I came to a.b.p.w. to see pictures of completed projects from my fellow
woodworkers. Instead, I get tons of Enc crap (whatever THAT is) and a bunch
of computer geeks in a ****in' contest trying to outdo each other by
throwing around nomenclature and acronyms. I am a woodworker, first, and a
computer user by necessity. You egotistical, loudmouth, know-it-alls have
absolutely RUINED it for me.

Dick Pewthers
Austin, TX

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 17:48:30 GMT, "Dick Pewthers"
wrote:

I came to a.b.p.w. to see pictures of completed projects from my fellow
woodworkers. Instead, I get tons of Enc crap (whatever THAT is) and a bunch
of computer geeks in a ****in' contest trying to outdo each other by
throwing around nomenclature and acronyms. I am a woodworker, first, and a
computer user by necessity. You egotistical, loudmouth, know-it-alls have
absolutely RUINED it for me.

Dick Pewthers
Austin, TX




awww.... poor wittle woodworker.....

RUINED it for me.

Plenty of ****in' contests here, too.

The posts in question are part of an e-book "flood" of Shop Notes
magazine.

If you don't want to see them, filter them.

Easy enough.

Dick

Learn to use your computer and whatever newreader software you have.
You can easily setup most newreaders to get just the headers/subject
lines and then only grab what you are interested in. You can also
setup KILLFILTERS to tell the newreader sotware to ignore a certain
poster/etc.

Bottom line, get some education on USING your computer and this would
NOT be a problem or hassle. Remain ignorant about using your computer
and either quit visiting ABPW or put up with the off topic stuff.
Choice is yours

John

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 17:48:30 GMT, "Dick Pewthers"
wrote:

I came to a.b.p.w. to see pictures of completed projects from my fellow
woodworkers. Instead, I get tons of Enc crap (whatever THAT is) and a bunch
of computer geeks in a ****in' contest trying to outdo each other by
throwing around nomenclature and acronyms. I am a woodworker, first, and a
computer user by necessity. You egotistical, loudmouth, know-it-alls have
absolutely RUINED it for me.

Dick Pewthers
Austin, TX

John wrote:


I came to a.b.p.w. to see pictures of completed projects from my fellow
woodworkers.

Gotta be a troll.

Barry

Bear with it. The ****in' contest is due to a nit that wants to fill up =
the forum with some crap done via Outlook (Rich Text)instead of a news =
format capable product like OE (HTML).

Acronyms are just a type of shorthand like you used when you wrote =
"abpw".



--=20

PDQ
--
=20
"Dick Pewthers" wrote in message =
...
| I came to a.b.p.w. to see pictures of completed projects from my =
fellow=20
| woodworkers. Instead, I get tons of Enc crap (whatever THAT is) and a =
bunch=20
| of computer geeks in a ****in' contest trying to outdo each other by=20
| throwing around nomenclature and acronyms. I am a woodworker, first, =
and a=20
| computer user by necessity. You egotistical, loudmouth, know-it-alls =
have=20
| absolutely RUINED it for me.
|=20
| Dick Pewthers
| Austin, TX=20
|=20
|

well, no...... not really. You don't understand, PDQ.
~~~~~

I think those posts are appropriate, it may be copyrighted mat'l, but
you can't buy most of it anywhere. It has forced me to learn to use
new software, increasing my skills. Much as I have learned new things
in the shop. Now I can decode yenc files and compile .rar files.

Thanks, Krunchy.


-Dan V.


On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 14:18:00 -0500, "PDQ" wrote:

Bear with it. The ****in' contest is due to a nit that wants to fill up the forum with some crap done via Outlook (Rich Text)instead of a news format capable product like OE (HTML).

PDQ

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 16:20:12 -0500, Dan Valleskey wrote:
well, no...... not really. You don't understand, PDQ.
~~~~~

I think those posts are appropriate, it may be copyrighted mat'l, but
you can't buy most of it anywhere.

If they're in this group (my server filters out binaries where they
don't belong), then they are in the wrong place regardless of the legal
and ethical problems.

It has forced me to learn to use
new software, increasing my skills. Much as I have learned new things
in the shop. Now I can decode yenc files and compile .rar files.

That's great. Watch out for viruses.

