Blocking senders

"~ janj" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 18:52:56 -0500, Galen Hekhuis
wrote:

Early on, before we even got around to the first draft of the RFD, the
subject of "blacklisting" or blocking posters based on IP number, nym, or
any of a number of different criteria. The suggestion was met with a
resounding "NO." Even if someone were to hold hostage and threaten to
kill
a cute kitten unless we "blacklisted" someone, we still wouldn't block a
poster. We aren't even looking at ways to do it, so we may not even be
able to do it even if we wanted to. If a post is civil and about ponds,
there is little doubt that it would be approved, no matter who submitted
it. Let me make it perfectly clear, we will allow anyone to post no
matter
how many cute kittens someone threatens to kill. There are NO plans to
moderate RPM on anything other than content. Of course, if someone
threatens cute bunnies we may have to rethink that...

I don't know about you Galen, but if a post comes thru on my watch
threatening to kill anything if we mods don't do something, I'll be
hitting
the reject button. :-) ~ jan

What Jan said.

Gail

On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 20:52:29 GMT, "Gail Futoran"
wrote:

"~ janj" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 18:52:56 -0500, Galen Hekhuis
wrote:

Early on, before we even got around to the first draft of the RFD, the
subject of "blacklisting" or blocking posters based on IP number, nym, or
any of a number of different criteria. The suggestion was met with a
resounding "NO." Even if someone were to hold hostage and threaten to
kill
a cute kitten unless we "blacklisted" someone, we still wouldn't block a
poster. We aren't even looking at ways to do it, so we may not even be
able to do it even if we wanted to. If a post is civil and about ponds,
there is little doubt that it would be approved, no matter who submitted
it. Let me make it perfectly clear, we will allow anyone to post no
matter
how many cute kittens someone threatens to kill. There are NO plans to
moderate RPM on anything other than content. Of course, if someone
threatens cute bunnies we may have to rethink that...

I don't know about you Galen, but if a post comes thru on my watch
threatening to kill anything if we mods don't do something, I'll be
hitting
the reject button. :-) ~ jan

What Jan said.

Hey gang, maybe y'all should re-read the thing. I said nothing about
receiving a post that threatened us to take some action. I mentioned that
we had no plans to "blacklist" anyone, and that threats of any kind (I used
killing kittens, but it could have been puppies or anything) were quite
unlikely to make us do so. Threatening *posts* are an entirely different
matter.

--
Galen Hekhuis NpD, JFR, GWA
Hell hath no fury like a bird in the hand.

Galen Hekhuis wrote:
On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 20:52:29 GMT, "Gail Futoran"
"~ janj" wrote in message
Galen Hekhuis wrote:
[ . . . ]
Hey gang, maybe y'all should re-read the thing. I said nothing about
receiving a post that threatened us to take some action. I mentioned
that we had no plans to "blacklist" anyone, and that threats of any kind
(I used killing kittens, but it could have been puppies or anything) were
quite unlikely to make us do so. Threatening *posts* are an entirely
different matter.

Playing Devil's Advocate here. So, if I say that, if you don't post my post
to rpm, I will kill YOU, would be treated differently than if I said I
would kill a baby kitten or all your koi?

--
Nick. Support severely wounded and disabled Veterans and their families!

Thank a Veteran and Support Our Troops. You are not forgotten. Thanks ! ! !
~Semper Fi~

Galen Hekhuis wrote:
On 21 Dec 2006 22:21:44 GMT, wrote:

Playing Devil's Advocate here. So, if I say that, if you don't post my
post to rpm, I will kill YOU, would be treated differently than if I
said I would kill a baby kitten or all your koi?

I don't care if you threaten me, my kittens, my koi, (my tractor is a
different story), or much of anything, I still won't be "blacklisting"
folks. If you kill me, I sure won't be "blacklisting" anyone. Now if
you send me a threatening post, that's entirely different, and the post
may be returned, indeed, it may have a number of things done with it,
such as forwarding the post to various people and agencies. It probably
wouldn't get posted, as it is difficult for me to imagine how one could
make a "civil" threat, although there is something to be said for making
such threats public. Anyway, the whole thrust of the article was to say
that "blocking senders" was not on the table, nor did I feel that any
threats would be effective in making us block a particular sender.

Good! I, in fact, would never threaten harm to anyone or anything.

--
Nick. Support severely wounded and disabled Veterans and their families!

Thank a Veteran and Support Our Troops. You are not forgotten. Thanks ! ! !
~Semper Fi~

On 21 Dec 2006 22:21:44 GMT, wrote:

Playing Devil's Advocate here. So, if I say that, if you don't post my post
to rpm, I will kill YOU, would be treated differently than if I said I
would kill a baby kitten or all your koi?

I don't care if you threaten me, my kittens, my koi, (my tractor is a
different story), or much of anything, I still won't be "blacklisting"
folks. If you kill me, I sure won't be "blacklisting" anyone. Now if you
send me a threatening post, that's entirely different, and the post may be
returned, indeed, it may have a number of things done with it, such as
forwarding the post to various people and agencies. It probably wouldn't
get posted, as it is difficult for me to imagine how one could make a
"civil" threat, although there is something to be said for making such
threats public. Anyway, the whole thrust of the article was to say that
"blocking senders" was not on the table, nor did I feel that any threats
would be effective in making us block a particular sender.

