wrote:

Effected Butterfly retched A moderated group! onto my recliner:


In article , Roy
wrote:

On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 13:10:05 GMT, Harry Bloomfield
wrote:

[crap]

To save all the arguing, set one up and see what happens, those who
object do not have to join....

He can't. He's too stupid. Instead he's running around like the mutant
offspring of Norman Wisdom and Kenneth Williams, trying to pretend he
knows what he's talking about, and making a complete arse of himself.

POTM!

But, it has teeth!
--
ah

"wemfish" wemfish AT tiscali.co.uk wrote in message
...
Well said Paul.
If Harry would just shut up half the problems on this group would go away,
He brought the trolls here from local.yorkshire in the first place!!
---


There are two schools of thought about the local.yorkshire trolls.

Some people argue that if you also lived in Leeds or Bradford (or some other
Yorkshire **** hole) then you'd want to get out into a country orientated
group like uk.rec.caravanning, as well.

Others say that it's really all the fault of the government - giving these
urban vandals the 'right to roam', trampling crops, leaving gates open, and
dropping their hypodermic syringes everywhere they go.....

ah retched A moderated group! onto my recliner:

I am everyone on usenet! wrote:

Effected Butterfly retched A moderated group! onto my recliner:

In article , Roy

wrote:

On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 13:10:05 GMT, Harry Bloomfield
wrote:

[crap]

To save all the arguing, set one up and see what happens, those who
object do not have to join....

He can't. He's too stupid. Instead he's running around like the mutant
offspring of Norman Wisdom and Kenneth Williams, trying to pretend he
knows what he's talking about, and making a complete arse of himself.
POTM!

But, it has teeth!


*Scratches head*


--

Phil K.

http://philkyle2003.reachme.at/

chevron retched A moderated group! onto my recliner:


"wemfish" wemfish AT tiscali.co.uk wrote in message
...
Well said Paul.
If Harry would just shut up half the problems on this group would go away,
He brought the trolls here from local.yorkshire in the first place!!
---


There are two schools of thought about the local.yorkshire trolls.

Some people argue that if you also lived in Leeds or Bradford (or some other
Yorkshire **** hole) then you'd want to get out into a country orientated
group like uk.rec.caravanning, as well.

Others say that it's really all the fault of the government - giving these
urban vandals the 'right to roam', trampling crops, leaving gates open, and
dropping their hypodermic syringes everywhere they go.....



I blame everyone else.




--

Phil K.

http://philkyle2003.reachme.at/

wemfish retched A moderated group! onto my recliner:

Well said Paul.
If Harry would just shut up half the problems on this group would go away,
He brought the trolls here from local.yorkshire in the first place!!


You might be onto something.


--

Phil K.

http://philkyle2003.reachme.at/

Harry Bloomfield retched A moderated group! onto my recliner:

On 04/02/2004 hugh opined:-
In message m,
MikeE writes
On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 22:13:01 +0000, Harry Bloomfield wrote:

Hi folks,

My wife recently applied to join a moderated group and was
arbitrarily rejected - no reason given and no way of finding out why.

You don't 'apply' to join groups set up as moderated, you simply
subscribe to the them in the usual way, read them in the usual way and
post to them in the usual way.

The only difference so far as you or your wife is concerned, is that
your postings to the group would be directed via a filter server prior
to appearing on the group.


FOAD


--

Phil K.

http://philkyle2003.reachme.at/

I am everyone on usenet! wrote:

ah retched A moderated group! onto my recliner:

I am everyone on usenet! wrote:

Effected Butterfly retched A moderated group! onto my recliner:

In article , Roy

wrote:

On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 13:10:05 GMT, Harry Bloomfield
wrote:

[crap]

To save all the arguing, set one up and see what happens, those who
object do not have to join....

He can't. He's too stupid. Instead he's running around like the mutant
offspring of Norman Wisdom and Kenneth Williams, trying to pretend he
knows what he's talking about, and making a complete arse of himself.

