Shame, Shame Shame on you Phil Allison

[Brian Goldsmith]

"Eric" <eric_hood@mac.com> wrote

It has been 2 or 3 years since P.A. started his stupidity on this ng.I kf
him in the early days but still have to read his nonsense because others
insist upon replying to his garbage.
He will not simply go away , he will stoop to what ever level he has to to
get a reaction .Just stop replying to him ladies and gentlemen whether he
makes a sensible post or not , then perhaps he may get bored.
Gordon

I agree, I have been reading more of his rubbish since I killfiled him
than I was before. perhaps people could remove his posts before they
respond?

Eric

****** Er,what a mindless,moronic statement this is!
Do you also believe in the tooth fairy?

Brian Goldsmith.

 

On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 07:27:23 GMT, Eric <eric_hood@mac.com> wrote:

On 2004-12-29 16:58:26 +1000, "GMac" <gor2003@smartchat.net.au> said:


"paul packer" <packer@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
news:41d24181.1330943@news.iprimus.com.au...
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 00:05:00 +0800, "corks"
corks67@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote:

why even pay attention to him for fuck sakes, ignore the troll ands he
might
just go away

Any guarantees with that?
It has been 2 or 3 years since P.A. started his stupidity on this ng.I kf
him in the early days but still have to read his nonsense because others
insist upon replying to his garbage.
He will not simply go away , he will stoop to what ever level he has to to
get a reaction .Just stop replying to him ladies and gentlemen whether he
makes a sensible post or not , then perhaps he may get bored.
Gordon


I agree, I have been reading more of his rubbish since I killfiled him
than I was before. perhaps people could remove his posts before they
respond?

Eric

Er that is not on...removing his posts ,or rather cancelling them from
the newsgroup after they have been posted is a clear violation of your
internet user agreement .If found out you could have your internet
provider cancel your account....so I would strongly recommend that you
don't do it, no matter how easy it is to do ..(especially if you use
free agent).

 

[Eric]

On 2004-12-29 17:34:58 +1000, "Brian Goldsmith"
<brian.goldsmith@nospam.echo1.com.au> said:

"Eric" <eric_hood@mac.com> wrote

It has been 2 or 3 years since P.A. started his stupidity on this ng.I kf
him in the early days but still have to read his nonsense because others
insist upon replying to his garbage.
He will not simply go away , he will stoop to what ever level he has to to
get a reaction .Just stop replying to him ladies and gentlemen whether he
makes a sensible post or not , then perhaps he may get bored.
Gordon


I agree, I have been reading more of his rubbish since I killfiled him
than I was before. perhaps people could remove his posts before they
respond?

Eric

****** Er,what a mindless,moronic statement this is!
Do you also believe in the tooth fairy?

Brian Goldsmith.

But of course.

 

[Eric]

On 2004-12-29 17:35:53 +1000, nowayJose@freespeech.com said:

On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 07:27:23 GMT, Eric <eric_hood@mac.com> wrote:

On 2004-12-29 16:58:26 +1000, "GMac" <gor2003@smartchat.net.au> said:


"paul packer" <packer@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
news:41d24181.1330943@news.iprimus.com.au...
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 00:05:00 +0800, "corks"
corks67@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote:

why even pay attention to him for fuck sakes, ignore the troll ands he
might
just go away

Any guarantees with that?
It has been 2 or 3 years since P.A. started his stupidity on this ng.I kf
him in the early days but still have to read his nonsense because others
insist upon replying to his garbage.
He will not simply go away , he will stoop to what ever level he has to to
get a reaction .Just stop replying to him ladies and gentlemen whether he
makes a sensible post or not , then perhaps he may get bored.
Gordon


I agree, I have been reading more of his rubbish since I killfiled him
than I was before. perhaps people could remove his posts before they
respond?

Eric

snip snip snip

Are we talking about the same thing? I am talking about removing them
from the response that you write. Like I have done to you.

Eric

 

[Brian Goldsmith]

"Eric" <eric_hood@mac.com> wrote

Are we talking about the same thing? I am talking about removing them
from the response that you write. Like I have done to you.

Eric

******You forgot about the "Subject"!!!!

Oh dear,the tooth fairy has struck again!

Brian Goldsmith.

 

[Max Harding vk3jin]

and I'm not related.. Max
"Phil Allison" <philallison@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:33c58dF3t80buU1@individual.net...

