what exactly happened here?
04-26-2006 | 11:58 AM
#341
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: what exactly happened here?
There is a difference between "posting something on usenet" and posting a
continuous stream of abuse, that has little social, artistic, political or
humorous value. That is not spam. Another difference, is that spammers and
scam artists always leave a contact address. You have the option to not buy
their products, warn others not to buy them, because they use spam in their
advertising, or report them to the Spanish police, who have, by the way,
been doing a brisk business in rounding up Nigerian scam artists.
The remailers that we have been talking about, started out with the premise,
that people should be able to publish information, without having to worry
about the secret police knocking on their door, or their boss finding out
about their sexual preferences. In this case, they are being used for
something completely different. The owner of one service, dizum.com, claims
that he will take steps to prevent or stop abuse, but it appears that he
does not mean this.
Earle
"admin" <admin.26vl3n@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x> wrote in message
news:admin.26vl3n@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x...
>
> spam on usenet is not a new problem, may be new to this group - but all
> the unmoderated groups get it at some level. Need I mention the
> alt.binaries with all the piracy going on there - I haven't heard much
> effort from the film & music industry trying to stop that - they only
> go after the p2p software. It's virtually impossible to stop someone
> from posting something on usenet. Sure you could create some deterents
> - but where there's a will - there's a way.
>
>
> Earle Horton Wrote:
> > This is true, but Google Groups requires one to provide an identity, or
> > at
> > least a valid email address, before posting. The possible penalty for
> > abuse
> > is loss of posting privileges on Google and loss of mailing privileges.
> > Now
> > Hotmail accounts are free, as are Google privileges, but it does take
> > some
> > effort to set them up. So you can lose something, if you are caught
> > abusing
> > privileges on Google Groups.
> >
> > On the other hand, there is no at-risk investment with using anonymous
> > remailers. It does take time to set up the encryption software and
> > figure
> > out the remailer routes, but once that is done, one can apparently post
> > with
> > impunity. Now if the abuse continues, at the present level, then
> > changes in
> > the structure of Usenet, to disallow anonymous remailers, is one
> > possible
> > result. If all the servers block postings through dizum.com, for
> > example,
> > then it is dead for this purpose.
> >
> > I can see why anonymous remailers came into being in the first place.
> > It is
> > so people, with something to hide, can continue to express themselves
> > publicly. Now I am all for free speech, but I am not so sure that free
> > speech rights include being able to hide one's true identity. Whatever
> > socially redeeming function these anonymous remailers are alleged to
> > provide, it appears to be swamped by the sheer amount of garbage that
> > they
> > propagate.
> >
> > Earle
> >
> > "admin" <admin.26usec@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x> wrote in message
> > news:admin.26usec@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x...
> > >
> > > There is no way to block someone from posting on Usenet.
> > > anyone could just walk into a public library and use Google Groups,
> > or
> > > use their Internet connection at work, or even a cell phone, etc.
> > etc.
> > >
> > > This is just the way Usenet works.
> > > It's greatest strength is also it's greatest weakness.
> > >
> > >
> > > Jeff DeWitt Wrote:
> > > > I wonder if it would be possible for the ISP's to filter out posts
> > from
> > > > these anonymous remailers? After all all of this stuff has to come
> > > > through their servers and it's wasting good bandwidth and annoying
> > > > their
> > > > customers.
> > > >
> > > > Jeff DeWitt
> > > >
> > > > Earle Horton wrote:
> > > > > Bill,
> > > > >
> > > > > The most abusive postings seem to come from anonymous remailers.
> > As
> > > > far as
> > > > > I can figure out, these exist, solely to allow people to abuse
> > Usenet
> > > > with
> > > > > impunity. I have heard "freedom of speech", "freedom from
> > political
> > > > > persecution", etc. argued for the existence of these pests, but
> > all I
> > > > have
> > > > > **seen** coming from them, is abuse.
> > > > >
> > > > > Any clue what to do about them?
> > > > >
> > > > > Earle
> > > > >
> > > > > "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> > > > > news:444AEDAE.98785F4F@***.net...
> > > > >
> > > > >>Hi Josh,
> > > > >> You may help by reporting the abuse to the addresses you find in
> > > > >>their header. That's the only way we may remove the trolls that
> > would
> > > > >>spam our groups. Learn how to via: SPAM COMPLAINTS -
> > > > >>http://spam.abuse.net/userhelp/howtocomplain.shtml
> > > > >>USENET COMPLAINTS -
> > > > http://www.cybernothing.org/faqs/net-abuse-faq.html
> > > > >>PROBE ATTEMPTS - http://online.securityfocus.com/news/9
> > > > >> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> > > > >>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> > > > >>
> > > > >>Josh Piela wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>>Hi everyone,
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> What has happened to this newsgroup? I am starting to
> > understand
> > > > that
> > > > >>>Bill has pissed the wrong person off this time. Correct?? Is
> > there
> > > > any
> > > > >
> > > > > way
> > > > >
> > > > >>>that we can fix this group? I looked forward to visiting this
> > board
> > > > >
> > > > > daily
> > > > >
> > > > >>>and reading about the wonderful world of jeeps. It's a world I
> > miss
> > > > >
> > > > > allot
> > > > >
> > > > >>>and I really enjoy reading everyone's moments with their jeeps.
> > Now
> > > > >
> > > > > it's
> > > > >
> > > > >>>getting to be a bit much, with all this terribly unnecessary
> > > > vulgarity.
> > > > >
> > > > > I
> > > > >
> > > > >>>am not looking to **** anyone off here, just wondering what the
> > deal
> > > > is
> > > > >
> > > > > with
> > > > >
> > > > >>>all the crap that is being posted.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > admin
> > > ----- Posted via http://www.wranglergear.com
> > >
>
>
> --
> admin
> ----- Posted via http://www.wranglergear.com
>
continuous stream of abuse, that has little social, artistic, political or
humorous value. That is not spam. Another difference, is that spammers and
scam artists always leave a contact address. You have the option to not buy
their products, warn others not to buy them, because they use spam in their
advertising, or report them to the Spanish police, who have, by the way,
been doing a brisk business in rounding up Nigerian scam artists.
The remailers that we have been talking about, started out with the premise,
that people should be able to publish information, without having to worry
about the secret police knocking on their door, or their boss finding out
about their sexual preferences. In this case, they are being used for
something completely different. The owner of one service, dizum.com, claims
that he will take steps to prevent or stop abuse, but it appears that he
does not mean this.
Earle
"admin" <admin.26vl3n@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x> wrote in message
news:admin.26vl3n@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x...
>
> spam on usenet is not a new problem, may be new to this group - but all
> the unmoderated groups get it at some level. Need I mention the
> alt.binaries with all the piracy going on there - I haven't heard much
> effort from the film & music industry trying to stop that - they only
> go after the p2p software. It's virtually impossible to stop someone
> from posting something on usenet. Sure you could create some deterents
> - but where there's a will - there's a way.
>
>
> Earle Horton Wrote:
> > This is true, but Google Groups requires one to provide an identity, or
> > at
> > least a valid email address, before posting. The possible penalty for
> > abuse
> > is loss of posting privileges on Google and loss of mailing privileges.
> > Now
> > Hotmail accounts are free, as are Google privileges, but it does take
> > some
> > effort to set them up. So you can lose something, if you are caught
> > abusing
> > privileges on Google Groups.
> >
> > On the other hand, there is no at-risk investment with using anonymous
> > remailers. It does take time to set up the encryption software and
> > figure
> > out the remailer routes, but once that is done, one can apparently post
> > with
> > impunity. Now if the abuse continues, at the present level, then
> > changes in
> > the structure of Usenet, to disallow anonymous remailers, is one
> > possible
> > result. If all the servers block postings through dizum.com, for
> > example,
> > then it is dead for this purpose.
> >
> > I can see why anonymous remailers came into being in the first place.
> > It is
> > so people, with something to hide, can continue to express themselves
> > publicly. Now I am all for free speech, but I am not so sure that free
> > speech rights include being able to hide one's true identity. Whatever
> > socially redeeming function these anonymous remailers are alleged to
> > provide, it appears to be swamped by the sheer amount of garbage that
> > they
> > propagate.
> >
> > Earle
> >
> > "admin" <admin.26usec@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x> wrote in message
> > news:admin.26usec@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x...
> > >
> > > There is no way to block someone from posting on Usenet.
> > > anyone could just walk into a public library and use Google Groups,
> > or
> > > use their Internet connection at work, or even a cell phone, etc.
> > etc.
> > >
> > > This is just the way Usenet works.
> > > It's greatest strength is also it's greatest weakness.
> > >
> > >
> > > Jeff DeWitt Wrote:
> > > > I wonder if it would be possible for the ISP's to filter out posts
> > from
> > > > these anonymous remailers? After all all of this stuff has to come
> > > > through their servers and it's wasting good bandwidth and annoying
> > > > their
> > > > customers.
> > > >
> > > > Jeff DeWitt
> > > >
> > > > Earle Horton wrote:
> > > > > Bill,
> > > > >
> > > > > The most abusive postings seem to come from anonymous remailers.