POTM!

But, it has teeth!

*Scratches head*

[my thoughts exactly--I'm kinda lost with them acronymism thingies]
--
ah

I am everyone on usenet! wrote:

Harry Bloomfield retched A moderated group! onto my recliner:

On 04/02/2004 hugh opined:-

In message m,
MikeE writes

On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 22:13:01 +0000, Harry Bloomfield wrote:

Hi folks,

My wife recently applied to join a moderated group and was
arbitrarily rejected - no reason given and no way of finding out why.

You don't 'apply' to join groups set up as moderated, you simply
subscribe to the them in the usual way, read them in the usual way and
post to them in the usual way.

The only difference so far as you or your wife is concerned, is that
your postings to the group would be directed via a filter server prior
to appearing on the group.

FOAD

BMDUBYA?
--
ah

On Fri, 6 Feb 2004 22:06:17 -0000, Steve W... wrote:

"Harry Bloomfield" wrote in message
.uk...
Hi folks,

Out of curiosity, I have been subscribed for a while to the moderated
version of uk.local.yorkshire

I thought you might be interested in hearing how the new newsgroup is
performing and how well it is fulfilling its purpose....

The group took a little time before it was eventually 'found' by all
the Usenet servers, so it was not immediately available to everyone.
Once it was, it was then possible for anyone to subscribe to and read
the contents.

Postings made to the newsgroup are directed via a filter server which
is set up to remove certain content automatically, with some additional
manual intervention as and when needed. The filtering seemed to only
delay postings between a matter of a few seconds and a worst case of
some 5 minutes. This seems a small price to pay, versus the alternative
of the personal filter systems needed for so many of the open groups.
Whether the delays might increase as more groups join the moderation
server I don't know, but it seems a small price to pay for the
concentrated content. Any items which are filtered out, can be easily
seen on a web site and I have seen no indications of bias on the part
of the moderation process against any genuine posts.

No attempt seems to have been made to completely eliminate trolling,
only the more malicious ones are absent. Those who thought that the
move to moderated status might mean the end of the group, will I am
sure find it a pleasant surprise.

Looking at the original u.l.y newsgroup this evening, all the genuine
posters seem to have abandoned it in favour of the new moderated
version of the group.

One of the objections to moderated groups I heard, was that newcomers
would not be able to get to the content easily and that posting by
newcomers would suffers long delays. This is absolutely untrue. They
can be reading in no more time than it takes to subscribe to an
umoderated group and posting with just a delay of a minute or two.

If anyone wants to make this group moderated, I would certainly support
it.

--

Regards,
Harry (M1BYT) (Lap)
http://www.ukradioamateur.org


Well it seems that this group is going down hill at some great speed, the
idiots that blight the group are obviously discussing their tactics at
playtime.
Perhaps now's the time for the regulars of the group to try & go forward &
moderate the group or just call it a day.

Steve...

I love Harry.

--
Phil Kyle - Usenet Legend.

http://philkyle2003.reachme.at/

"If Harry would just shut up half the
problems on this group would go away,
He brought the trolls here from
local.yorkshire in the first place!! " - wemfish

Phil Kyle wrote in
s.com:

I love Harry.

Oh great - he's now in uk.radio.amateur - this guy 'Phil Kyle' is great -
you though we had problems with Airy Gareth - now the fun has begun.

Whoever brought him in via crossposts - thanks very much.

Another newsgroup bites the dust.

Leigh.....

On 7 Feb 2004 16:09:25 GMT, Leigh wrote:

Phil Kyle wrote in
s.com:

I love Harry.

Oh great - he's now in uk.radio.amateur - this guy 'Phil Kyle' is great -
you though we had problems with Airy Gareth - now the fun has begun.

Whoever brought him in via crossposts - thanks very much.

Another newsgroup bites the dust.

Leigh.....

