in article [Email Removed], Jeremy Nixon - Supernews at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 4:43 PM:
Full Version: for Fred Doyle
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57
| QUOTE |
| Willem <gaatjenietaan@notvalid@ac> wrote: But he is not doing it from Supernews.. if it is him. So it is irrelevant. Unless you mean he did the same thing from Supernews and that is why he got blocked. No, that's not what I mean. What I said was that his behavior *would be* a violation *if* done from Supernews. The relevance is that this won't make us inclined to want him posting from our system. |
See, right there... they decide who gets to post from their system based
upon the attitude of the poster. Not what he posts, but how submissive he
is to their wishes, their made up "policies". If they like his "behavior".
If they like his haircut, for christ sake.
Jeremy is blocking "Mike" because he does not like "Mike's" behavior.
Not because "Mike" posted spam, it is because his "behavior" was not up to
Jeremy's standards.
Who is next? What will be the reason you don't measure up to the "behavior
standards"?
| QUOTE |
| Jeremy, if you don't want people to draw conclusions from your words, you should be careful with them. You suggest and imply too much. This time you point Mike out as a newsgroup disrupter, but isn't this group full of them? Zimphire posts from Supernews too, who draws the line and where I wonder. I prefer to draw the line well away from the gray area, erring on the side of leniency. But in practice I'm happy to leave that stuff up to the abuse department. |
Blah Blah Blah
in article [Email Removed], Demetrius
Zeluff at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 11:01 AM:
Zeluff at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 11:01 AM:
| QUOTE |
| AlwaysCorrect <[Email Removed]> wrote in news:BC9ED256.F325E% [Email Removed]: in article [Email Removed], Jeremy Nixon - Supernews at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 10:04 AM: Willem <gaatjenietaan@notvalid@ac> wrote: Many posters have much longer urls for their business or classes in their posts. Supernews staff does it too. Still Supernews is the first that says this is a reason to block their customers for it. Liar. Now Supernews calls people liars when their own (Supernews) actions and words come back to bite them. Supernews is not the first NSP to block people who have spammed a website in a sig. |
First or last, makes no difference. It is a made up rule to fit the
situation.
in article 40798d3b$0$85210$[Email Removed], Willem at
gaatjenietaan@notvalid@ac wrote on 04/11/2004 11:23 AM:
gaatjenietaan@notvalid@ac wrote on 04/11/2004 11:23 AM:
| QUOTE |
| Jeremy Nixon - Supernews <[Email Removed]> wrote news:[Email Removed] Willem <gaatjenietaan@notvalid@ac> wrote: Many posters have much longer urls for their business or classes in their posts. Supernews staff does it too. Still Supernews is the first that says this is a reason to block their customers for it. Liar. Thank you for being so professionally polite to someone you don't know from another country as well. You suggested, implied, several times up until right now, that the fake spam posts are connected to Mike. Others here say Supernews blocks for urls in posts too, they say it is well known Supernews does it if you post a lot. I'm not a liar but it's strange to know Supernews will call people that based on reactions on what Supernews writes itself. WJ -- http://www.demon.nl/eng/support/newsgroups/index.html http://tinyurl.com/yuxgq http://tinyurl.com/yvrmo |
Just more of that "make it up as you go" professional attitude from
Supernews.
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 18:03:51 -0700, Cris Zalika <[Email Removed]> wrote:
| QUOTE |
| in article [Email Removed], Rebecca Ore at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 2:54 PM: "Mike..." <[Email Removed]> writes: No matter how much you cry and moan, I do not and I did not post spam. Okay, what *is* your definition of spam? Not "Mike's" job to educate you. |
Rebecca doesn't need any education as to what is, and is not, Usenet
spam as defined by common concensus of news server administrators
worldwide. Rebecca ran, for some considerable time, her own Usenet
server and earned the respect and trust of the Usenet community in
doing so.
--
Anthony Edwards
[Email Removed]
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 22:22:32 GMT, reverend maxwell snort
<[Email Removed]> wrote:
<[Email Removed]> wrote:
| QUOTE |
| In article <[Email Removed]>, [Email Removed] says... dave <[Email Removed]> wrote: Supernews posted messages that were FAKED AFTER HE WAS BLOCKED. They attempt to use messages that Mike could NOT have written as evidence of his "crime". If you look at the posts, you'll notice that they were deliberately constructed to bypass the block. I was thinking server latency, but if he did this on purpose (and even if Seth thinks I'm a fuckhead), I'm non-repentent about attacking him. |
I didn't think of anybody in particular, it just seemed to me that
people repeatedly attacking him was a waste of time and giving him a
reason to stick around/extend this tedious exercise.
But since I made the error of bothering to read some other posts in
some threads, I made the second error of replying to his garbage posts
myself.