> > As
> > > > far as
> > > > > I can figure out, these exist, solely to allow people to abuse
> > Usenet
> > > > with
> > > > > impunity. I have heard "freedom of speech", "freedom from
> > political
> > > > > persecution", etc. argued for the existence of these pests, but
> > all I
> > > > have
> > > > > **seen** coming from them, is abuse.
> > > > >
> > > > > Any clue what to do about them?
> > > > >
> > > > > Earle
> > > > >
> > > > > "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> > > > > news:444AEDAE.98785F4F@***.net...
> > > > >
> > > > >>Hi Josh,
> > > > >> You may help by reporting the abuse to the addresses you find in
> > > > >>their header. That's the only way we may remove the trolls that
> > would
> > > > >>spam our groups. Learn how to via: SPAM COMPLAINTS -
> > > > >>http://spam.abuse.net/userhelp/howtocomplain.shtml
> > > > >>USENET COMPLAINTS -
> > > > http://www.cybernothing.org/faqs/net-abuse-faq.html
> > > > >>PROBE ATTEMPTS - http://online.securityfocus.com/news/9
> > > > >> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> > > > >>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> > > > >>
> > > > >>Josh Piela wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>>Hi everyone,
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> What has happened to this newsgroup? I am starting to
> > understand
> > > > that
> > > > >>>Bill has pissed the wrong person off this time. Correct?? Is
> > there
> > > > any
> > > > >
> > > > > way
> > > > >
> > > > >>>that we can fix this group? I looked forward to visiting this
> > board
> > > > >
> > > > > daily
> > > > >
> > > > >>>and reading about the wonderful world of jeeps. It's a world I
> > miss
> > > > >
> > > > > allot
> > > > >
> > > > >>>and I really enjoy reading everyone's moments with their jeeps.
> > Now
> > > > >
> > > > > it's
> > > > >
> > > > >>>getting to be a bit much, with all this terribly unnecessary
> > > > vulgarity.
> > > > >
> > > > > I
> > > > >
> > > > >>>am not looking to **** anyone off here, just wondering what the
> > deal
> > > > is
> > > > >
> > > > > with
> > > > >
> > > > >>>all the crap that is being posted.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > admin
> > > ----- Posted via http://www.wranglergear.com
> > >
>
>
> --
> admin
> ----- Posted via http://www.wranglergear.com
>
04-26-2006 | 11:58 AM
#342
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: what exactly happened here?
There is a difference between "posting something on usenet" and posting a
continuous stream of abuse, that has little social, artistic, political or
humorous value. That is not spam. Another difference, is that spammers and
scam artists always leave a contact address. You have the option to not buy
their products, warn others not to buy them, because they use spam in their
advertising, or report them to the Spanish police, who have, by the way,
been doing a brisk business in rounding up Nigerian scam artists.
The remailers that we have been talking about, started out with the premise,
that people should be able to publish information, without having to worry
about the secret police knocking on their door, or their boss finding out
about their sexual preferences. In this case, they are being used for
something completely different. The owner of one service, dizum.com, claims
that he will take steps to prevent or stop abuse, but it appears that he
does not mean this.
Earle
"admin" <admin.26vl3n@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x> wrote in message
news:admin.26vl3n@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x...
>
> spam on usenet is not a new problem, may be new to this group - but all
> the unmoderated groups get it at some level. Need I mention the
> alt.binaries with all the piracy going on there - I haven't heard much
> effort from the film & music industry trying to stop that - they only
> go after the p2p software. It's virtually impossible to stop someone
> from posting something on usenet. Sure you could create some deterents
> - but where there's a will - there's a way.
>
>
> Earle Horton Wrote:
> > This is true, but Google Groups requires one to provide an identity, or
> > at
> > least a valid email address, before posting. The possible penalty for
> > abuse
> > is loss of posting privileges on Google and loss of mailing privileges.
> > Now
> > Hotmail accounts are free, as are Google privileges, but it does take
> > some
> > effort to set them up. So you can lose something, if you are caught
> > abusing
> > privileges on Google Groups.
> >
> > On the other hand, there is no at-risk investment with using anonymous
> > remailers. It does take time to set up the encryption software and
> > figure
> > out the remailer routes, but once that is done, one can apparently post
> > with
> > impunity. Now if the abuse continues, at the present level, then
> > changes in
> > the structure of Usenet, to disallow anonymous remailers, is one
> > possible
> > result. If all the servers block postings through dizum.com, for
> > example,
> > then it is dead for this purpose.
> >
> > I can see why anonymous remailers came into being in the first place.
> > It is
> > so people, with something to hide, can continue to express themselves
> > publicly. Now I am all for free speech, but I am not so sure that free
> > speech rights include being able to hide one's true identity. Whatever
> > socially redeeming function these anonymous remailers are alleged to
> > provide, it appears to be swamped by the sheer amount of garbage that
> > they
> > propagate.
> >
> > Earle
> >
> > "admin" <admin.26usec@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x> wrote in message
> > news:admin.26usec@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x...
> > >
> > > There is no way to block someone from posting on Usenet.
> > > anyone could just walk into a public library and use Google Groups,
> > or
> > > use their Internet connection at work, or even a cell phone, etc.
> > etc.
> > >
> > > This is just the way Usenet works.
> > > It's greatest strength is also it's greatest weakness.
> > >
> > >
> > > Jeff DeWitt Wrote:
> > > > I wonder if it would be possible for the ISP's to filter out posts
> > from
> > > > these anonymous remailers? After all all of this stuff has to come
> > > > through their servers and it's wasting good bandwidth and annoying
> > > > their
> > > > customers.
> > > >
> > > > Jeff DeWitt
> > > >
> > > > Earle Horton wrote:
> > > > > Bill,
> > > > >
> > > > > The most abusive postings seem to come from anonymous remailers.
> > As
> > > > far as
> > > > > I can figure out, these exist, solely to allow people to abuse
> > Usenet
> > > > with
> > > > > impunity. I have heard "freedom of speech", "freedom from
> > political
> > > > > persecution", etc. argued for the existence of these pests, but
> > all I
> > > > have
> > > > > **seen** coming from them, is abuse.
> > > > >
> > > > > Any clue what to do about them?
> > > > >
> > > > > Earle
> > > > >
> > > > > "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> > > > > news:444AEDAE.98785F4F@***.net...
> > > > >
> > > > >>Hi Josh,
> > > > >> You may help by reporting the abuse to the addresses you find in
> > > > >>their header. That's the only way we may remove the trolls that
> > would
> > > > >>spam our groups. Learn how to via: SPAM COMPLAINTS -
> > > > >>http://spam.abuse.net/userhelp/howtocomplain.shtml
> > > > >>USENET COMPLAINTS -
> > > > http://www.cybernothing.org/faqs/net-abuse-faq.html
> > > > >>PROBE ATTEMPTS - http://online.securityfocus.com/news/9
> > > > >> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> > > > >>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> > > > >>
> > > > >>Josh Piela wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>>Hi everyone,
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> What has happened to this newsgroup? I am starting to
> > understand
> > > > that
> > > > >>>Bill has pissed the wrong person off this time. Correct?? Is
> > there
> > > > any
> > > > >
> > > > > way
> > > > >
> > > > >>>that we can fix this group? I looked forward to visiting this
> > board
> > > > >
> > > > > daily
> > > > >
> > > > >>>and reading about the wonderful world of jeeps. It's a world I
> > miss
> > > > >
> > > > > allot
> > > > >
> > > > >>>and I really enjoy reading everyone's moments with their jeeps.
> > Now
> > > > >
> > > > > it's
> > > > >
> > > > >>>getting to be a bit much, with all this terribly unnecessary
> > > > vulgarity.
> > > > >
> > > > > I
> > > > >
> > > > >>>am not looking to **** anyone off here, just wondering what the
> > deal
> > > > is
> > > > >
> > > > > with
> > > > >
> > > > >>>all the crap that is being posted.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > admin
> > > ----- Posted via http://www.wranglergear.com
> > >
>
>
> --
> admin
> ----- Posted via http://www.wranglergear.com
>
continuous stream of abuse, that has little social, artistic, political or
humorous value. That is not spam. Another difference, is that spammers and
scam artists always leave a contact address. You have the option to not buy
their products, warn others not to buy them, because they use spam in their
advertising, or report them to the Spanish police, who have, by the way,
been doing a brisk business in rounding up Nigerian scam artists.
The remailers that we have been talking about, started out with the premise,
that people should be able to publish information, without having to worry
about the secret police knocking on their door, or their boss finding out
about their sexual preferences. In this case, they are being used for
something completely different. The owner of one service, dizum.com, claims
that he will take steps to prevent or stop abuse, but it appears that he
does not mean this.
Earle
"admin" <admin.26vl3n@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x> wrote in message
news:admin.26vl3n@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x...
>
> spam on usenet is not a new problem, may be new to this group - but all
> the unmoderated groups get it at some level. Need I mention the
> alt.binaries with all the piracy going on there - I haven't heard much
> effort from the film & music industry trying to stop that - they only
> go after the p2p software. It's virtually impossible to stop someone
> from posting something on usenet. Sure you could create some deterents
> - but where there's a will - there's a way.
>
>
> Earle Horton Wrote:
> > This is true, but Google Groups requires one to provide an identity, or
> > at
> > least a valid email address, before posting. The possible penalty for
> > abuse
> > is loss of posting privileges on Google and loss of mailing privileges.