Just because something isn't being sold any more doesn't mean the
work has been made public domain.

Dave Hinz wrote:


If they're in this group (my server filters out binaries where they
don't belong), then they are in the wrong place regardless of the legal
and ethical problems.


They're not. They are in a.b.p.w

Dick Pewthers wrote:
You egotistical, loudmouth, know-it-alls have
absolutely RUINED it for me.



What ruined it for me was the new Darren on Bewitched.

I was never the same again.

UA100

"Dan Valleskey" valleskey at comcast dot net wrote in message
...
well, no...... not really. You don't understand, PDQ.
~~~~~

I think those posts are appropriate, it may be copyrighted mat'l, but
you can't buy most of it anywhere. It has forced me to learn to use
new software, increasing my skills. Much as I have learned new things
in the shop. Now I can decode yenc files and compile .rar files.

Thanks, Krunchy.

Yeah because it suits you, disregard the law. Legally obtaining Shops Notes
back issues is absolutely doable. Just send them the money.

"Jules" wrote in message
...
Dick, your crossposting.


So are you.

"Unisaw A100" wrote in message
...
Dick Pewthers wrote:
You egotistical, loudmouth, know-it-alls have
absolutely RUINED it for me.



What ruined it for me was the new Darren on Bewitched.

I was never the same again.

UA100


Y'know, I was thinking the same thing.

Vic

And to think, we were expected not to notice!

--
Jeff P.

A truck carrying copies of Roget's Thesaurus over-turned on the
highway. The local newspaper reported that the onlookers were
"stunned, overwhelmed, astonished, bewildered, and dumfounded."

Check out my woodshop at: www.sawdustcentral.com


"Unisaw A100" wrote in message
...
Dick Pewthers wrote:
You egotistical, loudmouth, know-it-alls have
absolutely RUINED it for me.



What ruined it for me was the new Darren on Bewitched.

I was never the same again.

UA100

Unisaw A100 wrote:
What ruined it for me was the new Darren on Bewitched.
I was never the same again.

It was the Brutus/Bluto change for me. Could be an age thing
though. Bothers me to today. I am *NOT* OCD.

Dave in Fairfax
--
Dave Leader
reply-to doesn't work
use:
daveldr at att dot net
American Association of Woodturners
http://www.woodturner.org
Capital Area Woodturners
http://www.capwoodturners.org/
PATINA
http://www.Patinatools.org/

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 17:48:30 GMT, "Dick Pewthers"
wrote:

I came to a.b.p.w. to see pictures of completed projects from my fellow
woodworkers. Instead, I get tons of Enc crap (whatever THAT is) and a bunch
of computer geeks in a ****in' contest trying to outdo each other by
throwing around nomenclature and acronyms. I am a woodworker, first, and a
computer user by necessity. You egotistical, loudmouth, know-it-alls have
absolutely RUINED it for me.

Dick Pewthers
Austin, TX


Sometimes newsgroups go through a phase like that. Often I will
unsubscribe the group, then re-subscribe 2-3 weeks later to see if it
has improved. The worse thing to do is to respond or be upset. There
will always be someone who wants to destroy a newsgroup. You can also
apply a filter, such as filter out all posts that contain the word
"Krunchy."

I disagree. It is not an ebook newsgroup, but a PICTURE newsgroup to
post pictures of furniture and woodenware. So Krunchy is abusing the
newsgroup and should be posting elsewhere. Non-the-less, a filter
easily removes it and no-thanks to Krunchy.

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 16:20:12 -0500, Dan Valleskey valleskey at
comcast dot net wrote:

well, no...... not really. You don't understand, PDQ.
~~~~~

I think those posts are appropriate, it may be copyrighted mat'l, but
you can't buy most of it anywhere. It has forced me to learn to use
new software, increasing my skills. Much as I have learned new things
in the shop. Now I can decode yenc files and compile .rar files.

Thanks, Krunchy.


-Dan V.


On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 14:18:00 -0500, "PDQ" wrote:

Bear with it. The ****in' contest is due to a nit that wants to fill up the forum with some crap done via Outlook (Rich Text)instead of a news format capable product like OE (HTML).

PDQ

Unisaw A100 wrote:

Dick Pewthers wrote:


You egotistical, loudmouth, know-it-alls have
absolutely RUINED it for me.