Mr. Bloomfield invited me. He just doesn't know it yet.


--
Phil Kyle - Usenet Legend.

http://philkyle2003.reachme.at/

"If Harry would just shut up half the
problems on this group would go away,
He brought the trolls here from
local.yorkshire in the first place!! " - wemfish

On Sat, 7 Feb 2004 16:18:47 -0000, Mary Fisher wrote:

"Steve W..." wrote in message
...

"Harry Bloomfield" wrote in message
.uk...
Hi folks,

Out of curiosity, I have been subscribed for a while to the moderated
version of uk.local.yorkshire

I thought you might be interested in hearing how the new newsgroup is
performing and how well it is fulfilling its purpose....

The group took a little time before it was eventually 'found' by all
the Usenet servers, so it was not immediately available to everyone.
Once it was, it was then possible for anyone to subscribe to and read
the contents.

Postings made to the newsgroup are directed via a filter server which
is set up to remove certain content automatically, with some additional
manual intervention as and when needed. The filtering seemed to only
delay postings between a matter of a few seconds and a worst case of
some 5 minutes. This seems a small price to pay, versus the alternative
of the personal filter systems needed for so many of the open groups.
Whether the delays might increase as more groups join the moderation
server I don't know, but it seems a small price to pay for the
concentrated content. Any items which are filtered out, can be easily
seen on a web site and I have seen no indications of bias on the part
of the moderation process against any genuine posts.

No attempt seems to have been made to completely eliminate trolling,
only the more malicious ones are absent. Those who thought that the
move to moderated status might mean the end of the group, will I am
sure find it a pleasant surprise.

Looking at the original u.l.y newsgroup this evening, all the genuine
posters seem to have abandoned it in favour of the new moderated
version of the group.

One of the objections to moderated groups I heard, was that newcomers
would not be able to get to the content easily and that posting by
newcomers would suffers long delays. This is absolutely untrue. They
can be reading in no more time than it takes to subscribe to an
umoderated group and posting with just a delay of a minute or two.

If anyone wants to make this group moderated, I would certainly support
it.

--

Regards,
Harry (M1BYT) (Lap)
http://www.ukradioamateur.org


Well it seems that this group is going down hill at some great speed, the
idiots that blight the group are obviously discussing their tactics at
playtime.
Perhaps now's the time for the regulars of the group to try & go forward
&
moderate the group or just call it a day.

Sinking ships come to mind from your words.

We can always stick around and wait for them to get fed up or grow up.
That's my intention. We certainly don't have to read their babblings.

Mary

Mary

Quite contrary.


--
Phil Kyle - Usenet Legend.

http://philkyle2003.reachme.at/

"If Harry would just shut up half the
problems on this group would go away,
He brought the trolls here from
local.yorkshire in the first place!! " - wemfish

The Lord alerted my mind to the presence of this EVIL article by Phil
Kyle, and I thusly replied:

On Sat, 7 Feb 2004 16:18:47 -0000, Mary Fisher wrote:

"Steve W..." wrote in message
...

"Harry Bloomfield" wrote in message
.uk...
Hi folks,

Out of curiosity, I have been subscribed for a while to the moderated
version of uk.local.yorkshire

I thought you might be interested in hearing how the new newsgroup is
performing and how well it is fulfilling its purpose....

The group took a little time before it was eventually 'found' by all
the Usenet servers, so it was not immediately available to everyone.
Once it was, it was then possible for anyone to subscribe to and read
the contents.

Postings made to the newsgroup are directed via a filter server which
is set up to remove certain content automatically, with some
additional manual intervention as and when needed. The filtering
seemed to only delay postings between a matter of a few seconds and a
worst case of some 5 minutes. This seems a small price to pay, versus
the alternative of the personal filter systems needed for so many of
the open groups. Whether the delays might increase as more groups
join the moderation server I don't know, but it seems a small price
to pay for the concentrated content. Any items which are filtered
out, can be easily seen on a web site and I have seen no indications
of bias on the part of the moderation process against any genuine
posts.