> > Now
> > Hotmail accounts are free, as are Google privileges, but it does take
> > some
> > effort to set them up. So you can lose something, if you are caught
> > abusing
> > privileges on Google Groups.
> >
> > On the other hand, there is no at-risk investment with using anonymous
> > remailers. It does take time to set up the encryption software and
> > figure
> > out the remailer routes, but once that is done, one can apparently post
> > with
> > impunity. Now if the abuse continues, at the present level, then
> > changes in
> > the structure of Usenet, to disallow anonymous remailers, is one
> > possible
> > result. If all the servers block postings through dizum.com, for
> > example,
> > then it is dead for this purpose.
> >
> > I can see why anonymous remailers came into being in the first place.
> > It is
> > so people, with something to hide, can continue to express themselves
> > publicly. Now I am all for free speech, but I am not so sure that free
> > speech rights include being able to hide one's true identity. Whatever
> > socially redeeming function these anonymous remailers are alleged to
> > provide, it appears to be swamped by the sheer amount of garbage that
> > they
> > propagate.
> >
> > Earle
> >
> > "admin" <admin.26usec@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x> wrote in message
> > news:admin.26usec@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x...
> > >
> > > There is no way to block someone from posting on Usenet.
> > > anyone could just walk into a public library and use Google Groups,
> > or
> > > use their Internet connection at work, or even a cell phone, etc.
> > etc.
> > >
> > > This is just the way Usenet works.
> > > It's greatest strength is also it's greatest weakness.
> > >
> > >
> > > Jeff DeWitt Wrote:
> > > > I wonder if it would be possible for the ISP's to filter out posts
> > from
> > > > these anonymous remailers? After all all of this stuff has to come
> > > > through their servers and it's wasting good bandwidth and annoying
> > > > their
> > > > customers.
> > > >
> > > > Jeff DeWitt
> > > >
> > > > Earle Horton wrote:
> > > > > Bill,
> > > > >
> > > > > The most abusive postings seem to come from anonymous remailers.
> > As
> > > > far as
> > > > > I can figure out, these exist, solely to allow people to abuse
> > Usenet
> > > > with
> > > > > impunity. I have heard "freedom of speech", "freedom from
> > political
> > > > > persecution", etc. argued for the existence of these pests, but
> > all I
> > > > have
> > > > > **seen** coming from them, is abuse.
> > > > >
> > > > > Any clue what to do about them?
> > > > >
> > > > > Earle
> > > > >
> > > > > "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> > > > > news:444AEDAE.98785F4F@***.net...
> > > > >
> > > > >>Hi Josh,
> > > > >> You may help by reporting the abuse to the addresses you find in
> > > > >>their header. That's the only way we may remove the trolls that
> > would
> > > > >>spam our groups. Learn how to via: SPAM COMPLAINTS -
> > > > >>http://spam.abuse.net/userhelp/howtocomplain.shtml
> > > > >>USENET COMPLAINTS -
> > > > http://www.cybernothing.org/faqs/net-abuse-faq.html
> > > > >>PROBE ATTEMPTS - http://online.securityfocus.com/news/9
> > > > >> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> > > > >>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> > > > >>
> > > > >>Josh Piela wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>>Hi everyone,
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> What has happened to this newsgroup? I am starting to
> > understand
> > > > that
> > > > >>>Bill has pissed the wrong person off this time. Correct?? Is
> > there
> > > > any
> > > > >
> > > > > way
> > > > >
> > > > >>>that we can fix this group? I looked forward to visiting this
> > board
> > > > >
> > > > > daily
> > > > >
> > > > >>>and reading about the wonderful world of jeeps. It's a world I
> > miss
> > > > >
> > > > > allot
> > > > >
> > > > >>>and I really enjoy reading everyone's moments with their jeeps.
> > Now
> > > > >
> > > > > it's
> > > > >
> > > > >>>getting to be a bit much, with all this terribly unnecessary
> > > > vulgarity.
> > > > >
> > > > > I
> > > > >
> > > > >>>am not looking to **** anyone off here, just wondering what the
> > deal
> > > > is
> > > > >
> > > > > with
> > > > >
> > > > >>>all the crap that is being posted.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > admin
> > > ----- Posted via http://www.wranglergear.com
> > >
>
>
> --
> admin
> ----- Posted via http://www.wranglergear.com
>
04-26-2006 | 11:58 AM
#343
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: what exactly happened here?
There is a difference between "posting something on usenet" and posting a
continuous stream of abuse, that has little social, artistic, political or
humorous value. That is not spam. Another difference, is that spammers and
scam artists always leave a contact address. You have the option to not buy
their products, warn others not to buy them, because they use spam in their
advertising, or report them to the Spanish police, who have, by the way,
been doing a brisk business in rounding up Nigerian scam artists.
The remailers that we have been talking about, started out with the premise,
that people should be able to publish information, without having to worry
about the secret police knocking on their door, or their boss finding out
about their sexual preferences. In this case, they are being used for
something completely different. The owner of one service, dizum.com, claims
that he will take steps to prevent or stop abuse, but it appears that he
does not mean this.
Earle
"admin" <admin.26vl3n@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x> wrote in message
news:admin.26vl3n@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x...
>
> spam on usenet is not a new problem, may be new to this group - but all
> the unmoderated groups get it at some level. Need I mention the
> alt.binaries with all the piracy going on there - I haven't heard much
> effort from the film & music industry trying to stop that - they only
> go after the p2p software. It's virtually impossible to stop someone
> from posting something on usenet. Sure you could create some deterents
> - but where there's a will - there's a way.
>
>
> Earle Horton Wrote:
> > This is true, but Google Groups requires one to provide an identity, or
> > at
> > least a valid email address, before posting. The possible penalty for
> > abuse
> > is loss of posting privileges on Google and loss of mailing privileges.
> > Now
> > Hotmail accounts are free, as are Google privileges, but it does take
> > some
> > effort to set them up. So you can lose something, if you are caught
> > abusing
> > privileges on Google Groups.
> >
> > On the other hand, there is no at-risk investment with using anonymous
> > remailers. It does take time to set up the encryption software and
> > figure
> > out the remailer routes, but once that is done, one can apparently post
> > with
> > impunity. Now if the abuse continues, at the present level, then
> > changes in
> > the structure of Usenet, to disallow anonymous remailers, is one
> > possible
> > result. If all the servers block postings through dizum.com, for
> > example,
> > then it is dead for this purpose.
> >
> > I can see why anonymous remailers came into being in the first place.
> > It is
> > so people, with something to hide, can continue to express themselves
> > publicly. Now I am all for free speech, but I am not so sure that free
> > speech rights include being able to hide one's true identity. Whatever
> > socially redeeming function these anonymous remailers are alleged to
> > provide, it appears to be swamped by the sheer amount of garbage that
> > they
> > propagate.
> >
> > Earle
> >
> > "admin" <admin.26usec@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x> wrote in message
> > news:admin.26usec@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x...
> > >
> > > There is no way to block someone from posting on Usenet.
> > > anyone could just walk into a public library and use Google Groups,
> > or
> > > use their Internet connection at work, or even a cell phone, etc.
> > etc.
> > >
> > > This is just the way Usenet works.
> > > It's greatest strength is also it's greatest weakness.
> > >
> > >
> > > Jeff DeWitt Wrote:
> > > > I wonder if it would be possible for the ISP's to filter out posts
> > from
> > > > these anonymous remailers? After all all of this stuff has to come
> > > > through their servers and it's wasting good bandwidth and annoying
> > > > their
> > > > customers.
> > > >
> > > > Jeff DeWitt
> > > >
> > > > Earle Horton wrote:
> > > > > Bill,
> > > > >
> > > > > The most abusive postings seem to come from anonymous remailers.
> > As
> > > > far as
> > > > > I can figure out, these exist, solely to allow people to abuse
> > Usenet
> > > > with
> > > > > impunity. I have heard "freedom of speech", "freedom from
> > political
> > > > > persecution", etc. argued for the existence of these pests, but
> > all I
> > > > have
> > > > > **seen** coming from them, is abuse.
> > > > >
> > > > > Any clue what to do about them?
> > > > >
> > > > > Earle
> > > > >
> > > > > "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> > > > > news:444AEDAE.98785F4F@***.net...
> > > > >
> > > > >>Hi Josh,
> > > > >> You may help by reporting the abuse to the addresses you find in
> > > > >>their header. That's the only way we may remove the trolls that
> > would
> > > > >>spam our groups. Learn how to via: SPAM COMPLAINTS -
> > > > >>http://spam.abuse.net/userhelp/howtocomplain.shtml
> > > > >>USENET COMPLAINTS -
> > > > http://www.cybernothing.org/faqs/net-abuse-faq.html
> > > > >>PROBE ATTEMPTS - http://online.securityfocus.com/news/9
> > > > >> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> > > > >>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> > > > >>
> > > > >>Josh Piela wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>>Hi everyone,
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> What has happened to this newsgroup? I am starting to
> > understand
> > > > that
> > > > >>>Bill has pissed the wrong person off this time. Correct?? Is
> > there
> > > > any
> > > > >
> > > > > way
> > > > >
> > > > >>>that we can fix this group? I looked forward to visiting this
> > board
> > > > >
> > > > > daily
> > > > >
> > > > >>>and reading about the wonderful world of jeeps. It's a world I
> > miss
> > > > >
> > > > > allot
> > > > >
> > > > >>>and I really enjoy reading everyone's moments with their jeeps.