What ruined it for me was the new Darren on Bewitched.

I was never the same again.

UA100



They had to go with the new one. The old one had chronic back problems
and couldn't act anymore. They could have told us something though
instead of the alien abduction way it played out!

Mark and Kim Smith wrote:

and couldn't act anymore. They could have told us something though
instead of the alien abduction way it played out!

Oh! Did it involve anal probing?

Dang!

Leon wrote:

"Jules" wrote in message
...

Dick, your crossposting.



So are you.

Come on man, the group is named "alt.binaries.PICTURES.woodworking". What
Krunchy is posting is illegal. If you want to download it then fine, you do
that, but don't try to justify his doing it. It is wrong. Plain and
simple.

--
Jeff P.

Check out my woodshop at: www.sawdustcentral.com

*What was the best thing before sliced bread?
*How do they get a deer to cross at the yellow road sign?
*Why is there an expiration on sour cream? It's already sour isn't it?
*Why do kamikaze pilots wear helmets?

"Jules" wrote in message
...
Should we just let you draw the line?

I thought this is a binary group. For woodworking. Were you complaining
when others posted excel programs or tables for calculating miter and
bevel cuts for crown moulding or segmented turnings?

Hmmmmm. Will you re-draw the line again because it is something you
approve of? Such as drawings of shop layouts? Excel program for
calculating angles on a multi sided box?



Phisherman wrote:

I disagree. It is not an ebook newsgroup, but a PICTURE newsgroup to
post pictures of furniture and woodenware. So Krunchy is abusing the
newsgroup and should be posting elsewhere. Non-the-less, a filter
easily removes it and no-thanks to Krunchy.

Jeff P. wrote:
And to think, we were expected not to notice!



They tried the same switcheroo with the daughter on "Roseanne".

Like we're not paying attention!

Barry

I wouldn't know how to download it. If it's brokenup like that, I am too
far behind. Granted, I do believe it is somewhat illegal. I also
understand it is commonplace.

I hope everybody in the clucking hen party remembers their own sterling
morals next time, and every time, they drive their car. Or loan out or
receive on loan, a program. Or a book.

That is what I find so interesting here. How pure everybody is. And how
eager they are to draw a line about which illegal activity is ok
(because they do it) and which is not ok (because they don't do it). All
without coming right out and saying why.

Why it's the stuff Sunday School stories are made of.

So yes everybody, look within, and see if you really should be picking
up a rock.




Jeff P. wrote:

Come on man, the group is named "alt.binaries.PICTURES.woodworking". What
Krunchy is posting is illegal. If you want to download it then fine, you do
that, but don't try to justify his doing it. It is wrong. Plain and
simple.

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 06:27:18 GMT, "Jeff P."
wrote:

Come on man, the group is named "alt.binaries.PICTURES.woodworking". What
Krunchy is posting is illegal. If you want to download it then fine, you do
that, but don't try to justify his doing it. It is wrong. Plain and
simple.


what he was posting was pictures. scans, specifically, of a
woodworking magazine, in PDF format. they were totally on topic.

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 12:57:59 -0500, Jules wrote:

I hope everybody in the clucking hen party remembers their own sterling
morals next time, and every time, they drive their car. Or loan out or
receive on loan, a program. Or a book.

Driving a car, or loaning out materials, aren't violating intellectual
property. When you loan someone a book, one license to have a copy of
the book has been sold, and there continues to be only one copy of that
book for that license. If you _photocopy_ the book, you have violated
that. Libraries are covered for that under "fair use", by the way,
for people copying a limited number of pages.

That is what I find so interesting here. How pure everybody is. And how
eager they are to draw a line about which illegal activity is ok
(because they do it) and which is not ok (because they don't do it). All
without coming right out and saying why.

Because some of us make our living in a field where our output
_is_ easily-stolen intellectual property and take it kind of personally.

Why it's the stuff Sunday School stories are made of.
So yes everybody, look within, and see if you really should be picking
up a rock.

I loathe and detest Microsoft, and I won't even steal from _them_.

"Jules" wrote in message
...
I wouldn't know how to download it. If it's brokenup like that, I am too
far behind. Granted, I do believe it is somewhat illegal. I also
understand it is commonplace.

