RE: New heights of spam from Choate and MattX
-- On 15 Mar 2002, at 15:13, Trei, Peter wrote: > mattd has actually improved slightly as well - some of his > messages are actually on-topic, and reference other's > postings appropriately. This inspired me to glance through my shit folder, into which I filter spam, the deranged, etc. Yes. Relevance is up, abuse is down. Volume remains as ever, as does total disconnection from reality. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG tIxhzPShJMRdeRZzekp1vRQYN036UNxK80zXkPan 4y0AvcepLNhiI7pxoh+5HPSVtrcAnS0+yatCctumA
Re: New heights of spam from Choate and MattX
At 05:28 PM 3/15/02 -0800, Tim May wrote: >rest of drug-addled gibberish elided > >Hey, with all of the folks offering "reformatted" repostings of rehashed >repeats of old news here, can't anybody offer to translate this >architect/nutcase guy's posts from his internal crackpipe lingo into >something resembling English? > >--Tim May Write your own damn translator if you can't hack the prose. WTF, Tim, is it that time of the month again? "Take a stress pill, Dave" --HAL
Re: New heights of spam from Choate and MattX
No you drop me a line you may be the bastarded who killed my wife and kids. On 15 Mar 2002 at 14:43, j eric townsend wrote: > At 09:29 -0800 2002/03/15, Tim May wrote: > >Being away from the Net for nearly 24 hours, I wondered why I was > >getting 90 e-mails downloading, but only about 16 messages in my > >"Cypherpunks" filtered mailbox. So I looked at what the cat drug in: > > Here's an idea -- why not use whatever you use to filter things into > your cypherpunks mailbox to first filter out anything from people you > don't want to read instead of whining to everyone on the list about > how much they send that you don't want to read? > > -- > J. Eric Townsend -- http://www.spies.com/jet > > Were you in USASSG/ACSI/MACV in Vietnam, 1967-1970? Drop me a line if so...
Re: New heights of spam from Choate and MattX
J. Eric wrote: >Here's an idea -- why not use whatever you use to filter things into >your cypherpunks mailbox to first filter out anything from people you >don't want to read instead of whining to everyone on the list about >how much they send that you don't want to read? This appears sound at first and second glance, and is often recommended. Moderation is similarly considered to be constructive way to weed out what is not wanted. And gates and fences of the mind and language and behavior. Some folks recommend mail bombing offenders, stoning them with onlist opprobrium and ridicule, reporting them to whatever authority is willing to chop the tongues, toes and fingers of miscreants, and then there's the pleasurable notions of assassinating, butt fucking, well, pipe lay our lady but the vulgarine is mighty addictive, so back to what reasonable people do to the unreasonable: call them idiots, throw in the SHU, revoke their license to ape their betters, plot to rasp their human rights, then get down and dirty to rip their constitutional rights to shreds, and when push comes to shove, the uppities aiming payback, hazard your own rights by blowing the shit out of foreign and domestic enemies, so goddam frustrating is it to shut the whiners up who won't keep to their pre-ordained position under the puke spigot, fer chrissakes, well-mannered english-speakers are hard to come by, chinga tu madre, companero?