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 23:33:34 -0000, Jeremy Nixon - Supernews
<[Email Removed]> wrote:
<[Email Removed]> wrote:
| QUOTE |
| Seth <group> wrote: I think it's stupid and annoying. I have never understood why other NSPs didn't try and take a "harder line" against it when it started, especially since it's an advertisement for a service in the same line of business. Well, "stupid and annoying" doesn't make a good argument for it being spam; and none of us is in the habit of blocking stuff about competitors. Heck, we'd have to block most of this newsgroup. :) |
lol Currently, that doesn't strike me as such a bad idea.
| QUOTE |
| What's strange about this is what Mike hopes to achieve. Aside from the futility of complaining in newsgroups about being blocked/TOS'd from an NSP, apparently he has a commercial company. So, leaving aside any issues about spamming, I am wondering just why he thinks anybody would use the services of someone who has behaved in such an extreme, irrational and unprofessional manner as he has done here. I've no idea. Had he complained in a reasonable and mature manner, the whole thing would have gone very differently. |
Whatever the case initially, it's clear he's now totally uninterested
in whatever he's complaining about, and just wants to post as much
crap as he can - probably until his new NSP cuts him off.
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 17:42:51 -0700, Cris Zalika <[Email Removed]>
wrote:
wrote:
| QUOTE |
| in article [Email Removed], Seth at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 2:14 PM: There are newsgroups discussing servers, providers, hosts, what if all providers thought like you and started blocking customers for saying things about them they don't like to hear? AFAIK private companies are free to choose whatever policies they like, and you're free to chose one that has policies closer to what you agree with. Or you can make those "policies" public and let the chips fall where they may. |
Not sure what you're getting at here, sorry.
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 17:15:41 -0700, AlwaysCorrect
<[Email Removed]> wrote:
<[Email Removed]> wrote:
| QUOTE |
| in article [Email Removed], Seth at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 2:16 PM: On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 12:44:17 -0700, "Mike..." <[Email Removed] wrote: in article [Email Removed], Aratzio at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 11:31 AM: And what's best about that is he leaves a record for his customers to find. Really bright... My clients by my time and my talent, I am not selling my opinions about News Providers to clients. My opinions about news providers are not for sale. I will not limit my writing in newsgroups so that some fantasy client will "like me". I am willing to pay the price of lost business to clients that have thin skin and can't take an opinion that might offended them. You can express any opinion you like. It's your decision... Yes it is... and there is nothing you can do about it except cry and moan. |
I think you're doing more than enough for everyone, Mike.
| QUOTE |
| So let's read another message about how you are bothered by what other people choose to do in newsgroups. |
It doesn't bother me, even the relatively few posts I have read,
although all these whining posts by you are obviously annoying, in a
similar way to why dogshit is annoying on a public park.
However, I'm sure it would bother me if I was a customer of yours and
realised how irrational and unprofessional you are.
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 18:15:02 -0700, Cris Zalika <[Email Removed]>
wrote:
wrote:
| QUOTE |
| in article [Email Removed], Jeremy Nixon - Supernews at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 4:43 PM: Willem <gaatjenietaan@notvalid@ac> wrote: But he is not doing it from Supernews.. if it is him. So it is irrelevant. Unless you mean he did the same thing from Supernews and that is why he got blocked. No, that's not what I mean. What I said was that his behavior *would be* a violation *if* done from Supernews. The relevance is that this won't make us inclined to want him posting from our system. See, right there... they decide who gets to post from their system based upon the attitude of the poster. Not what he posts, but how submissive he is to their wishes, their made up "policies". If they like his "behavior". If they like his haircut, for christ sake. Jeremy is blocking "Mike" because he does not like "Mike's" behavior. Not because "Mike" posted spam, it is because his "behavior" was not up to Jeremy's standards. |
You know, really... Just because you _can_ post pretty much how you
like on usenet, doesn't mean you _have to_ choose the most idiotic way
possible, which is what "Mike" is doing.
| QUOTE |
| Who is next? What will be the reason you don't measure up to the "behavior standards"? |
Uh oh... How many degrees of separation is this post from one where
Supernews is equated with the Nazis?
rfgdxm/Robert F. Golaszewski <[Email Removed]> wrote:
| QUOTE |
| I didn't say it was faulty. Unlike your infamous Sucknews filter which blocked a post of mine because I (GASP!) included the URL of a competitor of yours in a post? ;) |
Unlike that one, yes. You'll notice the difference in reaction -- that
one was immediately fixed, with apology. :)
--
Jeremy | [Email Removed]
Jeremy Nixon - Supernews wrote:
| QUOTE |
| rfgdxm/Robert F. Golaszewski <[Email Removed]> wrote: Unlike your infamous Sucknews filter which blocked a post of mine because I (GASP!) included the URL of a competitor of yours in a post? ;) Unlike that one, yes. You'll notice the difference in reaction -- that one was immediately fixed, with apology. :) |
In fairness to Supernews, I must concede they indeed did acknowledge this
was a filter error, and corrected it. Hopefully you corrected it fully.
IIRC, the issue was the filter was not a specific one aimed as Sucknews, but
instead was dinging all posts including a URL with "suck" anywhere in it.
Such a filter is *way* overbroad, considering the number of innocent URLs it
could ding. Although, if someone ever puts up a hate site about me using the
domain name rfgdxmsucks.com, I might not mind too much if the filter caught
any post with a link to a URL on that domain. ;)
--
http://www.dextromethorphan.ws/
For information about the psychedelic DXM, including dangers.
in article [Email Removed], Lord Pander at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 5:52 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 5:52 PM:
| QUOTE |
| all the evidence these people need is that you post something in an art group they do not think is art, so they call it spam. No brains needed to sort that out I think. If you don't like it, kill file it, but blocking someone on the fact that someone else posts under his name is nonsense. The policy of supernews seems to be don't investigate, just block. And if you complain about us we will block you as well. LP |
Censors like to work in the dark, bigots like to work in the dark. Bring
them into the light and they squeak and squeal like little mice with their
tails stuck on a trap.