I hope everybody in the clucking hen party remembers their own sterling
morals next time, and every time, they drive their car. Or loan out or
receive on loan, a program. Or a book.

Just because people do things wrong does not excuse wrong behavior. Illegal
is illegal. Morally wrong (although a much more messy thing to define) is
morally wrong. The wrong things are still wrong even though other people
may do other things wrong. Boy - that's just about a profound sentence,
isn't it? The fact is that is is equally proper to call anyone on the
things they are doing wrong, and to be called on the things we each do
wrong. Failure to provide that degree of accountability within a society
creates chaos.


That is what I find so interesting here. How pure everybody is. And how
eager they are to draw a line about which illegal activity is ok
(because they do it) and which is not ok (because they don't do it). All
without coming right out and saying why.

I must have missed something because I haven't seen anyone condoning any
illegal activities.


So yes everybody, look within, and see if you really should be picking
up a rock.


That's fair to the extent that it should keep each person from getting up on
a white horse, but not to the extent that it causes people to overlook
wrongdoings. It's one thing to suggest one should not become judgmental of
others, it's another thing completely to suggest that people should not call
illegal activities for what they are.
--

-Mike-

Mike Marlow wrote:
"Jules" wrote in message
...
I wouldn't know how to download it. If it's brokenup like that, I
am too
far behind. Granted, I do believe it is somewhat illegal. I also
understand it is commonplace.

I hope everybody in the clucking hen party remembers their own
sterling
morals next time, and every time, they drive their car. Or loan out
or
receive on loan, a program. Or a book.

Just because people do things wrong does not excuse wrong behavior.
Illegal
is illegal. Morally wrong (although a much more messy thing to
define) is
morally wrong. The wrong things are still wrong even though other
people
may do other things wrong.

How refreshing. But let's not forget that driving a car, loaning
a book, or (depending on circumstances) loaning a program are
typically not illegal. Republishing material without the copyright
owner's permission is.

Boy - that's just about a profound sentence,
isn't it? The fact is that is is equally proper to call anyone on
the
things they are doing wrong, and to be called on the things we each
do
wrong. Failure to provide that degree of accountability within a
society
creates chaos.

It really ****es people off though.

....

That's fair to the extent that it should keep each person from
getting up on
a white horse, but not to the extent that it causes people to
overlook
wrongdoings. It's one thing to suggest one should not become
judgmental of
others, it's another thing completely to suggest that people should
not call
illegal activities for what they are.

Well said. Too bad it's Off-Topic for this newsgroup. ;-0

--

FF

Dave Hinz wrote in
:

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 12:57:59 -0500, Jules
wrote:

I hope everybody in the clucking hen party remembers their own
sterling morals next time, and every time, they drive their car. Or
loan out or receive on loan, a program. Or a book.

Driving a car, or loaning out materials, aren't violating intellectual
property. When you loan someone a book, one license to have a copy of
the book has been sold, and there continues to be only one copy of
that book for that license.


I agree with you on principle but there is an important distiction here.
Books are sold not licensed and are subject to the first sale doctrine
which says in essence you may trade, sell or give away the original item
provided you have not kept a copy for yourself.


If you _photocopy_ the book, you have
violated that. Libraries are covered for that under "fair use", by
the way, for people copying a limited number of pages.

Another, fine but important point is that everyone, not just libraries,
enjoys fair use rights.


That is what I find so interesting here. How pure everybody is. And
how eager they are to draw a line about which illegal activity is ok
(because they do it) and which is not ok (because they don't do it).
All without coming right out and saying why.

Because some of us make our living in a field where our output
_is_ easily-stolen intellectual property and take it kind of
personally.

Why it's the stuff Sunday School stories are made of.
So yes everybody, look within, and see if you really should be
picking up a rock.

I loathe and detest Microsoft, and I won't even steal from _them_.

A final fine point and I'm not advocating either in any way, but what he
is doing is copyright infringement which by definition is not the same
as stealing.

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 14:55:21 -0600, Secret Squirrel wrote:
Dave Hinz wrote in
:

(snip much of mostly-agreeing)

I loathe and detest Microsoft, and I won't even steal from _them_.