> > Now
> > > > >
> > > > > it's
> > > > >
> > > > >>>getting to be a bit much, with all this terribly unnecessary
> > > > vulgarity.
> > > > >
> > > > > I
> > > > >
> > > > >>>am not looking to **** anyone off here, just wondering what the
> > deal
> > > > is
> > > > >
> > > > > with
> > > > >
> > > > >>>all the crap that is being posted.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > admin
> > > ----- Posted via http://www.wranglergear.com
> > >
>
>
> --
> admin
> ----- Posted via http://www.wranglergear.com
>
continuous stream of abuse, that has little social, artistic, political or
humorous value. That is not spam. Another difference, is that spammers and
scam artists always leave a contact address. You have the option to not buy
their products, warn others not to buy them, because they use spam in their
advertising, or report them to the Spanish police, who have, by the way,
been doing a brisk business in rounding up Nigerian scam artists.
The remailers that we have been talking about, started out with the premise,
that people should be able to publish information, without having to worry
about the secret police knocking on their door, or their boss finding out
about their sexual preferences. In this case, they are being used for
something completely different. The owner of one service, dizum.com, claims
that he will take steps to prevent or stop abuse, but it appears that he
does not mean this.
Earle
"admin" <admin.26vl3n@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x> wrote in message
news:admin.26vl3n@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x...
>
> spam on usenet is not a new problem, may be new to this group - but all
> the unmoderated groups get it at some level. Need I mention the
> alt.binaries with all the piracy going on there - I haven't heard much
> effort from the film & music industry trying to stop that - they only
> go after the p2p software. It's virtually impossible to stop someone
> from posting something on usenet. Sure you could create some deterents
> - but where there's a will - there's a way.
>
>
> Earle Horton Wrote:
> > This is true, but Google Groups requires one to provide an identity, or
> > at
> > least a valid email address, before posting. The possible penalty for
> > abuse
> > is loss of posting privileges on Google and loss of mailing privileges.
> > Now
> > Hotmail accounts are free, as are Google privileges, but it does take
> > some
> > effort to set them up. So you can lose something, if you are caught
> > abusing
> > privileges on Google Groups.
> >
> > On the other hand, there is no at-risk investment with using anonymous
> > remailers. It does take time to set up the encryption software and
> > figure
> > out the remailer routes, but once that is done, one can apparently post
> > with
> > impunity. Now if the abuse continues, at the present level, then
> > changes in
> > the structure of Usenet, to disallow anonymous remailers, is one
> > possible
> > result. If all the servers block postings through dizum.com, for
> > example,
> > then it is dead for this purpose.
> >
> > I can see why anonymous remailers came into being in the first place.
> > It is
> > so people, with something to hide, can continue to express themselves
> > publicly. Now I am all for free speech, but I am not so sure that free
> > speech rights include being able to hide one's true identity. Whatever
> > socially redeeming function these anonymous remailers are alleged to
> > provide, it appears to be swamped by the sheer amount of garbage that
> > they
> > propagate.
> >
> > Earle
> >
> > "admin" <admin.26usec@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x> wrote in message
> > news:admin.26usec@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x...
> > >
> > > There is no way to block someone from posting on Usenet.
> > > anyone could just walk into a public library and use Google Groups,
> > or
> > > use their Internet connection at work, or even a cell phone, etc.
> > etc.
> > >
> > > This is just the way Usenet works.
> > > It's greatest strength is also it's greatest weakness.
> > >
> > >
> > > Jeff DeWitt Wrote:
> > > > I wonder if it would be possible for the ISP's to filter out posts
> > from
> > > > these anonymous remailers? After all all of this stuff has to come
> > > > through their servers and it's wasting good bandwidth and annoying
> > > > their
> > > > customers.
> > > >
> > > > Jeff DeWitt
> > > >
> > > > Earle Horton wrote:
> > > > > Bill,
> > > > >
> > > > > The most abusive postings seem to come from anonymous remailers.
> > As
> > > > far as
> > > > > I can figure out, these exist, solely to allow people to abuse
> > Usenet
> > > > with
> > > > > impunity. I have heard "freedom of speech", "freedom from
> > political
> > > > > persecution", etc. argued for the existence of these pests, but
> > all I
> > > > have
> > > > > **seen** coming from them, is abuse.
> > > > >
> > > > > Any clue what to do about them?
> > > > >
> > > > > Earle
> > > > >
> > > > > "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> > > > > news:444AEDAE.98785F4F@***.net...
> > > > >
> > > > >>Hi Josh,
> > > > >> You may help by reporting the abuse to the addresses you find in
> > > > >>their header. That's the only way we may remove the trolls that
> > would
> > > > >>spam our groups. Learn how to via: SPAM COMPLAINTS -
> > > > >>http://spam.abuse.net/userhelp/howtocomplain.shtml
> > > > >>USENET COMPLAINTS -
> > > > http://www.cybernothing.org/faqs/net-abuse-faq.html
> > > > >>PROBE ATTEMPTS - http://online.securityfocus.com/news/9
> > > > >> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> > > > >>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> > > > >>
> > > > >>Josh Piela wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>>Hi everyone,
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> What has happened to this newsgroup? I am starting to
> > understand
> > > > that
> > > > >>>Bill has pissed the wrong person off this time. Correct?? Is
> > there
> > > > any
> > > > >
> > > > > way
> > > > >
> > > > >>>that we can fix this group? I looked forward to visiting this
> > board
> > > > >
> > > > > daily
> > > > >
> > > > >>>and reading about the wonderful world of jeeps. It's a world I
> > miss
> > > > >
> > > > > allot
> > > > >
> > > > >>>and I really enjoy reading everyone's moments with their jeeps.
> > Now
> > > > >
> > > > > it's
> > > > >
> > > > >>>getting to be a bit much, with all this terribly unnecessary
> > > > vulgarity.
> > > > >
> > > > > I
> > > > >
> > > > >>>am not looking to **** anyone off here, just wondering what the
> > deal
> > > > is
> > > > >
> > > > > with
> > > > >
> > > > >>>all the crap that is being posted.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > admin
> > > ----- Posted via http://www.wranglergear.com
> > >
>
>
> --
> admin
> ----- Posted via http://www.wranglergear.com
>
04-26-2006 | 12:24 PM
#344
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: what exactly happened here?
If Bill really wants to get ambitious, he should start a UDP on the
remailers that allow folks to only get an account so they can abuse the
system. If they don't want to clean up their act, block their domain
like was threatened to the @home network a few years back.
That usually wakes them up or closes them down....
Mike
Earle Horton wrote:
>
> There is a difference between "posting something on usenet" and posting a
> continuous stream of abuse, that has little social, artistic, political or
> humorous value. That is not spam. Another difference, is that spammers and
> scam artists always leave a contact address. You have the option to not buy
> their products, warn others not to buy them, because they use spam in their
> advertising, or report them to the Spanish police, who have, by the way,
> been doing a brisk business in rounding up Nigerian scam artists.
>
> The remailers that we have been talking about, started out with the premise,
> that people should be able to publish information, without having to worry
> about the secret police knocking on their door, or their boss finding out
> about their sexual preferences. In this case, they are being used for
> something completely different. The owner of one service, dizum.com, claims
> that he will take steps to prevent or stop abuse, but it appears that he
> does not mean this.
>
> Earle
>
> "admin" <admin.26vl3n@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x> wrote in message
> news:admin.26vl3n@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x...
> >
> > spam on usenet is not a new problem, may be new to this group - but all
> > the unmoderated groups get it at some level. Need I mention the
> > alt.binaries with all the piracy going on there - I haven't heard much
> > effort from the film & music industry trying to stop that - they only
> > go after the p2p software. It's virtually impossible to stop someone
> > from posting something on usenet. Sure you could create some deterents
> > - but where there's a will - there's a way.
> >
> >
> > Earle Horton Wrote:
> > > This is true, but Google Groups requires one to provide an identity, or
> > > at
> > > least a valid email address, before posting. The possible penalty for
> > > abuse
> > > is loss of posting privileges on Google and loss of mailing privileges.
> > > Now
> > > Hotmail accounts are free, as are Google privileges, but it does take
> > > some
> > > effort to set them up. So you can lose something, if you are caught
> > > abusing
> > > privileges on Google Groups.
> > >
> > > On the other hand, there is no at-risk investment with using anonymous
> > > remailers. It does take time to set up the encryption software and
> > > figure
> > > out the remailer routes, but once that is done, one can apparently post
> > > with
> > > impunity. Now if the abuse continues, at the present level, then
> > > changes in
> > > the structure of Usenet, to disallow anonymous remailers, is one
> > > possible
> > > result. If all the servers block postings through dizum.com, for
> > > example,
> > > then it is dead for this purpose.
> > >
> > > I can see why anonymous remailers came into being in the first place.