No attempt seems to have been made to completely eliminate trolling,
only the more malicious ones are absent. Those who thought that the
move to moderated status might mean the end of the group, will I am
sure find it a pleasant surprise.

Looking at the original u.l.y newsgroup this evening, all the genuine
posters seem to have abandoned it in favour of the new moderated
version of the group.

One of the objections to moderated groups I heard, was that newcomers
would not be able to get to the content easily and that posting by
newcomers would suffers long delays. This is absolutely untrue. They
can be reading in no more time than it takes to subscribe to an
umoderated group and posting with just a delay of a minute or two.

If anyone wants to make this group moderated, I would certainly
support it.

--

Regards,
Harry (M1BYT) (Lap)
http://www.ukradioamateur.org


Well it seems that this group is going down hill at some great speed,
the idiots that blight the group are obviously discussing their
tactics at playtime. Perhaps now's the time for the regulars of the
group to try & go forward & moderate the group or just call it a day.

Sinking ships come to mind from your words.

We can always stick around and wait for them to get fed up or grow up.
That's my intention. We certainly don't have to read their babblings.

Mary

Mary

Quite contrary.

I hope she's prepared to wait as long as DL have.

--
The Reverend Parson Peter Parsnip
Smiting Sinful Usenet Users Since 1874

"A ******* shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to his
tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the Lord."
- Deuteronomy 23:2

The Lord alerted my mind to the presence of this EVIL article by Leigh,
and I thusly replied:

Phil Kyle wrote in
s.com:

I love Harry.

Oh great - he's now in uk.radio.amateur - this guy 'Phil Kyle' is great
- you though we had problems with Airy Gareth - now the fun has begun.

Whoever brought him in via crossposts - thanks very much.

Another newsgroup bites the dust.

It depends on how long it takes for you to reject Harry's netKKKoping
antics. We're only here to play kiss chase with him... if he moves on,
then there's no bother!

PS: setting followups without warning. Very bad.

--
The Reverend Parson Peter Parsnip
Smiting Sinful Usenet Users Since 1874

"A ******* shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to his
tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the Lord."
- Deuteronomy 23:2

The Lord alerted my mind to the presence of this EVIL article by Phil
Kyle, and I thusly replied:

On 7 Feb 2004 16:09:25 GMT, Leigh wrote:

Phil Kyle wrote in
s.com:

I love Harry.

Oh great - he's now in uk.radio.amateur - this guy 'Phil Kyle' is great
- you though we had problems with Airy Gareth - now the fun has begun.

Whoever brought him in via crossposts - thanks very much.

Another newsgroup bites the dust.

Leigh.....

Mr. Bloomfield invited me. He just doesn't know it yet.

He's a kind and gentle man.

--
The Reverend Parson Peter Parsnip
Smiting Sinful Usenet Users Since 1874

"A ******* shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to his
tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the Lord."
- Deuteronomy 23:2

Phil Kyle wrote in
s.com:

On 7 Feb 2004 16:09:25 GMT, Leigh wrote:

Phil Kyle wrote in
s.com:

I love Harry.

Oh great - he's now in uk.radio.amateur - this guy 'Phil Kyle' is
great - you though we had problems with Airy Gareth - now the fun has
begun.

Whoever brought him in via crossposts - thanks very much.

Another newsgroup bites the dust.

Leigh.....

Mr. Bloomfield invited me. He just doesn't know it yet.

Well - I'm sure the members of uk.radio.amateur would like you to take
this early opportunity to leave. Please makes this a group you don't
infest.

Leigh...

The Lord alerted my mind to the presence of this EVIL article by Leigh,
and I thusly replied:

Phil Kyle wrote in
s.com:

On 7 Feb 2004 16:09:25 GMT, Leigh wrote:

Phil Kyle wrote in
s.com:

I love Harry.