Supernews blocks people based upon fake messages. Blocks people based upon
made up "policy" that is made to fit the moment.
Supernews blocks people just because they don't like your "behavior" in a
newsgroup.
I have learned all this from reading this thread.
in article 29$[Email Removed], T D O Y S at [Email Removed]
wrote on 04/11/2004 6:29 PM:
wrote on 04/11/2004 6:29 PM:
| QUOTE |
| Asshole-User AlwaysINCorrect <[Email Removed]> SCREAMED for weeks: Artist Mike ... His posts are filtered because he's a spammer. Got any evidence of that? Just a bit that you gave us, SPAMMER Mike Krispy.. ":^) =?ISO-8859-1?B?rg==?=" <[Email Removed] ""Mike C."" <[Email Removed] "Advocate" <[Email Removed] "Al Dente" <[Email Removed] "Fred" <[Email Removed] "Mike C." <"Mike C." [Email Removed] "Mike C." <[Email Removed] "Mike" <[Email Removed] "Mike..." <[Email Removed] "The Real Mike C." <[Email Removed] MC <[Email Removed] Mike <[Email Removed] Mike C <[Email Removed] Mike C. <[Email Removed] Mike Christy <[Email Removed] [Email Removed] More authors are using this email than can be displayed. The list is truncated... hahahahaha |
Got any evidence that "MIke" is doing the spamming? Or is it just silly
people using his email address?
hahahahaha.
in article [Email Removed], Jeremy Nixon - Supernews at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 6:57 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 6:57 PM:
| QUOTE |
| Willem <gaatjenietaan@notvalid@ac> wrote: Seems everyone knows that for a fact in here. Strange. "Everyone" amounts to one person posting under multiple names, who chooses to lie, and to continually claim I have said things that I clearly have not said. |
Sort of like thinking someone spams but they really have not.
in article [Email Removed], reverend maxwell
snort at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 3:22 PM:
snort at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 3:22 PM:
| QUOTE |
| In article <BC9EC6B8.F323C%[Email Removed]>, [Email Removed] says... in article [Email Removed], reverend maxwell snort at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 9:51 AM: your mind is infected with green bile eating away at the neurons. soon there will be a big worm laying eggs in all the cracks and crevices. It will tunnel to the middle and die. soon after that there will be many little worms trying to get out. they will be hungry. Thank you for sharing your personal fantasies. I am sure you mommy will just adore them. no problem. I particularly like that one. btw, my mother's dead. |
Next time write her a note and leave it on the grave.
in article [Email Removed], Seth at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 6:42 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 6:42 PM:
| QUOTE |
| On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 22:22:32 GMT, reverend maxwell snort <[Email Removed]> wrote: In article <[Email Removed]>, [Email Removed] says... dave <[Email Removed]> wrote: Supernews posted messages that were FAKED AFTER HE WAS BLOCKED. They attempt to use messages that Mike could NOT have written as evidence of his "crime". If you look at the posts, you'll notice that they were deliberately constructed to bypass the block. I was thinking server latency, but if he did this on purpose (and even if Seth thinks I'm a fuckhead), I'm non-repentent about attacking him. I didn't think of anybody in particular, it just seemed to me that people repeatedly attacking him was a waste of time and giving him a reason to stick around/extend this tedious exercise. But since I made the error of bothering to read some other posts in some threads, I made the second error of replying to his garbage posts myself. |
Learn to control yourself and maybe you will not be such a fool.
User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022
Cris Zalika <[Email Removed]>
SpammerMike.
--
Rebecca Ore
http://mysite.verizon.net/rebecca.ore
Cris Zalika <[Email Removed]>
SpammerMike.
--
Rebecca Ore
http://mysite.verizon.net/rebecca.ore
Jackie <[Email Removed]> wrote:
| QUOTE |
| Got any evidence that "MIke" is doing the spamming? Or is it just silly people using his email address? |
It's a vast conspiracy against you, is it?
Well, I can certainly see how you'd end up with enemies, I'll grant you
that much.
--
Jeremy | [Email Removed]
Anthony Edwards <[Email Removed]> writes:
| QUOTE |
| On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 18:03:51 -0700, Cris Zalika <[Email Removed]> wrote: in article [Email Removed], Rebecca Ore at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 2:54 PM: "Mike..." <[Email Removed]> writes: No matter how much you cry and moan, I do not and I did not post spam. Okay, what *is* your definition of spam? Not "Mike's" job to educate you. Rebecca doesn't need any education as to what is, and is not, Usenet spam as defined by common concensus of news server administrators worldwide. Rebecca ran, for some considerable time, her own Usenet server and earned the respect and trust of the Usenet community in doing so. |
Mike doesn't want to define spam because he knows his definition of
spam is commercial urls by his competitors.