> > > It is
> > > so people, with something to hide, can continue to express themselves
> > > publicly. Now I am all for free speech, but I am not so sure that free
> > > speech rights include being able to hide one's true identity. Whatever
> > > socially redeeming function these anonymous remailers are alleged to
> > > provide, it appears to be swamped by the sheer amount of garbage that
> > > they
> > > propagate.
> > >
> > > Earle
> > >
> > > "admin" <admin.26usec@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x> wrote in message
> > > news:admin.26usec@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x...
> > > >
> > > > There is no way to block someone from posting on Usenet.
> > > > anyone could just walk into a public library and use Google Groups,
> > > or
> > > > use their Internet connection at work, or even a cell phone, etc.
> > > etc.
> > > >
> > > > This is just the way Usenet works.
> > > > It's greatest strength is also it's greatest weakness.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Jeff DeWitt Wrote:
> > > > > I wonder if it would be possible for the ISP's to filter out posts
> > > from
> > > > > these anonymous remailers? After all all of this stuff has to come
> > > > > through their servers and it's wasting good bandwidth and annoying
> > > > > their
> > > > > customers.
> > > > >
> > > > > Jeff DeWitt
> > > > >
> > > > > Earle Horton wrote:
> > > > > > Bill,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The most abusive postings seem to come from anonymous remailers.
> > > As
> > > > > far as
> > > > > > I can figure out, these exist, solely to allow people to abuse
> > > Usenet
> > > > > with
> > > > > > impunity. I have heard "freedom of speech", "freedom from
> > > political
> > > > > > persecution", etc. argued for the existence of these pests, but
> > > all I
> > > > > have
> > > > > > **seen** coming from them, is abuse.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Any clue what to do about them?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Earle
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:444AEDAE.98785F4F@***.net...
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>Hi Josh,
> > > > > >> You may help by reporting the abuse to the addresses you find in
> > > > > >>their header. That's the only way we may remove the trolls that
> > > would
> > > > > >>spam our groups. Learn how to via: SPAM COMPLAINTS -
> > > > > >>http://spam.abuse.net/userhelp/howtocomplain.shtml
> > > > > >>USENET COMPLAINTS -
> > > > > http://www.cybernothing.org/faqs/net-abuse-faq.html
> > > > > >>PROBE ATTEMPTS - http://online.securityfocus.com/news/9
> > > > > >> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> > > > > >>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>Josh Piela wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>>Hi everyone,
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> What has happened to this newsgroup? I am starting to
> > > understand
> > > > > that
> > > > > >>>Bill has pissed the wrong person off this time. Correct?? Is
> > > there
> > > > > any
> > > > > >
> > > > > > way
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>that we can fix this group? I looked forward to visiting this
> > > board
> > > > > >
> > > > > > daily
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>and reading about the wonderful world of jeeps. It's a world I
> > > miss
> > > > > >
> > > > > > allot
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>and I really enjoy reading everyone's moments with their jeeps.
> > > Now
> > > > > >
> > > > > > it's
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>getting to be a bit much, with all this terribly unnecessary
> > > > > vulgarity.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>am not looking to **** anyone off here, just wondering what the
> > > deal
> > > > > is
> > > > > >
> > > > > > with
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>all the crap that is being posted.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > admin
> > > > ----- Posted via http://www.wranglergear.com
> > > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > admin
> > ----- Posted via http://www.wranglergear.com
> >
remailers that allow folks to only get an account so they can abuse the
system. If they don't want to clean up their act, block their domain
like was threatened to the @home network a few years back.
That usually wakes them up or closes them down....
Mike
Earle Horton wrote:
>
> There is a difference between "posting something on usenet" and posting a
> continuous stream of abuse, that has little social, artistic, political or
> humorous value. That is not spam. Another difference, is that spammers and
> scam artists always leave a contact address. You have the option to not buy
> their products, warn others not to buy them, because they use spam in their
> advertising, or report them to the Spanish police, who have, by the way,
> been doing a brisk business in rounding up Nigerian scam artists.
>
> The remailers that we have been talking about, started out with the premise,
> that people should be able to publish information, without having to worry
> about the secret police knocking on their door, or their boss finding out
> about their sexual preferences. In this case, they are being used for
> something completely different. The owner of one service, dizum.com, claims
> that he will take steps to prevent or stop abuse, but it appears that he
> does not mean this.
>
> Earle
>
> "admin" <admin.26vl3n@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x> wrote in message
> news:admin.26vl3n@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x...
> >
> > spam on usenet is not a new problem, may be new to this group - but all
> > the unmoderated groups get it at some level. Need I mention the
> > alt.binaries with all the piracy going on there - I haven't heard much
> > effort from the film & music industry trying to stop that - they only
> > go after the p2p software. It's virtually impossible to stop someone
> > from posting something on usenet. Sure you could create some deterents
> > - but where there's a will - there's a way.
> >
> >
> > Earle Horton Wrote:
> > > This is true, but Google Groups requires one to provide an identity, or
> > > at
> > > least a valid email address, before posting. The possible penalty for
> > > abuse
> > > is loss of posting privileges on Google and loss of mailing privileges.
> > > Now
> > > Hotmail accounts are free, as are Google privileges, but it does take
> > > some
> > > effort to set them up. So you can lose something, if you are caught
> > > abusing
> > > privileges on Google Groups.
> > >
> > > On the other hand, there is no at-risk investment with using anonymous
> > > remailers. It does take time to set up the encryption software and
> > > figure
> > > out the remailer routes, but once that is done, one can apparently post
> > > with
> > > impunity. Now if the abuse continues, at the present level, then
> > > changes in
> > > the structure of Usenet, to disallow anonymous remailers, is one
> > > possible
> > > result. If all the servers block postings through dizum.com, for
> > > example,
> > > then it is dead for this purpose.
> > >
> > > I can see why anonymous remailers came into being in the first place.
> > > It is
> > > so people, with something to hide, can continue to express themselves
> > > publicly. Now I am all for free speech, but I am not so sure that free
> > > speech rights include being able to hide one's true identity. Whatever
> > > socially redeeming function these anonymous remailers are alleged to
> > > provide, it appears to be swamped by the sheer amount of garbage that
> > > they
> > > propagate.
> > >
> > > Earle
> > >
> > > "admin" <admin.26usec@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x> wrote in message
> > > news:admin.26usec@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x...
> > > >
> > > > There is no way to block someone from posting on Usenet.
> > > > anyone could just walk into a public library and use Google Groups,
> > > or
> > > > use their Internet connection at work, or even a cell phone, etc.
> > > etc.
> > > >
> > > > This is just the way Usenet works.
> > > > It's greatest strength is also it's greatest weakness.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Jeff DeWitt Wrote:
> > > > > I wonder if it would be possible for the ISP's to filter out posts
> > > from
> > > > > these anonymous remailers? After all all of this stuff has to come
> > > > > through their servers and it's wasting good bandwidth and annoying
> > > > > their
> > > > > customers.
> > > > >
> > > > > Jeff DeWitt
> > > > >
> > > > > Earle Horton wrote:
> > > > > > Bill,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The most abusive postings seem to come from anonymous remailers.
> > > As
> > > > > far as
> > > > > > I can figure out, these exist, solely to allow people to abuse
> > > Usenet
> > > > > with
> > > > > > impunity. I have heard "freedom of speech", "freedom from
> > > political
> > > > > > persecution", etc. argued for the existence of these pests, but
> > > all I
> > > > > have
> > > > > > **seen** coming from them, is abuse.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Any clue what to do about them?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Earle
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:444AEDAE.98785F4F@***.net...
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>Hi Josh,
> > > > > >> You may help by reporting the abuse to the addresses you find in
> > > > > >>their header. That's the only way we may remove the trolls that
> > > would
> > > > > >>spam our groups. Learn how to via: SPAM COMPLAINTS -
> > > > > >>http://spam.abuse.net/userhelp/howtocomplain.shtml
> > > > > >>USENET COMPLAINTS -
> > > > > http://www.cybernothing.org/faqs/net-abuse-faq.html
> > > > > >>PROBE ATTEMPTS - http://online.securityfocus.com/news/9
> > > > > >> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> > > > > >>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>Josh Piela wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>>Hi everyone,
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> What has happened to this newsgroup? I am starting to
> > > understand
> > > > > that
> > > > > >>>Bill has pissed the wrong person off this time. Correct?? Is
> > > there
> > > > > any
> > > > > >
> > > > > > way
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>that we can fix this group? I looked forward to visiting this
> > > board
> > > > > >
> > > > > > daily
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>and reading about the wonderful world of jeeps. It's a world I
> > > miss
> > > > > >
> > > > > > allot
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>and I really enjoy reading everyone's moments with their jeeps.
> > > Now
> > > > > >
> > > > > > it's
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>getting to be a bit much, with all this terribly unnecessary
> > > > > vulgarity.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>am not looking to **** anyone off here, just wondering what the
> > > deal
> > > > > is
> > > > > >
> > > > > > with
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>all the crap that is being posted.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > admin
> > > > ----- Posted via http://www.wranglergear.com
> > > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > admin
> > ----- Posted via http://www.wranglergear.com
> >
04-26-2006 | 12:24 PM
#345
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: what exactly happened here?