Oh great - he's now in uk.radio.amateur - this guy 'Phil Kyle' is
great - you though we had problems with Airy Gareth - now the fun has
begun.

Whoever brought him in via crossposts - thanks very much.

Another newsgroup bites the dust.

Leigh.....

Mr. Bloomfield invited me. He just doesn't know it yet.

Well - I'm sure the members of uk.radio.amateur would like you to take
this early opportunity to leave. Please makes this a group you don't
infest.

I can't help but feel that you are a troll.

--
The Reverend Parson Peter Parsnip
Smiting Sinful Usenet Users Since 1874

"A ******* shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to his
tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the Lord."
- Deuteronomy 23:2

I wholeheartedly support the suggestion that the group should be moderated.

(top posted and bottom posted, to please everyone!!!)

"Phil Kyle" wrote in message
s.com...
On Fri, 6 Feb 2004 22:06:17 -0000, Steve W... wrote:

"Harry Bloomfield" wrote in message
.uk...
Hi folks,

Out of curiosity, I have been subscribed for a while to the moderated
version of uk.local.yorkshire

I thought you might be interested in hearing how the new newsgroup is
performing and how well it is fulfilling its purpose....

The group took a little time before it was eventually 'found' by all
the Usenet servers, so it was not immediately available to everyone.
Once it was, it was then possible for anyone to subscribe to and read
the contents.

Postings made to the newsgroup are directed via a filter server which
is set up to remove certain content automatically, with some additional
manual intervention as and when needed. The filtering seemed to only
delay postings between a matter of a few seconds and a worst case of
some 5 minutes. This seems a small price to pay, versus the alternative
of the personal filter systems needed for so many of the open groups.
Whether the delays might increase as more groups join the moderation
server I don't know, but it seems a small price to pay for the
concentrated content. Any items which are filtered out, can be easily
seen on a web site and I have seen no indications of bias on the part
of the moderation process against any genuine posts.

No attempt seems to have been made to completely eliminate trolling,
only the more malicious ones are absent. Those who thought that the
move to moderated status might mean the end of the group, will I am
sure find it a pleasant surprise.

Looking at the original u.l.y newsgroup this evening, all the genuine
posters seem to have abandoned it in favour of the new moderated
version of the group.

One of the objections to moderated groups I heard, was that newcomers
would not be able to get to the content easily and that posting by
newcomers would suffers long delays. This is absolutely untrue. They
can be reading in no more time than it takes to subscribe to an
umoderated group and posting with just a delay of a minute or two.

If anyone wants to make this group moderated, I would certainly support
it.

--

Regards,
Harry (M1BYT) (Lap)
http://www.ukradioamateur.org


Well it seems that this group is going down hill at some great speed,
the
idiots that blight the group are obviously discussing their tactics at
playtime.
Perhaps now's the time for the regulars of the group to try & go
forward &
moderate the group or just call it a day.

Steve...

I love Harry.

--
Phil Kyle - Usenet Legend.

http://philkyle2003.reachme.at/

"If Harry would just shut up half the
problems on this group would go away,
He brought the trolls here from
local.yorkshire in the first place!! " - wemfish

I wholeheartedly support the suggestion that the group should be moderated.
Unfortunately even blocking the trolls doesn't seem to work, because too
many people take the bait and make a meal of it!

"Phil Kyle" wrote in message:
"Miles" wrote in message
...
I wholeheartedly support the suggestion that the group should be
moderated.

And it should be in HTML format with pictures.

(top posted and bottom posted, to please everyone!!!)

Topped and tailed.
There will be none of this top posting nonsense when the group becomes
moderated.
Gary7SLL


s.com...
On Fri, 6 Feb 2004 22:06:17 -0000, Steve W... wrote:

"Harry Bloomfield" wrote in message
.uk...
Hi folks,

Out of curiosity, I have been subscribed for a while to the moderated
version of uk.local.yorkshire

I thought you might be interested in hearing how the new newsgroup is
performing and how well it is fulfilling its purpose....