--
Rebecca Ore
http://mysite.verizon.net/rebecca.ore
in article [Email Removed], Seth at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 6:44 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 6:44 PM:
| QUOTE |
| However, I'm sure it would bother me if I was a customer of yours and realised how irrational and unprofessional you are. |
Blah Blah Blah
Willem <gaatjenietaan@notvalid@ac> wrote:
| QUOTE |
| You keep denying you actually said they are by him but also you keep suggesting it. If you don't have proof or don't want to present proof, you have no reason to keep bringing them up in relation to Mike and the reason you blocked him. |
If you're just going to keep on misrepresenting the things I say so you'll
have something to attack (cf. "straw man argument") then I see little point
in carrying on this conversation.
So I'll try saying the same thing yet again: those posts were *not* the
reason he was blocked, and at no point did I ever claim that they were.
If you can't understand that after my having said it over and over, then,
whatever, carry on.
--
Jeremy | [Email Removed]
Jackie <[Email Removed]> writes:
| QUOTE |
| in article [Email Removed], Jeremy Nixon - Supernews at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 6:57 PM: Willem <gaatjenietaan@notvalid@ac> wrote: Seems everyone knows that for a fact in here. Strange. "Everyone" amounts to one person posting under multiple names, who chooses to lie, and to continually claim I have said things that I clearly have not said. Sort of like thinking someone spams but they really have not. |
Basically, define spam and explain why posting a URL as an answer to
questions or to get people to come to your site to see Janet Jackson's
tit isn't.
--
Rebecca Ore
http://mysite.verizon.net/rebecca.ore
That and more.
Dave.
"Jackie" <[Email Removed]> wrote in message
news:BC9F4AF3.F3335%[Email Removed]...
Dave.
"Jackie" <[Email Removed]> wrote in message
news:BC9F4AF3.F3335%[Email Removed]...
| QUOTE |
| in article [Email Removed], Lord Pander at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 5:52 PM: all the evidence these people need is that you post something in an art group they do not think is art, so they call it spam. No brains needed to sort that out I think. If you don't like it, kill file it, but blocking someone on the fact that someone else posts under his name is nonsense. The policy of supernews seems to be don't investigate, just block. And if you complain about us we will block you as well. LP Censors like to work in the dark, bigots like to work in the dark. Bring them into the light and they squeak and squeal like little mice with their tails stuck on a trap. Supernews blocks people based upon fake messages. Blocks people based upon made up "policy" that is made to fit the moment. Supernews blocks people just because they don't like your "behavior" in a newsgroup. I have learned all this from reading this thread. |
Can we say O-M-N-O-M-A-N for example.
LP
"Jackie" <[Email Removed]> wrote in message
news:BC9F4C11.F3336%[Email Removed]...
LP
"Jackie" <[Email Removed]> wrote in message
news:BC9F4C11.F3336%[Email Removed]...
| QUOTE |
| in article 29$[Email Removed], T D O Y S at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 6:29 PM: Asshole-User AlwaysINCorrect <[Email Removed]> SCREAMED for weeks: Artist Mike ... His posts are filtered because he's a spammer. Got any evidence of that? Just a bit that you gave us, SPAMMER Mike Krispy.. ":^) =?ISO-8859-1?B?rg==?=" <[Email Removed] ""Mike C."" <[Email Removed] "Advocate" <[Email Removed] "Al Dente" <[Email Removed] "Fred" <[Email Removed] "Mike C." <"Mike C." [Email Removed] "Mike C." <[Email Removed] "Mike" <[Email Removed] "Mike..." <[Email Removed] "The Real Mike C." <[Email Removed] MC <[Email Removed] Mike <[Email Removed] Mike C <[Email Removed] Mike C. <[Email Removed] Mike Christy <[Email Removed] [Email Removed] More authors are using this email than can be displayed. The list is truncated... hahahahaha Got any evidence that "MIke" is doing the spamming? Or is it just silly people using his email address? hahahahaha. |
I think mike is a real prick, and I still think he is correct, as you have
done it to me as well.
LP
"Jeremy Nixon - Supernews" <[Email Removed]> wrote in message
news:[Email Removed]...
done it to me as well.
LP
"Jeremy Nixon - Supernews" <[Email Removed]> wrote in message
news:[Email Removed]...
| QUOTE |
| Jackie <[Email Removed]> wrote: Got any evidence that "MIke" is doing the spamming? Or is it just silly people using his email address? It's a vast conspiracy against you, is it? Well, I can certainly see how you'd end up with enemies, I'll grant you that much. -- Jeremy | [Email Removed] |
Spam would be posting you page link at the bottom of all your posts - Like
you do!
LP
"Rebecca Ore" <[Email Removed]> wrote in message
news:[Email Removed]...
you do!