If Bill really wants to get ambitious, he should start a UDP on the
remailers that allow folks to only get an account so they can abuse the
system. If they don't want to clean up their act, block their domain
like was threatened to the @home network a few years back.
That usually wakes them up or closes them down....
Mike
Earle Horton wrote:
>
> There is a difference between "posting something on usenet" and posting a
> continuous stream of abuse, that has little social, artistic, political or
> humorous value. That is not spam. Another difference, is that spammers and
> scam artists always leave a contact address. You have the option to not buy
> their products, warn others not to buy them, because they use spam in their
> advertising, or report them to the Spanish police, who have, by the way,
> been doing a brisk business in rounding up Nigerian scam artists.
>
> The remailers that we have been talking about, started out with the premise,
> that people should be able to publish information, without having to worry
> about the secret police knocking on their door, or their boss finding out
> about their sexual preferences. In this case, they are being used for
> something completely different. The owner of one service, dizum.com, claims
> that he will take steps to prevent or stop abuse, but it appears that he
> does not mean this.
>
> Earle
>
> "admin" <admin.26vl3n@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x> wrote in message
> news:admin.26vl3n@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x...
> >
> > spam on usenet is not a new problem, may be new to this group - but all
> > the unmoderated groups get it at some level. Need I mention the
> > alt.binaries with all the piracy going on there - I haven't heard much
> > effort from the film & music industry trying to stop that - they only
> > go after the p2p software. It's virtually impossible to stop someone
> > from posting something on usenet. Sure you could create some deterents
> > - but where there's a will - there's a way.
> >
> >
> > Earle Horton Wrote:
> > > This is true, but Google Groups requires one to provide an identity, or
> > > at
> > > least a valid email address, before posting. The possible penalty for
> > > abuse
> > > is loss of posting privileges on Google and loss of mailing privileges.
> > > Now
> > > Hotmail accounts are free, as are Google privileges, but it does take
> > > some
> > > effort to set them up. So you can lose something, if you are caught
> > > abusing
> > > privileges on Google Groups.
> > >
> > > On the other hand, there is no at-risk investment with using anonymous
> > > remailers. It does take time to set up the encryption software and
> > > figure
> > > out the remailer routes, but once that is done, one can apparently post
> > > with
> > > impunity. Now if the abuse continues, at the present level, then
> > > changes in
> > > the structure of Usenet, to disallow anonymous remailers, is one
> > > possible
> > > result. If all the servers block postings through dizum.com, for
> > > example,
> > > then it is dead for this purpose.
> > >
> > > I can see why anonymous remailers came into being in the first place.
> > > It is
> > > so people, with something to hide, can continue to express themselves
> > > publicly. Now I am all for free speech, but I am not so sure that free
> > > speech rights include being able to hide one's true identity. Whatever
> > > socially redeeming function these anonymous remailers are alleged to
> > > provide, it appears to be swamped by the sheer amount of garbage that
> > > they
> > > propagate.
> > >
> > > Earle
> > >
> > > "admin" <admin.26usec@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x> wrote in message
> > > news:admin.26usec@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x...
> > > >
> > > > There is no way to block someone from posting on Usenet.
> > > > anyone could just walk into a public library and use Google Groups,
> > > or
> > > > use their Internet connection at work, or even a cell phone, etc.
> > > etc.
> > > >
> > > > This is just the way Usenet works.
> > > > It's greatest strength is also it's greatest weakness.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Jeff DeWitt Wrote:
> > > > > I wonder if it would be possible for the ISP's to filter out posts
> > > from
> > > > > these anonymous remailers? After all all of this stuff has to come
> > > > > through their servers and it's wasting good bandwidth and annoying
> > > > > their
> > > > > customers.
> > > > >
> > > > > Jeff DeWitt
> > > > >
> > > > > Earle Horton wrote:
> > > > > > Bill,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The most abusive postings seem to come from anonymous remailers.
> > > As
> > > > > far as
> > > > > > I can figure out, these exist, solely to allow people to abuse
> > > Usenet
> > > > > with
> > > > > > impunity. I have heard "freedom of speech", "freedom from
> > > political
> > > > > > persecution", etc. argued for the existence of these pests, but
> > > all I
> > > > > have
> > > > > > **seen** coming from them, is abuse.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Any clue what to do about them?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Earle
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:444AEDAE.98785F4F@***.net...
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>Hi Josh,
> > > > > >> You may help by reporting the abuse to the addresses you find in
> > > > > >>their header. That's the only way we may remove the trolls that
> > > would
> > > > > >>spam our groups. Learn how to via: SPAM COMPLAINTS -
> > > > > >>http://spam.abuse.net/userhelp/howtocomplain.shtml
> > > > > >>USENET COMPLAINTS -
> > > > > http://www.cybernothing.org/faqs/net-abuse-faq.html
> > > > > >>PROBE ATTEMPTS - http://online.securityfocus.com/news/9
> > > > > >> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> > > > > >>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>Josh Piela wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>>Hi everyone,
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> What has happened to this newsgroup? I am starting to
> > > understand
> > > > > that
> > > > > >>>Bill has pissed the wrong person off this time. Correct?? Is
> > > there
> > > > > any
> > > > > >
> > > > > > way
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>that we can fix this group? I looked forward to visiting this
> > > board
> > > > > >
> > > > > > daily
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>and reading about the wonderful world of jeeps. It's a world I
> > > miss
> > > > > >
> > > > > > allot
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>and I really enjoy reading everyone's moments with their jeeps.
> > > Now
> > > > > >
> > > > > > it's
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>getting to be a bit much, with all this terribly unnecessary
> > > > > vulgarity.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>am not looking to **** anyone off here, just wondering what the
> > > deal
> > > > > is
> > > > > >
> > > > > > with
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>all the crap that is being posted.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > admin
> > > > ----- Posted via http://www.wranglergear.com
> > > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > admin
> > ----- Posted via http://www.wranglergear.com
> >
remailers that allow folks to only get an account so they can abuse the
system. If they don't want to clean up their act, block their domain
like was threatened to the @home network a few years back.
That usually wakes them up or closes them down....
Mike
Earle Horton wrote:
>
> There is a difference between "posting something on usenet" and posting a
> continuous stream of abuse, that has little social, artistic, political or
> humorous value. That is not spam. Another difference, is that spammers and
> scam artists always leave a contact address. You have the option to not buy
> their products, warn others not to buy them, because they use spam in their
> advertising, or report them to the Spanish police, who have, by the way,
> been doing a brisk business in rounding up Nigerian scam artists.
>
> The remailers that we have been talking about, started out with the premise,
> that people should be able to publish information, without having to worry
> about the secret police knocking on their door, or their boss finding out
> about their sexual preferences. In this case, they are being used for
> something completely different. The owner of one service, dizum.com, claims
> that he will take steps to prevent or stop abuse, but it appears that he
> does not mean this.
>
> Earle
>
> "admin" <admin.26vl3n@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x> wrote in message
> news:admin.26vl3n@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x...
> >
> > spam on usenet is not a new problem, may be new to this group - but all
> > the unmoderated groups get it at some level. Need I mention the
> > alt.binaries with all the piracy going on there - I haven't heard much
> > effort from the film & music industry trying to stop that - they only
> > go after the p2p software. It's virtually impossible to stop someone
> > from posting something on usenet. Sure you could create some deterents
> > - but where there's a will - there's a way.
> >
> >
> > Earle Horton Wrote:
> > > This is true, but Google Groups requires one to provide an identity, or
> > > at
> > > least a valid email address, before posting. The possible penalty for
> > > abuse
> > > is loss of posting privileges on Google and loss of mailing privileges.
> > > Now
> > > Hotmail accounts are free, as are Google privileges, but it does take
> > > some
> > > effort to set them up. So you can lose something, if you are caught
> > > abusing
> > > privileges on Google Groups.
> > >
> > > On the other hand, there is no at-risk investment with using anonymous
> > > remailers. It does take time to set up the encryption software and
> > > figure
> > > out the remailer routes, but once that is done, one can apparently post
> > > with
> > > impunity. Now if the abuse continues, at the present level, then
> > > changes in
> > > the structure of Usenet, to disallow anonymous remailers, is one
> > > possible
> > > result. If all the servers block postings through dizum.com, for
> > > example,
> > > then it is dead for this purpose.
> > >
> > > I can see why anonymous remailers came into being in the first place.
> > > It is
> > > so people, with something to hide, can continue to express themselves
> > > publicly. Now I am all for free speech, but I am not so sure that free
> > > speech rights include being able to hide one's true identity. Whatever
> > > socially redeeming function these anonymous remailers are alleged to
> > > provide, it appears to be swamped by the sheer amount of garbage that
> > > they
> > > propagate.
> > >
> > > Earle
> > >
> > > "admin" <admin.26usec@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x> wrote in message
> > > news:admin.26usec@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x...
> > > >
> > > > There is no way to block someone from posting on Usenet.
> > > > anyone could just walk into a public library and use Google Groups,
> > > or
> > > > use their Internet connection at work, or even a cell phone, etc.
> > > etc.
> > > >
> > > > This is just the way Usenet works.