A final fine point and I'm not advocating either in any way, but what he
is doing is copyright infringement which by definition is not the same
as stealing.

Well, when someone is benefiting from the work of others, for a product
which is supposed to be paid for and they're not paying for it, that's
close enough to "stealing" for my definition.

Dave Hinz wrote in
:

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 14:55:21 -0600, Secret Squirrel
wrote:
Dave Hinz wrote in
:

(snip much of mostly-agreeing)

I loathe and detest Microsoft, and I won't even steal from _them_.

A final fine point and I'm not advocating either in any way, but what
he is doing is copyright infringement which by definition is not the
same as stealing.

Well, when someone is benefiting from the work of others, for a
product which is supposed to be paid for and they're not paying for
it, that's close enough to "stealing" for my definition.



Again, it's a fine point, but not the same. Stealing implies that you've
been deprived of your property. In the case of copyright infringemnt,
you've not been deprived of any property, but rather from the potential
income that may have arisen from the sale or licensure of the
intellectual property.
When someone steals your car, you no longer have a car. When
someone infringes on the copyright on your (insert your choice of IP
here) you still have your IP. You've simply lost some potential future
revenue. Granted they are in many ways similar, and granted this is just
an issue of semantics. but they are in fact different things.

On 23 Feb 2005 21:32:16 GMT, Dave Hinz wrote:

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 14:55:21 -0600, Secret Squirrel wrote:
Dave Hinz wrote in
:

(snip much of mostly-agreeing)

I loathe and detest Microsoft, and I won't even steal from _them_.

A final fine point and I'm not advocating either in any way, but what he
is doing is copyright infringement which by definition is not the same
as stealing.

Well, when someone is benefiting from the work of others, for a product
which is supposed to be paid for and they're not paying for it, that's
close enough to "stealing" for my definition.



fubir lbhe urnq onpx hc lbhe nff Qnil... lbh ybfg...lbh unir orra
fubja nf gur sbby lbh ner ... jul abg whfg tb njnl naq pel n juvyr.

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 15:42:29 -0600, Secret Squirrel wrote:
Dave Hinz wrote in
:

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 14:55:21 -0600, Secret Squirrel
wrote:
Dave Hinz wrote in
:

(snip much of mostly-agreeing)

I loathe and detest Microsoft, and I won't even steal from _them_.

A final fine point and I'm not advocating either in any way, but what
he is doing is copyright infringement which by definition is not the
same as stealing.

Well, when someone is benefiting from the work of others, for a
product which is supposed to be paid for and they're not paying for
it, that's close enough to "stealing" for my definition.



Again, it's a fine point, but not the same. Stealing implies that you've
been deprived of your property. In the case of copyright infringemnt,
you've not been deprived of any property, but rather from the potential
income that may have arisen from the sale or licensure of the
intellectual property.

"stealing" can also imply "taking something without paying for it".

When someone steals your car, you no longer have a car. When
someone infringes on the copyright on your (insert your choice of IP
here) you still have your IP. You've simply lost some potential future
revenue. Granted they are in many ways similar, and granted this is just
an issue of semantics. but they are in fact different things.

It depends on your definition of "stealing", apparently. I see your
point, I just don't agree that person A has to lose (thing) when person
B takes it without paying.

In article 31,
Secret Squirrel wrote:
Dave Hinz wrote in
:

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 12:57:59 -0500, Jules
wrote:

I hope everybody in the clucking hen party remembers their own
sterling morals next time, and every time, they drive their car. Or
loan out or receive on loan, a program. Or a book.

Driving a car, or loaning out materials, aren't violating intellectual
property. When you loan someone a book, one license to have a copy of
the book has been sold, and there continues to be only one copy of
that book for that license.

I agree with you on principle but there is an important distiction here.
Books are sold not licensed and are subject to the first sale doctrine
which says in essence you may trade, sell or give away the original item
provided you have not kept a copy for yourself.

If you _photocopy_ the book, you have
violated that. Libraries are covered for that under "fair use", by
the way, for people copying a limited number of pages.

Another, fine but important point is that everyone, not just libraries,
enjoys fair use rights.


True, However libraries have a _special_ exemption *in*law*, for making
copies for 'somebody else'.