"Mike Harding" = gutless, egomaniac, pommy bastard plus ham


** How come your name does not appear in the ACA ham license register -
arsehole ?

http://www.aca.gov.au/pls/radcom/register_search.search_dispatcher

( The MG Harding on that list is a Max - not Mike. )


Using a fake name on usenet too are you ???

Maybe you are desperate, illegal pommy immigrant ??

What a cowering, gutless pommy turd is Mike Harding.

Even other hams find him a revolting bully.






.............. Phil

 

[Phil Allison]

"Max Harding vk3jin"

and I'm not related.. Max

** I never imagined a gentle soul like Max could be.

73 to you.




............. Phil

 

[Eddie]

whats this free agent?
sounds like the ideal terminator

.....so I would strongly recommend that you

don't do it, no matter how easy it is to do ..(especially if you use
free agent).

 

[Alan Rutlidge]

"Eddie" <eddie_bounce@optusnet.com> wrote in message
news:41d28606$0$1119$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

whats this free agent?
sounds like the ideal terminator

....so I would strongly recommend that you
don't do it, no matter how easy it is to do ..(especially if you use
free agent).


Hi Eddie,

Free Agent is a news reader program.

http://www.forteinc.com/main/homepage.php

Cheers,
Alan

 

[Eric]

On 2004-12-29 19:29:44 +1000, "Brian Goldsmith"
<brian.goldsmith@nospam.echo1.com.au> said:

"Eric" <eric_hood@mac.com> wrote

Are we talking about the same thing? I am talking about removing them
from the response that you write. Like I have done to you.

Eric

******You forgot about the "Subject"!!!!

Oh dear,the tooth fairy has struck again!

Brian Goldsmith.

Thanks. I had obviously not bothered.

 

[paul]

Galimatias wrote:

Eddie wrote:


cant someone pressuure his isp to terminate him, his obsene and
profane rantings need to be stopped, maybe a return to the "good old
days" are needed. The world will be a better place when he is gone,
i'm sad to say. Eddie


Your cure may be worse than the ailment. Whatever you think of a person's
postings on Usenet, they don't do much harm, and you don't have to read
them.

On the other hand, censorship is dangerous.



Maybe the biggest pity is that it discourages use of the groups affected.

I wonder how many people with information to share don't actively
participate because of the ongoing abuse.
I recall this subject featured in a Silicon Chip editorial a year or two
back.

There's a security alarms group that I follow occasionally which suffers
a similar problem.

 

[Rob]

paul wrote:

Galimatias wrote:

Eddie wrote:


cant someone pressuure his isp to terminate him, his obsene and
profane rantings need to be stopped, maybe a return to the "good old
days" are needed. The world will be a better place when he is gone,
i'm sad to say. Eddie



Your cure may be worse than the ailment. Whatever you think of a
person's
postings on Usenet, they don't do much harm, and you don't have to read
them.

On the other hand, censorship is dangerous.



Maybe the biggest pity is that it discourages use of the groups affected.
I wonder how many people with information to share don't actively
participate because of the ongoing abuse.
I recall this subject featured in a Silicon Chip editorial a year or two
back.

There's a security alarms group that I follow occasionally which suffers
a similar problem.

For Hi-Fi the SNR around here is pretty poor.

Rob

 

[Galimatias]

paul wrote:

Galimatias wrote:
Eddie wrote:


cant someone pressuure his isp to terminate him, his obsene and
profane rantings need to be stopped, maybe a return to the "good old
days" are needed. The world will be a better place when he is gone,
i'm sad to say. Eddie


Your cure may be worse than the ailment. Whatever you think of a
person's postings on Usenet, they don't do much harm, and you don't
have to read them.

On the other hand, censorship is dangerous.

Maybe the biggest pity is that it discourages use of the groups
affected. I wonder how many people with information to share don't
actively participate because of the ongoing abuse.
I recall this subject featured in a Silicon Chip editorial a year or
two back.

In the RW, we all get our share of annoyances, and most deal with it in a
fairly relaxed fashion. Usenet is no different, unless you consider an
annoyance in the form of abuse or other OT comment too much to bear. There
have been few people damaged by their active, even vigorous, participation
in NGs.

There's a security alarms group that I follow occasionally which
suffers a similar problem.

 

[paul packer]

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 12:50:08 +1100, "Galimatias"
<clamour@incoherence.org> wrote:

There
have been few people damaged by their active, even vigorous, participation
in NGs.

Would you be able to post proof of this?

 

[Galimatias]

paul packer wrote:

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 12:50:08 +1100, "Galimatias"
clamour@incoherence.org> wrote:

There
have been few people damaged by their active, even vigorous,
participation in NGs.