The group took a little time before it was eventually 'found' by all
the Usenet servers, so it was not immediately available to everyone.
Once it was, it was then possible for anyone to subscribe to and read
the contents.

Postings made to the newsgroup are directed via a filter server which
is set up to remove certain content automatically, with some
additional
manual intervention as and when needed. The filtering seemed to only
delay postings between a matter of a few seconds and a worst case of
some 5 minutes. This seems a small price to pay, versus the
alternative
of the personal filter systems needed for so many of the open groups.
Whether the delays might increase as more groups join the moderation
server I don't know, but it seems a small price to pay for the
concentrated content. Any items which are filtered out, can be easily
seen on a web site and I have seen no indications of bias on the part
of the moderation process against any genuine posts.

No attempt seems to have been made to completely eliminate trolling,
only the more malicious ones are absent. Those who thought that the
move to moderated status might mean the end of the group, will I am
sure find it a pleasant surprise.

Looking at the original u.l.y newsgroup this evening, all the genuine
posters seem to have abandoned it in favour of the new moderated
version of the group.

One of the objections to moderated groups I heard, was that newcomers
would not be able to get to the content easily and that posting by
newcomers would suffers long delays. This is absolutely untrue. They
can be reading in no more time than it takes to subscribe to an
umoderated group and posting with just a delay of a minute or two.

If anyone wants to make this group moderated, I would certainly
support
it.

--

Regards,
Harry (M1BYT) (Lap)
http://www.ukradioamateur.org


Well it seems that this group is going down hill at some great speed,
the
idiots that blight the group are obviously discussing their tactics at
playtime.
Perhaps now's the time for the regulars of the group to try & go
forward &
moderate the group or just call it a day.

Steve...

I love Harry.

--
Phil Kyle - Usenet Legend.

http://philkyle2003.reachme.at/

"If Harry would just shut up half the
problems on this group would go away,
He brought the trolls here from
local.yorkshire in the first place!! " - wemfish

I wholeheartedly support the suggestion that the group should be
moderated.
Unfortunately even blocking the trolls doesn't seem to work, because too
many people take the bait and make a meal of it!

On 7 Feb 2004 20:08:04 GMT, Leigh wrote:

Phil Kyle wrote in
s.com:

On 7 Feb 2004 16:09:25 GMT, Leigh wrote:

Phil Kyle wrote in
s.com:

I love Harry.

Oh great - he's now in uk.radio.amateur - this guy 'Phil Kyle' is
great - you though we had problems with Airy Gareth - now the fun has
begun.

Whoever brought him in via crossposts - thanks very much.

Another newsgroup bites the dust.

Leigh.....

Mr. Bloomfield invited me. He just doesn't know it yet.

Well - I'm sure the members of uk.radio.amateur would like you to take
this early opportunity to leave. Please makes this a group you don't
infest.

Leigh...

I have a bone to pick with Harry.
Wherever he lays his hat, that's my home.

--
Phil Kyle - Usenet Legend.

http://philkyle2003.reachme.at/

"If Harry would just shut up half the
problems on this group would go away,
He brought the trolls here from
local.yorkshire in the first place!! " - wemfish

On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 19:01:43 GMT, Reverend {Parson} Peter Parsnip wrote:

The Lord alerted my mind to the presence of this EVIL article by Phil
Kyle, and I thusly replied:

On Sat, 7 Feb 2004 16:18:47 -0000, Mary Fisher wrote:

"Steve W..." wrote in message
...

"Harry Bloomfield" wrote in message
.uk...
Hi folks,

Out of curiosity, I have been subscribed for a while to the moderated
version of uk.local.yorkshire

I thought you might be interested in hearing how the new newsgroup is
performing and how well it is fulfilling its purpose....