Re: New heights of spam from Choate and MattX
On Friday, March 15, 2002, at 08:14 PM, John Young wrote: > J. Eric wrote: > >> Here's an idea -- why not use whatever you use to filter things into >> your cypherpunks mailbox to first filter out anything from people you >> don't want to read instead of whining to everyone on the list about >> how much they send that you don't want to read? > > This appears sound at first and second glance, and is often > recommended. Moderation is similarly considered to be > constructive way to weed out what is not wanted. And gates > and fences of the mind and language and behavior. Some > folks recommend mail bombing offenders, stoning them with > onlist opprobrium and ridicule, reporting them to whatever > authority is willing to chop the tongues, toes and fingers of > miscreants, and then there's the pleasurable notions of > assassinating, butt fucking, well, pipe lay our lady but the > vulgarine is mighty addictive, so back to what reasonable > people do to the unreasonable: call them idiots, throw in > the SHU, revoke their license to ape their betters, rest of drug-addled gibberish elided Hey, with all of the folks offering "reformatted" repostings of rehashed repeats of old news here, can't anybody offer to translate this architect/nutcase guy's posts from his internal crackpipe lingo into something resembling English? --Tim May
Re: New heights of spam from Choate and MattX
On Friday, March 15, 2002, at 02:43 PM, j eric townsend wrote: > At 09:29 -0800 2002/03/15, Tim May wrote: >> Being away from the Net for nearly 24 hours, I wondered why I was >> getting 90 e-mails downloading, but only about 16 messages in my >> "Cypherpunks" filtered mailbox. So I looked at what the cat drug in: > > Here's an idea -- why not use whatever you use to filter things into > your cypherpunks mailbox to first filter out anything from people you > don't want to read instead of whining to everyone on the list about how > much they send that you don't want to read? > > -- J. Eric Townsend -- http://www.spies.com/jet > > Were you in USASSG/ACSI/MACV in Vietnam, 1967-1970? Drop me a line if > so... > No, I wasn't. But on the issue of filtering first, this is of course what I have been doing for years. But noting that one poster has spammed the list with more than 25 articles in a span of about 24 hours and another has spammed the list with only a slightly lesser amount, accounting for two thirds of the total list traffic during that period, is worth commenting on. As for my "whining," you need to get some sense of reality. --Tim May, Occupied America "They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759.
Re: New heights of spam from Choate and MattX
At 09:29 -0800 2002/03/15, Tim May wrote: >Being away from the Net for nearly 24 hours, I wondered why I was >getting 90 e-mails downloading, but only about 16 messages in my >"Cypherpunks" filtered mailbox. So I looked at what the cat drug in: Here's an idea -- why not use whatever you use to filter things into your cypherpunks mailbox to first filter out anything from people you don't want to read instead of whining to everyone on the list about how much they send that you don't want to read? -- J. Eric Townsend -- http://www.spies.com/jet Were you in USASSG/ACSI/MACV in Vietnam, 1967-1970? Drop me a line if so...
Re: CDR: RE: New heights of spam from Choate and MattX
On Fri, 15 Mar 2002, Trei, Peter wrote: > mattd has actually improved slightly as well - some of his messages > are actually on-topic, and reference other's postings appropriately. > It's been a full week since he's called for my violent death. An entire *week*? Naw. Not possible... If not you, then _who_??? -- Yours, J.A. Terranson [EMAIL PROTECTED] If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the first place...
RE: New heights of spam from Choate and MattX
> Tim May[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > > > Being away from the Net for nearly 24 hours, I wondered why I was > getting 90 e-mails downloading, but only about 16 messages in my > "Cypherpunks" filtered mailbox. So I looked at what the cat drug in: > > -- 29 messages from Choate, the usual forwarded Slashdot, kuroshin, CNN, > Register articles > > (doesn't even count about 6-8 messages he sent earlier yesterday...I'm > only counting since I was last on the Net!) > > -- 22 messages from MattX/proffr/whackamole > > (ditto, he sent some earlier messages as well) > > So, it looks like in the race to swamp the list with junk, Choate is a > hair ahead of the other pinhead. > > I know Choate is a strange character, but what does he think is being > accomplished by sending 25-35 forwarded items to the list in a single > day? > Jim's actually improved quite a bit - at least he no longer includes the entire HTML page as an attachment. At this point, two things would be nice: 1. To hold his enthusiasm in check long enough to gather up a whole day's references, and bundle them into one message. 2. Give a single sentence description as to why each link is worth the trouble. mattd has actually improved slightly as well - some of his messages are actually on-topic, and reference other's postings appropriately. It's been a full week since he's called for my violent death. However, he is still using the list as a private archiving service. Peter > --Tim May >