> > > > It's greatest strength is also it's greatest weakness.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Jeff DeWitt Wrote:
> > > > > I wonder if it would be possible for the ISP's to filter out posts
> > > from
> > > > > these anonymous remailers? After all all of this stuff has to come
> > > > > through their servers and it's wasting good bandwidth and annoying
> > > > > their
> > > > > customers.
> > > > >
> > > > > Jeff DeWitt
> > > > >
> > > > > Earle Horton wrote:
> > > > > > Bill,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The most abusive postings seem to come from anonymous remailers.
> > > As
> > > > > far as
> > > > > > I can figure out, these exist, solely to allow people to abuse
> > > Usenet
> > > > > with
> > > > > > impunity. I have heard "freedom of speech", "freedom from
> > > political
> > > > > > persecution", etc. argued for the existence of these pests, but
> > > all I
> > > > > have
> > > > > > **seen** coming from them, is abuse.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Any clue what to do about them?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Earle
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:444AEDAE.98785F4F@***.net...
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>Hi Josh,
> > > > > >> You may help by reporting the abuse to the addresses you find in
> > > > > >>their header. That's the only way we may remove the trolls that
> > > would
> > > > > >>spam our groups. Learn how to via: SPAM COMPLAINTS -
> > > > > >>http://spam.abuse.net/userhelp/howtocomplain.shtml
> > > > > >>USENET COMPLAINTS -
> > > > > http://www.cybernothing.org/faqs/net-abuse-faq.html
> > > > > >>PROBE ATTEMPTS - http://online.securityfocus.com/news/9
> > > > > >> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> > > > > >>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>Josh Piela wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>>Hi everyone,
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> What has happened to this newsgroup? I am starting to
> > > understand
> > > > > that
> > > > > >>>Bill has pissed the wrong person off this time. Correct?? Is
> > > there
> > > > > any
> > > > > >
> > > > > > way
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>that we can fix this group? I looked forward to visiting this
> > > board
> > > > > >
> > > > > > daily
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>and reading about the wonderful world of jeeps. It's a world I
> > > miss
> > > > > >
> > > > > > allot
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>and I really enjoy reading everyone's moments with their jeeps.
> > > Now
> > > > > >
> > > > > > it's
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>getting to be a bit much, with all this terribly unnecessary
> > > > > vulgarity.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>am not looking to **** anyone off here, just wondering what the
> > > deal
> > > > > is
> > > > > >
> > > > > > with
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>all the crap that is being posted.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > admin
> > > > ----- Posted via http://www.wranglergear.com
> > > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > admin
> > ----- Posted via http://www.wranglergear.com
> >
04-26-2006 | 12:24 PM
#346
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: what exactly happened here?
If Bill really wants to get ambitious, he should start a UDP on the
remailers that allow folks to only get an account so they can abuse the
system. If they don't want to clean up their act, block their domain
like was threatened to the @home network a few years back.
That usually wakes them up or closes them down....
Mike
Earle Horton wrote:
>
> There is a difference between "posting something on usenet" and posting a
> continuous stream of abuse, that has little social, artistic, political or
> humorous value. That is not spam. Another difference, is that spammers and
> scam artists always leave a contact address. You have the option to not buy
> their products, warn others not to buy them, because they use spam in their
> advertising, or report them to the Spanish police, who have, by the way,
> been doing a brisk business in rounding up Nigerian scam artists.
>
> The remailers that we have been talking about, started out with the premise,
> that people should be able to publish information, without having to worry
> about the secret police knocking on their door, or their boss finding out
> about their sexual preferences. In this case, they are being used for
> something completely different. The owner of one service, dizum.com, claims
> that he will take steps to prevent or stop abuse, but it appears that he
> does not mean this.
>
> Earle
>
> "admin" <admin.26vl3n@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x> wrote in message
> news:admin.26vl3n@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x...
> >
> > spam on usenet is not a new problem, may be new to this group - but all
> > the unmoderated groups get it at some level. Need I mention the
> > alt.binaries with all the piracy going on there - I haven't heard much
> > effort from the film & music industry trying to stop that - they only
> > go after the p2p software. It's virtually impossible to stop someone
> > from posting something on usenet. Sure you could create some deterents
> > - but where there's a will - there's a way.
> >
> >
> > Earle Horton Wrote:
> > > This is true, but Google Groups requires one to provide an identity, or
> > > at
> > > least a valid email address, before posting. The possible penalty for
> > > abuse
> > > is loss of posting privileges on Google and loss of mailing privileges.
> > > Now
> > > Hotmail accounts are free, as are Google privileges, but it does take
> > > some
> > > effort to set them up. So you can lose something, if you are caught
> > > abusing
> > > privileges on Google Groups.
> > >
> > > On the other hand, there is no at-risk investment with using anonymous
> > > remailers. It does take time to set up the encryption software and
> > > figure
> > > out the remailer routes, but once that is done, one can apparently post
> > > with
> > > impunity. Now if the abuse continues, at the present level, then
> > > changes in
> > > the structure of Usenet, to disallow anonymous remailers, is one
> > > possible
> > > result. If all the servers block postings through dizum.com, for
> > > example,
> > > then it is dead for this purpose.
> > >
> > > I can see why anonymous remailers came into being in the first place.
> > > It is
> > > so people, with something to hide, can continue to express themselves
> > > publicly. Now I am all for free speech, but I am not so sure that free
> > > speech rights include being able to hide one's true identity. Whatever
> > > socially redeeming function these anonymous remailers are alleged to
> > > provide, it appears to be swamped by the sheer amount of garbage that
> > > they
> > > propagate.
> > >
> > > Earle
> > >
> > > "admin" <admin.26usec@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x> wrote in message
> > > news:admin.26usec@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x...
> > > >
> > > > There is no way to block someone from posting on Usenet.
> > > > anyone could just walk into a public library and use Google Groups,
> > > or
> > > > use their Internet connection at work, or even a cell phone, etc.
> > > etc.
> > > >
> > > > This is just the way Usenet works.
> > > > It's greatest strength is also it's greatest weakness.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Jeff DeWitt Wrote:
> > > > > I wonder if it would be possible for the ISP's to filter out posts
> > > from
> > > > > these anonymous remailers? After all all of this stuff has to come
> > > > > through their servers and it's wasting good bandwidth and annoying
> > > > > their
> > > > > customers.
> > > > >
> > > > > Jeff DeWitt
> > > > >
> > > > > Earle Horton wrote:
> > > > > > Bill,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The most abusive postings seem to come from anonymous remailers.
> > > As
> > > > > far as
> > > > > > I can figure out, these exist, solely to allow people to abuse
> > > Usenet
> > > > > with
> > > > > > impunity. I have heard "freedom of speech", "freedom from
> > > political
> > > > > > persecution", etc. argued for the existence of these pests, but
> > > all I
> > > > > have
> > > > > > **seen** coming from them, is abuse.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Any clue what to do about them?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Earle
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:444AEDAE.98785F4F@***.net...
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>Hi Josh,
> > > > > >> You may help by reporting the abuse to the addresses you find in
> > > > > >>their header. That's the only way we may remove the trolls that
> > > would
> > > > > >>spam our groups. Learn how to via: SPAM COMPLAINTS -
> > > > > >>http://spam.abuse.net/userhelp/howtocomplain.shtml
> > > > > >>USENET COMPLAINTS -
> > > > > http://www.cybernothing.org/faqs/net-abuse-faq.html
> > > > > >>PROBE ATTEMPTS - http://online.securityfocus.com/news/9
> > > > > >> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> > > > > >>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>Josh Piela wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>>Hi everyone,
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> What has happened to this newsgroup? I am starting to
> > > understand
> > > > > that
> > > > > >>>Bill has pissed the wrong person off this time. Correct?? Is
> > > there
> > > > > any
> > > > > >
> > > > > > way
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>that we can fix this group? I looked forward to visiting this
> > > board
> > > > > >
> > > > > > daily
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>and reading about the wonderful world of jeeps. It's a world I
> > > miss
> > > > > >
> > > > > > allot
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>and I really enjoy reading everyone's moments with their jeeps.
> > > Now
> > > > > >
> > > > > > it's
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>getting to be a bit much, with all this terribly unnecessary
> > > > > vulgarity.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>am not looking to **** anyone off here, just wondering what the
> > > deal
> > > > > is
> > > > > >
> > > > > > with
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>all the crap that is being posted.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > admin
> > > > ----- Posted via http://www.wranglergear.com
> > > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > admin
> > ----- Posted via http://www.wranglergear.com
> >
remailers that allow folks to only get an account so they can abuse the
system. If they don't want to clean up their act, block their domain
like was threatened to the @home network a few years back.
That usually wakes them up or closes them down....
Mike
Earle Horton wrote:
>
> There is a difference between "posting something on usenet" and posting a
> continuous stream of abuse, that has little social, artistic, political or
> humorous value. That is not spam. Another difference, is that spammers and
> scam artists always leave a contact address. You have the option to not buy
> their products, warn others not to buy them, because they use spam in their
> advertising, or report them to the Spanish police, who have, by the way,
> been doing a brisk business in rounding up Nigerian scam artists.
>
> The remailers that we have been talking about, started out with the premise,
> that people should be able to publish information, without having to worry
> about the secret police knocking on their door, or their boss finding out
> about their sexual preferences. In this case, they are being used for
> something completely different. The owner of one service, dizum.com, claims
> that he will take steps to prevent or stop abuse, but it appears that he
> does not mean this.