LP
"Rebecca Ore" <[Email Removed]> wrote in message
news:[Email Removed]...
| QUOTE |
| Anthony Edwards <[Email Removed]> writes: On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 18:03:51 -0700, Cris Zalika <[Email Removed] wrote: in article [Email Removed], Rebecca Ore at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 2:54 PM: "Mike..." <[Email Removed]> writes: No matter how much you cry and moan, I do not and I did not post spam. Okay, what *is* your definition of spam? Not "Mike's" job to educate you. Rebecca doesn't need any education as to what is, and is not, Usenet spam as defined by common concensus of news server administrators worldwide. Rebecca ran, for some considerable time, her own Usenet server and earned the respect and trust of the Usenet community in doing so. Mike doesn't want to define spam because he knows his definition of spam is commercial urls by his competitors. -- Rebecca Ore http://mysite.verizon.net/rebecca.ore |
Jackie <[Email Removed]> writes:
| QUOTE |
| in article 29$[Email Removed], T D O Y S at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 6:29 PM: Asshole-User AlwaysINCorrect <[Email Removed]> SCREAMED for weeks: Artist Mike ... His posts are filtered because he's a spammer. Got any evidence of that? Just a bit that you gave us, SPAMMER Mike Krispy.. ":^) =?ISO-8859-1?B?rg==?=" <[Email Removed] ""Mike C."" <[Email Removed] "Advocate" <[Email Removed] "Al Dente" <[Email Removed] "Fred" <[Email Removed] "Mike C." <"Mike C." [Email Removed] "Mike C." <[Email Removed] "Mike" <[Email Removed] "Mike..." <[Email Removed] "The Real Mike C." <[Email Removed] MC <[Email Removed] Mike <[Email Removed] Mike C <[Email Removed] Mike C. <[Email Removed] Mike Christy <[Email Removed] [Email Removed] More authors are using this email than can be displayed. The list is truncated... hahahahaha Got any evidence that "MIke" is doing the spamming? Or is it just silly people using his email address? hahahahaha. |
If it's not Mike using his address, those are out and out forgeries
and Mike has grounds to ask for the people doing this to be terminated
by their ISPs or NSPs.
If Mike choses not to do this, and if the posting host is astraweb and
the User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022,
then I'm inclined to believe that Mike lies like a spammer.
What *is* your posting host and User-Agent, by the way.
--
Rebecca Ore
http://mysite.verizon.net/rebecca.ore
Jeremy Nixon - Supernews wrote:
| QUOTE |
| Jackie <[Email Removed]> wrote: Got any evidence that "MIke" is doing the spamming? Or is it just silly people using his email address? It's a vast conspiracy against you, is it? Well, I can certainly see how you'd end up with enemies, I'll grant you that much. |
ROFL. ;)
--
http://www.dextromethorphan.ws/
For information about the psychedelic DXM, including dangers.
They do not need proof, they just sit there and play God all day.
LP
"Willem" <gaatjenietaan@notvalid@ac> wrote in message
news:40798d3f$0$85210$[Email Removed]...
LP
"Willem" <gaatjenietaan@notvalid@ac> wrote in message
news:40798d3f$0$85210$[Email Removed]...
| QUOTE |
| Jeremy Nixon - Supernews <[Email Removed]> wrote news:[Email Removed] dave <[Email Removed]> wrote: Supernews posted messages that were FAKED AFTER HE WAS BLOCKED. They attempt to use messages that Mike could NOT have written as evidence of his "crime". If you look at the posts, you'll notice that they were deliberately constructed to bypass the block. What does that have to do with Mike or the block you put on him? Do you or do you not have proof that these fake posts were by Mike? You keep denying you actually said they are by him but also you keep suggesting it. If you don't have proof or don't want to present proof, you have no reason to keep bringing them up in relation to Mike and the reason you blocked him. WJ -- http://www.demon.nl/eng/support/newsgroups/index.html http://tinyurl.com/yuxgq http://tinyurl.com/yvrmo |
So is your job to sit there all day and post excuses for the messing up of
thing over at supernews? if not, I think they should let you go.
LP
"Jeremy Nixon - Supernews" <[Email Removed]> wrote in message
news:[Email Removed]...
thing over at supernews? if not, I think they should let you go.
LP
"Jeremy Nixon - Supernews" <[Email Removed]> wrote in message
news:[Email Removed]...
| QUOTE |
| rfgdxm/Robert F. Golaszewski <[Email Removed]> wrote: I didn't say it was faulty. Unlike your infamous Sucknews filter which blocked a post of mine because I (GASP!) included the URL of a competitor of yours in a post? ;) Unlike that one, yes. You'll notice the difference in reaction -- that one was immediately fixed, with apology. :) -- Jeremy | [Email Removed] |
in article [Email Removed], Jeremy Nixon - Supernews at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 7:44 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 7:44 PM:
| QUOTE |
| Willem <gaatjenietaan@notvalid@ac> wrote: You keep denying you actually said they are by him but also you keep suggesting it. If you don't have proof or don't want to present proof, you have no reason to keep bringing them up in relation to Mike and the reason you blocked him. If you're just going to keep on misrepresenting the things I say so you'll have something to attack (cf. "straw man argument") then I see little point in carrying on this conversation. So I'll try saying the same thing yet again: those posts were *not* the reason he was blocked, and at no point did I ever claim that they were. If you can't understand that after my having said it over and over, then, whatever, carry on. |
So you brought them up to create your own straw man. How cute.
Then you go about crying how others bring up straw men and should not.
hahahaha.