[[.. munch ..]]

I loathe and detest Microsoft, and I won't even steal from _them_.

A final fine point and I'm not advocating either in any way, but what he
is doing is copyright infringement which by definition is not the same
as stealing.

It can be argued that the person making the 'unauthorized' copy is "in
possession" of the "intellectual property" of the copyright owner. Without
the consent/permission of said owner. And/or that they have deprived the
copyright owner of the "rightful" revenues that they would have received
*if* the infringer had purchased a "legal" copy.

While the _legal_ definition of "theft" may not be satisfied by the above,
either line of reasoning *is* in line with "common usage" interpretation
of "stealing".

On a strictly legal basis, I suspect that "possession of stolen property,
knowing it to be stolen" _could_ be used against a party who knowingly
makes an 'unauthorized copy'.

Recent changes to copyright law provide for _criminal_ charges, as well as
civil lawsuits.

The action of "publishing" those unauthorized copies in a public forum
_does_ constitute the basis for a _criminal_ filing.

"B a r r y" wrote in message
. ..
Jeff P. wrote:
And to think, we were expected not to notice!



They tried the same switcheroo with the daughter on "Roseanne".

They did? ;-)

Like we're not paying attention!

Indeed. Kinda like Ritchie's brother Chuck on Happy Days.

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 22:09:49 GMT, Unisaw A100
wrote:

Dick Pewthers wrote:
You egotistical, loudmouth, know-it-alls have
absolutely RUINED it for me.



What ruined it for me was the new Darren on Bewitched.

I was never the same again.

UA100


Yeah. For me it started when George Reeve died, when I was only nine.

Having Superman die on you at that age is really hard.

The second time it happened, I was pretty sure already that it wasn't
real.


Sigh...


So anyways, I'm thinking of trying to get some of the Wreck's
Political Scientologists on Doctor Phil. I figure Miller, GregP,
Hinz, and the other numnums could have a real throwdown and get it all
over with.

Maybe Judge Judy...


Celebrity Deathmatch...?


Survivor...yeah, that's it - "Survivor - The Wreck".

At least we'd have the opportunity to vote them off the island.



Regards,

Tom.

Thomas J. Watson - Cabinetmaker, ret.
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/

Robert Bonomi wrote:
snip
On a strictly legal basis, I suspect that "possession of stolen property,
knowing it to be stolen" _could_ be used against a party who knowingly
makes an 'unauthorized copy'.
Recent changes to copyright law provide for _criminal_ charges, as well as
civil lawsuits.
The action of "publishing" those unauthorized copies in a public forum
_does_ constitute the basis for a _criminal_ filing.

I think th e Possession statute would apply more to those who d/l
the files rather than the publisherer. How ever, since it is done
over a medium that spans international spaces and the violations
are ongoing, maybe the RICO laws could be applied. I guess we'll
have to see what Gordon and his people can come up with.

Dave in Fairfax
--
Dave Leader
reply-to doesn't work
use:
daveldr at att dot net
American Association of Woodturners
http://www.woodturner.org
Capital Area Woodturners
http://www.capwoodturners.org/
PATINA
http://www.Patinatools.org/

Slowhand wrote:
Indeed. Kinda like Ritchie's brother Chuck on Happy Days.



And don't forget The Many Wives of Dean Johnson.

UA100

Yeah, that guy sure sleeps around.

--
Jeff P.

Check out my woodshop at: www.sawdustcentral.com

*What was the best thing before sliced bread?
*How do they get a deer to cross at the yellow road sign?
*Why is there an expiration on sour cream? It's already sour isn't it?
*Why do kamikaze pilots wear helmets?

"Unisaw A100" wrote in message
...
Slowhand wrote:
Indeed. Kinda like Ritchie's brother Chuck on Happy Days.



And don't forget The Many Wives of Dean Johnson.

UA100

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 19:00:33 -0500, Tom Watson wrote:
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652

At least we'd have the opportunity to vote them off the island.

Forte has excellent killfile capabilities, Tom.

Dave Hinz wrote:
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 19:00:33 -0500, Tom Watson
wrote:
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652

At least we'd have the opportunity to vote them off the island.

Forte has excellent killfile capabilities, Tom.

How about Google?

--

FF