The group took a little time before it was eventually 'found' by all
the Usenet servers, so it was not immediately available to everyone.
Once it was, it was then possible for anyone to subscribe to and read
the contents.

Postings made to the newsgroup are directed via a filter server which
is set up to remove certain content automatically, with some
additional manual intervention as and when needed. The filtering
seemed to only delay postings between a matter of a few seconds and a
worst case of some 5 minutes. This seems a small price to pay, versus
the alternative of the personal filter systems needed for so many of
the open groups. Whether the delays might increase as more groups
join the moderation server I don't know, but it seems a small price
to pay for the concentrated content. Any items which are filtered
out, can be easily seen on a web site and I have seen no indications
of bias on the part of the moderation process against any genuine
posts.

No attempt seems to have been made to completely eliminate trolling,
only the more malicious ones are absent. Those who thought that the
move to moderated status might mean the end of the group, will I am
sure find it a pleasant surprise.

Looking at the original u.l.y newsgroup this evening, all the genuine
posters seem to have abandoned it in favour of the new moderated
version of the group.

One of the objections to moderated groups I heard, was that newcomers
would not be able to get to the content easily and that posting by
newcomers would suffers long delays. This is absolutely untrue. They
can be reading in no more time than it takes to subscribe to an
umoderated group and posting with just a delay of a minute or two.

If anyone wants to make this group moderated, I would certainly
support it.

--

Regards,
Harry (M1BYT) (Lap)
http://www.ukradioamateur.org


Well it seems that this group is going down hill at some great speed,
the idiots that blight the group are obviously discussing their
tactics at playtime. Perhaps now's the time for the regulars of the
group to try & go forward & moderate the group or just call it a day.

Sinking ships come to mind from your words.

We can always stick around and wait for them to get fed up or grow up.
That's my intention. We certainly don't have to read their babblings.

Mary

Mary

Quite contrary.

I hope she's prepared to wait as long as DL have.

I'm setting up my caravan as we speak.

--
Phil Kyle - Usenet Legend.

http://philkyle2003.reachme.at/

"If Harry would just shut up half the
problems on this group would go away,
He brought the trolls here from
local.yorkshire in the first place!! " - wemfish

On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 22:36:09 GMT, Reverend {Parson} Peter Parsnip wrote:

The Lord alerted my mind to the presence of this EVIL article by Leigh,
and I thusly replied:

Phil Kyle wrote in
s.com:

On 7 Feb 2004 16:09:25 GMT, Leigh wrote:

Phil Kyle wrote in
s.com:

I love Harry.

Oh great - he's now in uk.radio.amateur - this guy 'Phil Kyle' is
great - you though we had problems with Airy Gareth - now the fun has
begun.

Whoever brought him in via crossposts - thanks very much.

Another newsgroup bites the dust.

Leigh.....

Mr. Bloomfield invited me. He just doesn't know it yet.

Well - I'm sure the members of uk.radio.amateur would like you to take
this early opportunity to leave. Please makes this a group you don't
infest.

I can't help but feel that you are a troll.

No I'm not.

--
Phil Kyle - Usenet Legend.

http://philkyle2003.reachme.at/

"If Harry would just shut up half the
problems on this group would go away,
He brought the trolls here from
local.yorkshire in the first place!! " - wemfish

Phil Kyle wrote in news:e26ed1ad8221de3dcb77e128092b8e27
@news.teranews.com:

I have a bone to pick with Harry.
Wherever he lays his hat, that's my home.

No - usenet doesn't work like that - people who have contributed to it for
many years know that its common decency to take any flames/complaints or
arguments to email whereas your style of name changing, filter avoidance
and other tactics is not acceptable.

Please 'Mr Kyle', take your 'bone picking' elsewhere, there's a good chap -
Harry has happily laid his hat in here for years whereas you have arrived
in a group by following/stalking him and now choose to fill another group
with your pathetic postings.