>
> Earle
>
> "admin" <admin.26vl3n@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x> wrote in message
> news:admin.26vl3n@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x...
> >
> > spam on usenet is not a new problem, may be new to this group - but all
> > the unmoderated groups get it at some level. Need I mention the
> > alt.binaries with all the piracy going on there - I haven't heard much
> > effort from the film & music industry trying to stop that - they only
> > go after the p2p software. It's virtually impossible to stop someone
> > from posting something on usenet. Sure you could create some deterents
> > - but where there's a will - there's a way.
> >
> >
> > Earle Horton Wrote:
> > > This is true, but Google Groups requires one to provide an identity, or
> > > at
> > > least a valid email address, before posting. The possible penalty for
> > > abuse
> > > is loss of posting privileges on Google and loss of mailing privileges.
> > > Now
> > > Hotmail accounts are free, as are Google privileges, but it does take
> > > some
> > > effort to set them up. So you can lose something, if you are caught
> > > abusing
> > > privileges on Google Groups.
> > >
> > > On the other hand, there is no at-risk investment with using anonymous
> > > remailers. It does take time to set up the encryption software and
> > > figure
> > > out the remailer routes, but once that is done, one can apparently post
> > > with
> > > impunity. Now if the abuse continues, at the present level, then
> > > changes in
> > > the structure of Usenet, to disallow anonymous remailers, is one
> > > possible
> > > result. If all the servers block postings through dizum.com, for
> > > example,
> > > then it is dead for this purpose.
> > >
> > > I can see why anonymous remailers came into being in the first place.
> > > It is
> > > so people, with something to hide, can continue to express themselves
> > > publicly. Now I am all for free speech, but I am not so sure that free
> > > speech rights include being able to hide one's true identity. Whatever
> > > socially redeeming function these anonymous remailers are alleged to
> > > provide, it appears to be swamped by the sheer amount of garbage that
> > > they
> > > propagate.
> > >
> > > Earle
> > >
> > > "admin" <admin.26usec@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x> wrote in message
> > > news:admin.26usec@no-mx-wranglergear.com.x...
> > > >
> > > > There is no way to block someone from posting on Usenet.
> > > > anyone could just walk into a public library and use Google Groups,
> > > or
> > > > use their Internet connection at work, or even a cell phone, etc.
> > > etc.
> > > >
> > > > This is just the way Usenet works.
> > > > It's greatest strength is also it's greatest weakness.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Jeff DeWitt Wrote:
> > > > > I wonder if it would be possible for the ISP's to filter out posts
> > > from
> > > > > these anonymous remailers? After all all of this stuff has to come
> > > > > through their servers and it's wasting good bandwidth and annoying
> > > > > their
> > > > > customers.
> > > > >
> > > > > Jeff DeWitt
> > > > >
> > > > > Earle Horton wrote:
> > > > > > Bill,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The most abusive postings seem to come from anonymous remailers.
> > > As
> > > > > far as
> > > > > > I can figure out, these exist, solely to allow people to abuse
> > > Usenet
> > > > > with
> > > > > > impunity. I have heard "freedom of speech", "freedom from
> > > political
> > > > > > persecution", etc. argued for the existence of these pests, but
> > > all I
> > > > > have
> > > > > > **seen** coming from them, is abuse.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Any clue what to do about them?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Earle
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:444AEDAE.98785F4F@***.net...
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>Hi Josh,
> > > > > >> You may help by reporting the abuse to the addresses you find in
> > > > > >>their header. That's the only way we may remove the trolls that
> > > would
> > > > > >>spam our groups. Learn how to via: SPAM COMPLAINTS -
> > > > > >>http://spam.abuse.net/userhelp/howtocomplain.shtml
> > > > > >>USENET COMPLAINTS -
> > > > > http://www.cybernothing.org/faqs/net-abuse-faq.html
> > > > > >>PROBE ATTEMPTS - http://online.securityfocus.com/news/9
> > > > > >> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> > > > > >>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>Josh Piela wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>>Hi everyone,
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> What has happened to this newsgroup? I am starting to
> > > understand
> > > > > that
> > > > > >>>Bill has pissed the wrong person off this time. Correct?? Is
> > > there
> > > > > any
> > > > > >
> > > > > > way
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>that we can fix this group? I looked forward to visiting this
> > > board
> > > > > >
> > > > > > daily
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>and reading about the wonderful world of jeeps. It's a world I
> > > miss
> > > > > >
> > > > > > allot
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>and I really enjoy reading everyone's moments with their jeeps.
> > > Now
> > > > > >
> > > > > > it's
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>getting to be a bit much, with all this terribly unnecessary
> > > > > vulgarity.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>am not looking to **** anyone off here, just wondering what the
> > > deal
> > > > > is
> > > > > >
> > > > > > with
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>>all the crap that is being posted.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > admin
> > > > ----- Posted via http://www.wranglergear.com
> > > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > admin
> > ----- Posted via http://www.wranglergear.com
> >
04-26-2006 | 07:38 PM
#347
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: what exactly happened here?
In article <44501057.A2127A20@***.net>,
"L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote:
> This must be the guy that lives in Austin, absolutely the stupidest
> jerk on the face of the earth. Maybe, if you could figure out the
> equivalent effects of California's compressed gases of a typical Santa
> Anna. Go back to school little girlie.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Popular Austinite actual bumpersticker "Keep Austin Weird"
Austin, otherwise known as the "Third Coast"
Liberal Texas
yuk
--
Member AAAAAAAA
American Association Against Acronym Abuse And Also Ambiguity.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
"L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote:
> This must be the guy that lives in Austin, absolutely the stupidest
> jerk on the face of the earth. Maybe, if you could figure out the
> equivalent effects of California's compressed gases of a typical Santa
> Anna. Go back to school little girlie.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Popular Austinite actual bumpersticker "Keep Austin Weird"
Austin, otherwise known as the "Third Coast"
Liberal Texas
yuk
--
Member AAAAAAAA
American Association Against Acronym Abuse And Also Ambiguity.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
04-26-2006 | 07:38 PM
#348
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: what exactly happened here?
In article <44501057.A2127A20@***.net>,
"L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote:
> This must be the guy that lives in Austin, absolutely the stupidest
> jerk on the face of the earth. Maybe, if you could figure out the
> equivalent effects of California's compressed gases of a typical Santa
> Anna. Go back to school little girlie.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Popular Austinite actual bumpersticker "Keep Austin Weird"
Austin, otherwise known as the "Third Coast"
Liberal Texas
yuk
--
Member AAAAAAAA
American Association Against Acronym Abuse And Also Ambiguity.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
"L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote:
> This must be the guy that lives in Austin, absolutely the stupidest
> jerk on the face of the earth. Maybe, if you could figure out the
> equivalent effects of California's compressed gases of a typical Santa
> Anna. Go back to school little girlie.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Popular Austinite actual bumpersticker "Keep Austin Weird"
Austin, otherwise known as the "Third Coast"
Liberal Texas
yuk
--
Member AAAAAAAA
American Association Against Acronym Abuse And Also Ambiguity.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
04-26-2006 | 07:38 PM
#349
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: what exactly happened here?
In article <44501057.A2127A20@***.net>,
"L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote:
> This must be the guy that lives in Austin, absolutely the stupidest
> jerk on the face of the earth. Maybe, if you could figure out the
> equivalent effects of California's compressed gases of a typical Santa
> Anna. Go back to school little girlie.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Popular Austinite actual bumpersticker "Keep Austin Weird"
Austin, otherwise known as the "Third Coast"
Liberal Texas
yuk
--
Member AAAAAAAA
American Association Against Acronym Abuse And Also Ambiguity.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
"L.W.(Bill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote:
> This must be the guy that lives in Austin, absolutely the stupidest
> jerk on the face of the earth. Maybe, if you could figure out the
> equivalent effects of California's compressed gases of a typical Santa
> Anna. Go back to school little girlie.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Popular Austinite actual bumpersticker "Keep Austin Weird"
Austin, otherwise known as the "Third Coast"
Liberal Texas
yuk
--
Member AAAAAAAA
American Association Against Acronym Abuse And Also Ambiguity.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
04-26-2006 | 08:17 PM
#350
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: what exactly happened here?
Hi Mike,
I miss @Hosed. And to think how much I bad mouth their censorship.
And those groups were huge, thousands of posts a day.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Mike Romain wrote:
>
> If Bill really wants to get ambitious, he should start a UDP on the
> remailers that allow folks to only get an account so they can abuse the
> system. If they don't want to clean up their act, block their domain
> like was threatened to the @home network a few years back.
>
> That usually wakes them up or closes them down....
>
> Mike
I miss @Hosed. And to think how much I bad mouth their censorship.
And those groups were huge, thousands of posts a day.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Mike Romain wrote:
>
> If Bill really wants to get ambitious, he should start a UDP on the
> remailers that allow folks to only get an account so they can abuse the
> system. If they don't want to clean up their act, block their domain
> like was threatened to the @home network a few years back.
>
> That usually wakes them up or closes them down....
>
> Mike