Your thinking processes are really messed up. It is too bad that so many
people are subject to your whim.
in article [Email Removed], Uni at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 7:47 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 7:47 PM:
| QUOTE |
| [Email Removed] wrote: On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 23:55:09 +0100, Chant <[Email Removed]> wrote: Lots of snipped Garbage from someone that don't know their Ass from a hole in the ground! Also MH's statement about 'world wide' NSP access being flat doesn't stand up. I would bet good money that by far the larger majority of his, or any US service are US or canada based. So unless they have huge 24 * 7 suck feeds, leaving not much for anyone else - which he denies, thats by far peak usage during US peak times. What are we talking about - mabe 20 - 25% outside the US, and with the US having a much larger portion of unmetered, unlimited broadband ISP connections, the 'rest of the world' must be a relatively small proportion of usage. The US may have a range of time zones, but not as much as the whole rest of the world put together. Mike has stated many times before that 60% of his customers are from outside of the US. You are speaking *Not* from a hole in the ground right now. You are talking about matters that you have no knowledge of. Artist Mike has some nice graphics tutorials on his site. I tried to point someone to one and that's how I discovered Supernews had blocked not only Mike from posting it, but EVERY other Supernews customer. Uni J.P. |
Censorship at the core of the company. Bigotry at the core of the company.
Whim based "Policy" at the core of the company.
No wonder they attract the type of people they do to their "service".
in article [Email Removed], Uni at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 7:39 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 7:39 PM:
| QUOTE |
| Not a single Supernews customer MAY post Artist Mike's URL. What, are we now ALL spammers? Evidence, attached. Note that it states "spammed", not harassed, not upset, not abused, not nickname changing, but "spammed". :-) Uni |
http://www.artistmike.com
The only reason I can do it, is because they don't have a strangle hold on
me.
in article [Email Removed], Jeremy Nixon - Supernews at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 7:42 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 7:42 PM:
| QUOTE |
| Jackie <[Email Removed]> wrote: Got any evidence that "MIke" is doing the spamming? Or is it just silly people using his email address? It's a vast conspiracy against you, is it? |
No, it is just silly people like you, that don't like my attitude and use my
email as a return address when they do spam.
You know damn well that people do that.
Like have accounts all over the nation so that I can post from different
parts of the US.
Real smart Jeremy.
| QUOTE |
| Well, I can certainly see how you'd end up with enemies, I'll grant you that much. |
Supernews being another dupe or another enemy?
--
Mike
* Logo Design *
Put some fun in your next logo!
Site at: http://www.artistmike.com
in article [Email Removed], Rebecca Ore at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 7:50 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 7:50 PM:
| QUOTE |
| Jackie <[Email Removed]> writes: in article [Email Removed], Jeremy Nixon - Supernews at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 6:57 PM: Willem <gaatjenietaan@notvalid@ac> wrote: Seems everyone knows that for a fact in here. Strange. "Everyone" amounts to one person posting under multiple names, who chooses to lie, and to continually claim I have said things that I clearly have not said. Sort of like thinking someone spams but they really have not. Basically, define spam and explain why posting a URL as an answer to questions or to get people to come to your site to see Janet Jackson's tit isn't. |
Because it is not.
--
Mike
* Logo Design *
Put some fun in your next logo!
Site at: http://www.artistmike.com
Oh, I would never think that Nicky Scala would stoop so low as to spam
using my email and to post from Astraweb.
For shame...to even suggest such a thing.
He only posted and faked every person in that newsgroup for months on end
and finally lost his account.
But he would never spoof me!
in article [Email Removed], Lord Pander at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 7:56 PM:
using my email and to post from Astraweb.
For shame...to even suggest such a thing.
He only posted and faked every person in that newsgroup for months on end
and finally lost his account.
But he would never spoof me!
in article [Email Removed], Lord Pander at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 7:56 PM:
| QUOTE |
| Can we say O-M-N-O-M-A-N for example. LP "Jackie" <[Email Removed]> wrote in message news:BC9F4C11.F3336%[Email Removed]... in article 29$[Email Removed], T D O Y S at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 6:29 PM: Asshole-User AlwaysINCorrect <[Email Removed]> SCREAMED for weeks: Artist Mike ... His posts are filtered because he's a spammer. Got any evidence of that? Just a bit that you gave us, SPAMMER Mike Krispy.. ":^) =?ISO-8859-1?B?rg==?=" <[Email Removed] ""Mike C."" <[Email Removed] "Advocate" <[Email Removed] "Al Dente" <[Email Removed] "Fred" <[Email Removed] "Mike C." <"Mike C." [Email Removed] "Mike C." <[Email Removed] "Mike" <[Email Removed] "Mike..." <[Email Removed] "The Real Mike C." <[Email Removed] MC <[Email Removed] Mike <[Email Removed] Mike C <[Email Removed] Mike C. <[Email Removed] Mike Christy <[Email Removed] [Email Removed] More authors are using this email than can be displayed. The list is truncated... hahahahaha Got any evidence that "MIke" is doing the spamming? Or is it just silly people using his email address? hahahahaha. |
in article [Email Removed], Rebecca Ore at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 8:06 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 8:06 PM:
| QUOTE |
| "Willem" <gaatjenietaan@notvalid@ac> writes: Rebecca, Of course, I checked using Google. Mike is controversial, but he doesn't spam and didn't nym from Supernews. A little fun is ok, but so is some fairness about the issue don't you think? How do you define spam? If someone posts in such a way as to merely get the url out there, without substance to the posts, then that *is* spamming. That is what I saw when I googled ArtistMike's url. He even claimed some of the posts as legitimate. You, sir, are not well informed, or are a moron, or are a spammer apologist, or a spammer (I remember getting some Euro spammer's plug pulled, and one of my friends cancelled a whole boatload of YucomBe or something like that's spam. Or you're a nutbar. |
If you can't rebut the issue, discredit the participant.