Take it to email or move on!

Leigh....

The Lord alerted my mind to the presence of this EVIL article by Phil
Kyle, and I thusly replied:

On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 19:01:43 GMT, Reverend {Parson} Peter Parsnip wrote:

The Lord alerted my mind to the presence of this EVIL article by Phil
Kyle, and I thusly replied:

On Sat, 7 Feb 2004 16:18:47 -0000, Mary Fisher wrote:

"Steve W..." wrote in message
...

"Harry Bloomfield" wrote in
message .uk...
Hi folks,

Out of curiosity, I have been subscribed for a while to the
moderated version of uk.local.yorkshire

I thought you might be interested in hearing how the new newsgroup
is performing and how well it is fulfilling its purpose....

The group took a little time before it was eventually 'found' by
all the Usenet servers, so it was not immediately available to
everyone. Once it was, it was then possible for anyone to subscribe
to and read the contents.

Postings made to the newsgroup are directed via a filter server
which is set up to remove certain content automatically, with some
additional manual intervention as and when needed. The filtering
seemed to only delay postings between a matter of a few seconds and
a worst case of some 5 minutes. This seems a small price to pay,
versus the alternative of the personal filter systems needed for so
many of the open groups. Whether the delays might increase as more
groups join the moderation server I don't know, but it seems a
small price to pay for the concentrated content. Any items which
are filtered out, can be easily seen on a web site and I have seen
no indications of bias on the part of the moderation process
against any genuine posts.

No attempt seems to have been made to completely eliminate
trolling, only the more malicious ones are absent. Those who
thought that the move to moderated status might mean the end of the
group, will I am sure find it a pleasant surprise.

Looking at the original u.l.y newsgroup this evening, all the
genuine posters seem to have abandoned it in favour of the new
moderated version of the group.

One of the objections to moderated groups I heard, was that
newcomers would not be able to get to the content easily and that
posting by newcomers would suffers long delays. This is absolutely
untrue. They can be reading in no more time than it takes to
subscribe to an umoderated group and posting with just a delay of a
minute or two.

If anyone wants to make this group moderated, I would certainly
support it.

--

Regards,
Harry (M1BYT) (Lap)
http://www.ukradioamateur.org


Well it seems that this group is going down hill at some great
speed, the idiots that blight the group are obviously discussing
their tactics at playtime. Perhaps now's the time for the regulars
of the group to try & go forward & moderate the group or just call
it a day.

Sinking ships come to mind from your words.

We can always stick around and wait for them to get fed up or grow
up. That's my intention. We certainly don't have to read their
babblings.

Mary

Mary

Quite contrary.

I hope she's prepared to wait as long as DL have.

I'm setting up my caravan as we speak.

Traitor!

--
The Reverend Parson Peter Parsnip
Smiting Sinful Usenet Users Since 1874

"A ******* shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to his
tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the Lord."
- Deuteronomy 23:2

The Lord alerted my mind to the presence of this EVIL article by Leigh,
and I thusly replied:

Phil Kyle wrote in
news:e26ed1ad8221de3dcb77e128092b8e27 @news.teranews.com:

I have a bone to pick with Harry.
Wherever he lays his hat, that's my home.

No - usenet doesn't work like that - people who have contributed to it
for many years know that its common decency to take any
flames/complaints or arguments to email whereas your style of name
changing, filter avoidance and other tactics is not acceptable.

Please 'Mr Kyle', take your 'bone picking' elsewhere, there's a good
chap - Harry has happily laid his hat in here for years whereas you have
arrived in a group by following/stalking him and now choose to fill
another group with your pathetic postings.

Take it to email or move on!

Oooh, I like a challenge.

--
The Reverend Parson Peter Parsnip
Smiting Sinful Usenet Users Since 1874

"A ******* shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to his
tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the Lord."
- Deuteronomy 23:2