Would you be able to post proof of this?

Yes.

 

[Brian Goldsmith]

"Galimatias" <clamour@incoherence.org>

In the RW, we all get our share of annoyances, and most deal with it in a
fairly relaxed fashion. Usenet is no different, unless you consider an
annoyance in the form of abuse or other OT comment too much to bear. There
have been few people damaged by their active, even vigorous, participation
in NGs.

****Please elaborate on the last sentence.Did you mean there have been a few
people damaged or did you mean there have been very few people damaged,the
difference in meaning is great.
Thanks,Brian Goldsmith.

 

[Galimatias]

Brian Goldsmith wrote:

"Galimatias" <clamour@incoherence.org

In the RW, we all get our share of annoyances, and most deal with it
in a fairly relaxed fashion. Usenet is no different, unless you
consider an annoyance in the form of abuse or other OT comment too
much to bear. There have been few people damaged by their active,
even vigorous, participation in NGs.

****Please elaborate on the last sentence.

More than happy to do so. Please put $200 in $5 notes into a plain A4
envelope addressed to me and let me know when it is ready.

Did you mean there have
been a few people damaged or did you mean there have been very few
people damaged,the difference in meaning is great.

Yes. Worrying, isn't it? I take it that English is a second language for
you.

Thanks,Brian Goldsmith.

No problem, Brian. I'm sure it will be nice doing business with you.

 

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 19:47:43 +1100, "Galimatias"
<clamour@incoherence.org> wrote:

Brian Goldsmith wrote:
"Galimatias" <clamour@incoherence.org

In the RW, we all get our share of annoyances, and most deal with it
in a fairly relaxed fashion. Usenet is no different, unless you
consider an annoyance in the form of abuse or other OT comment too
much to bear. There have been few people damaged by their active,
even vigorous, participation in NGs.

****Please elaborate on the last sentence.

More than happy to do so. Please put $200 in $5 notes into a plain A4
envelope addressed to me and let me know when it is ready.

Did you mean there have
been a few people damaged or did you mean there have been very few
people damaged,the difference in meaning is great.

Yes. Worrying, isn't it? I take it that English is a second language for
you.

Thanks,Brian Goldsmith.

No problem, Brian. I'm sure it will be nice doing business with you.

few = not many

whether he meant "very few" or "a few", probably makes no difference
in actual numbers, but just shows us that the poster has trouble
typing proper English.

Of course it would be a help if the poster could actually construct
his sentences properly,using correct syntax.
But then again on the internet bad english is common.
and of course bad manners is common as well.

Funny how people use bad language, when shown to be
wrong.

 

[Galimatias]

tryingtoworkout@badsyntaxcorner.com wrote:

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 19:47:43 +1100, "Galimatias"
clamour@incoherence.org> wrote:

Brian Goldsmith wrote:
"Galimatias" <clamour@incoherence.org

In the RW, we all get our share of annoyances, and most deal with it
in a fairly relaxed fashion. Usenet is no different, unless you
consider an annoyance in the form of abuse or other OT comment too
much to bear. There have been few people damaged by their active,
even vigorous, participation in NGs.

****Please elaborate on the last sentence.

More than happy to do so. Please put $200 in $5 notes into a plain
A4 envelope addressed to me and let me know when it is ready.

Did you mean there have
been a few people damaged or did you mean there have been very few
people damaged,the difference in meaning is great.

Yes. Worrying, isn't it? I take it that English is a second
language for you.

Thanks,Brian Goldsmith.

No problem, Brian. I'm sure it will be nice doing business with you.



few = not many

whether he meant "very few" or "a few", probably makes no difference
in actual numbers, but just shows us that the poster has trouble
typing proper English.

Of course it would be a help if the poster could actually construct
his sentences properly,using correct syntax.
But then again on the internet bad english is common.
and of course bad manners is common as well.

Funny how people use bad language, when shown to be
wrong.

Please have the goodness to indicate the "bad manners" and the "bad
language" in any of the above. Could you also indicate how you deduced that
the poster was a "he". You may or may not be correct. My interest is in
the reasoning process. Thank you very much.

 

[Max Harding vk3jin]

thank you Phil Have a happy new year.
"Phil Allison" <philallison@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:33fevnF3uks7cU1@individual.net...

"Max Harding vk3jin"

and I'm not related.. Max



** I never imagined a gentle soul like Max could be.

73 to you.




............ Phil