How cute, Rebecca. No wonder you are not a news host any longer.
Do you like it being done to you?
| QUOTE |
I agree, there are many trolls and flamers and lamers active in this group.. some from Supernews. Also many impostering Dutch trolls and warez types and little spammers post from Supernews. None of them are blocked. Makes me wonder why he really was blocked and how often this happens to people who did not speak up. You may not know the definition of spam. ArtistMike always had the option of complaining if people were forging him... |
Complain to whom? Supernews? hahahahaha.
Plus, I believe in people being able to write whatever they wish in
newsgroups so I am not about to cry to a news host about someone spoofing
me.
I take it to the newsgroup and have it out with them there. I support FREE
SPEECH in newsgroups. Even to the point of people writing very silly things
that most people would cry and whine about. I do not.
--
Mike
* Logo Design *
Put some fun in your next logo!
Site at: http://www.artistmike.com
"Mike..." <[Email Removed]> writes:
| QUOTE |
Basically, define spam and explain why posting a URL as an answer to questions or to get people to come to your site to see Janet Jackson's tit isn't. Because it is not. |
No, actually, that is precisely why the definition of spam accepted by
most ISPs and as defined in Tim Skirvin's FAQ talks about
substantively the same posts. You are spamming if the posts are made
*only* to get hits to your site.
Those posts *were* spam by that definition.
There's a guy posting with a commercial url in his sig in the tea
beverage group. One person has been hounding him for it, but his
posts tend to be informative and don't just point people to his
commerical site for answers. Most of the people in the group find him
to be a useful contributor. If you were a useful contributor to the
groups, i.e., if you weren't just posting to get people to your site,
then you'd have defenders from the groups in question.
You don't appear to have any defenders other than Uni from those
groups.
--
Rebecca Ore
http://mysite.verizon.net/rebecca.ore
in article [Email Removed], Rebecca Ore at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 8:06 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 8:06 PM:
| QUOTE |
| -- Rebecca Ore http://mysite.verizon.net/rebecca.ore |
Why are you spamming the newsgroup?
--
Mike
* Logo Design *
Put some fun in your next logo!
Site at: http://www.artistmike.com
in article [Email Removed], Rebecca Ore at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 8:13 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 8:13 PM:
| QUOTE |
| If Mike wanted to correct forgeries that used his real email address, he's going about getting that fixed in the worst way possible. |
I don't care about such things. It is a waste of time in my opinion. There
will always be people that don't like what I write, I don't care what they
do as a result of not liking what I write in newsgroups.
--
Mike
* Logo Design *
Put some fun in your next logo!
Site at: http://www.artistmike.com
in article [Email Removed], Lord Pander at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 8:21 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 8:21 PM:
| QUOTE |
| But you just did! Silly person. LP "Rebecca Ore" <[Email Removed]> wrote in message news:[Email Removed]... "Lord Pander" <[Email Removed]> writes: You mean this url? http://mysite.verizon.net/rebecca.ore Are you then a SPAMMER? I think so. LP I'm *not* suggesting that the answer to everyone's problems can be found by paying me for it, and I'm not posting the url as an answer to questions asked here. If you think it's spam, cancel it under your own name, report it to Verizon, and see where that gets you. -- Rebecca Ore http://mysite.verizon.net/rebecca.ore |
Too bad Verizon is not run like Supernews, then you might have a problem
with your spamming, Rebecca.
in article [Email Removed], Rebecca Ore at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 8:25 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 8:25 PM:
| QUOTE |
| "Lord Pander" <[Email Removed]> writes: You mean this url? http://mysite.verizon.net/rebecca.ore Are you then a SPAMMER? I think so. LP I'm *not* suggesting that the answer to everyone's problems can be found by paying me for it, and I'm not posting the url as an answer to questions asked here. |
The reason you posted the url is irrelevant. You posted it, it's spam.
Knock it off.
hahahahaha.
--
Mike
* Logo Design *
Put some fun in your next logo!
Site at: http://www.artistmike.com
"Mike..." <[Email Removed]> writes:
| QUOTE |
If you can't rebut the issue, discredit the participant. How cute, Rebecca. No wonder you are not a news host any longer. |
Well, there was an edu admin in Oregon who path aliased me because I
wouldn't boot one of my users 36 hours before the server was going
away completely.
| QUOTE |
Do you like it being done to you? |
Basically, you've confessed to making posts that I consider spam and
that you don't consider spam. Arguing with me is irrelevant. You
should have talked to Supernews. If they told you there was no block
on your posts, then you could have posted and had a friend on the
server (Uni) see if the post showed up. If the post didn't show up,
then you could work with your ISP and with Supernews to find out what
happened.
If you were being filtered, you could have discussed it with Supernews
and your ISP. If you were being forged, you could file abuse reports
with the forgers' ISP.
(snip)
| QUOTE |
You may not know the definition of spam. ArtistMike always had the option of complaining if people were forging him... Complain to whom? Supernews? hahahahaha. |
You could have complained to the forger's isps. Supernews would have
helped you, if you're not lying about those posts all being forgeries.
| QUOTE |
| Plus, I believe in people being able to write whatever they wish in newsgroups so I am not about to cry to a news host about someone spoofing me. |
Perhaps you're paying them to spam your url? Stranger things have
happened. If you are being joe-jobbed, it's stupid to allow that to
continue because people will question why people are spamming this
url.
If they're spoofing your address, that's one thing. If they're
forging it, that's another thing. We can't tell if you're paying
these people to spam for you or not unless you do something to stop
it.
| QUOTE |
I take it to the newsgroup and have it out with them there. I support FREE SPEECH in newsgroups. Even to the point of people writing very silly things that most people would cry and whine about. I do not. |
Oh, yeah, you just whine about being filtered for spamming.
--
Rebecca Ore
http://mysite.verizon.net/rebecca.ore
in article [Email Removed], Rebecca Ore at
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 8:00 PM:
[Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 8:00 PM:
| QUOTE |
| Jackie <[Email Removed]> writes: in article 29$[Email Removed], T D O Y S at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 6:29 PM: Asshole-User AlwaysINCorrect <[Email Removed]> SCREAMED for weeks: Artist Mike ... His posts are filtered because he's a spammer. Got any evidence of that? Just a bit that you gave us, SPAMMER Mike Krispy.. ":^) =?ISO-8859-1?B?rg==?=" <[Email Removed] ""Mike C."" <[Email Removed] "Advocate" <[Email Removed] "Al Dente" <[Email Removed] "Fred" <[Email Removed] "Mike C." <"Mike C." [Email Removed] "Mike C." <[Email Removed] "Mike" <[Email Removed] "Mike..." <[Email Removed] "The Real Mike C." <[Email Removed] MC <[Email Removed] Mike <[Email Removed] Mike C <[Email Removed] Mike C. <[Email Removed] Mike Christy <[Email Removed] [Email Removed] More authors are using this email than can be displayed. The list is truncated... hahahahaha Got any evidence that "MIke" is doing the spamming? Or is it just silly people using his email address? hahahahaha. If it's not Mike using his address, those are out and out forgeries and Mike has grounds to ask for the people doing this to be terminated by their ISPs or NSPs. |
Or I don't care, and I don't want to waste my time bothering about it.
If silly goofballs want to spam using my email I am not going to do battle
with each and every one of them to make them stop.
Waste of my time.
I would rather use my time as I wish and not be coerced into dealing with
silly people that want to spam using my email.
| QUOTE |
| If Mike choses not to do this, and if the posting host is astraweb and the User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022, then I'm inclined to believe that Mike lies like a spammer. |
Your inclinations are irrelevant.
--
Mike
* Logo Design *
Put some fun in your next logo!
Site at: http://www.artistmike.com
"Mike..." <[Email Removed]> writes:
| QUOTE |
| in article [Email Removed], Rebecca Ore at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 8:06 PM: -- Rebecca Ore Why are you spamming the newsgroup? |
Do you have to go to my site to get your question answered?
--
Rebecca Ore
http://mysite.verizon.net/rebecca.ore
"Mike..." <[Email Removed]> writes:
| QUOTE |
Too bad Verizon is not run like Supernews, then you might have a problem with your spamming, Rebecca. |
Pity you didn't read the Spam FAQ before spamming.
--
Rebecca Ore
http://mysite.verizon.net/rebecca.ore
"Mike..." <[Email Removed]> writes:
| QUOTE |
| in article [Email Removed], Rebecca Ore at [Email Removed] wrote on 04/11/2004 8:25 PM: "Lord Pander" <[Email Removed]> writes: You mean this url? http://mysite.verizon.net/rebecca.ore Are you then a SPAMMER? I think so. LP I'm *not* suggesting that the answer to everyone's problems can be found by paying me for it, and I'm not posting the url as an answer to questions asked here. The reason you posted the url is irrelevant. You posted it, it's spam. Knock it off. hahahahaha. |
I believe this was explained to you. URLs in sigs are okay as long as
the post isn't make simply to get the url in front of the readers.
If you're stupid, there's nothing further than could be done to help
you.
If you wanted to fix the problem with Supernews, the way to do that
was to work with your ISP and Supernews. If Supernews abuse advised
you to not do something, then you had two choices. Not do that, or
get another NSP account.
Supernews and your ISP have a contract. I doubt that the contract
allows you to post just anything you want.
Spammers lie. Spammers are stupid.
--
Rebecca Ore
http://mysite.verizon.net/rebecca.ore
"Mike..." <[Email Removed]> writes:
| QUOTE |
| If silly goofballs want to spam using my email I am not going to do battle with each and every one of them to make them stop. Waste of my time. |
So then, you see why Supernews might have been filtering your posts?
--
Rebecca Ore
http://mysite.verizon.net/rebecca.ore
Rebecca Ore <[Email Removed]> wrote:
| QUOTE |
| Pity you didn't read the Spam FAQ before spamming. |
Remember the days when the trolls weren't always blithering idiots?
Whatever happened to that?
--
Jeremy | [Email Removed]
Lord Pander <[Email Removed]> wrote:
| QUOTE |
| I think mike is a real prick, and I still think he is correct, as you have done it to me as well. |
What for, top-posting?
Perhaps you could share how you got un-blocked?
--
Jeremy | [Email Removed]
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.