--
Galen Hekhuis NpD, JFR, GWA
Hell hath no fury like a bird in the hand.

tsk tsk tsk....its not any of your concern why I do what I do.....now
is it Gail. You worry about your own dam ass and I'll see that mine is
taken care of. But yu may be surprised there is reaally very few
assholes that really hate me.Its mianly a few centered around the
moderation crap and choices, and of course Carol, but who the hell
reallyb cares what you or anyone else cares, its only USENET! I may
have a lot of experience and stuff to offer but its not gonna be on
this medium by any means....You know I do not have any problems on web
based forums, evidently they are not as much of pampered assholes like
this bunch is!






On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 20:50:05 GMT, "Gail Futoran"
wrote:

"Tristan" wrote in message
m...


So we are free to kill as many kittens rthen? I am not into hostage
keeping, as you got to feed the useless captives. I rather kill
em............

I guess one could always send em to Carol Gulley "collect" or mayabe
to San Antonio area collect to Gail! Then their refusal to pay collect
charges would result in "Their" killing of the kittens......no such
thing as a cute kitten. Dead kittens and cats rule! Only good cat or
kitten is a flat roadkill or otherwise dead one.

I have read your on-topic posts in rec.ponds and
the aquaria newsgroups. You have a lot of
experience and a lot to offer others on the
subjects of ponds and aquariums.

I honesty do not understand why you are so
determined to make other people hate you so
much they will cease reading your posts - of
any kind. It is a deep mystery to me.

Gail




-------
I forgot more about ponds and koi than I'll ever know!

"Tristan" wrote in message
...


tsk tsk tsk....its not any of your concern why I do what I do.....now
is it Gail. You worry about your own dam ass and I'll see that mine is
taken care of.

It is my concern when you attack me personally
for no reason.

But yu may be surprised there is reaally very few
assholes that really hate me.

It is incredibly easy to overlook misbehavior
in newsgroups until one becomes the victim of
those attacks.

The ONLY reason I have been engaging you is
because of the rec.ponds.moderated proposal and
my commitment to be involved in the discussion,
no matter how distasteful at times.

Its mianly a few centered around the
moderation crap and choices,

No. I have seen the same kind of behavior
you exhibit in rec.ponds occurring in all
manner of newsgroups. It's a function of
basic civility, or the lack thereof, not any
procedures under discussion.

and of course Carol,

Your behavior online has nothing to do with
"Carol". It has to do with YOUR choices.
People who have no clue as to your history
or "Carol's" history on rec.ponds have been
victims of your attacks.

but who the hell
reallyb cares what you or anyone else cares, its only USENET!

It is easy to deny that words have effects in
real life. Anyone who uses that excuse is
deluding himself or herself.

I may
have a lot of experience and stuff to offer but its not gonna be on
this medium by any means....

Then go away. ::shrug:: After all, as
you say, it's "only USENET".

You know I do not have any problems on web
based forums,

I do not "know" that at all, since I tend to avoid
web based forums.

evidently they are not as much of pampered assholes like
this bunch is!

Many web based forums are strictly controlled,
much more so than is typical on USENET
newsgroups. Behavior such as you have
exhibited on rec.ponds in the recent weeks would
get you banned permanently from many
web based forums. Ergo, your statement
makes no sense.

Gail

Get a ckue GAil get a ****ing clue, YOur getting off on this crap
plain and simple. I am glad something in all these years has caused
you to have an orgasim..............was it good, did it make you
shake and tremble and scream.....;-) ....Attacking you I think not,
your seemto want to stay engaged in blow for blwo topics.....or you
would totally ignore any post , si thats proof to me you get off on
the attention like CArol, both of you are attention whores. So I
assume its safe to assume you have a deviate need to respond so you
can have an orgasim.........interesting to say the least! Now all we
have to do is figure out The Revs perversions!







On Fri, 22 Dec 2006 16:16:18 GMT, "Gail Futoran"
wrote:

"Tristan" wrote in message
m...


tsk tsk tsk....its not any of your concern why I do what I do.....now
is it Gail. You worry about your own dam ass and I'll see that mine is
taken care of.

It is my concern when you attack me personally
for no reason.

But yu may be surprised there is reaally very few
assholes that really hate me.

It is incredibly easy to overlook misbehavior
in newsgroups until one becomes the victim of
those attacks.

The ONLY reason I have been engaging you is
because of the rec.ponds.moderated proposal and
my commitment to be involved in the discussion,
no matter how distasteful at times.

Its mianly a few centered around the
moderation crap and choices,

No. I have seen the same kind of behavior
you exhibit in rec.ponds occurring in all
manner of newsgroups. It's a function of
basic civility, or the lack thereof, not any
procedures under discussion.

and of course Carol,

Your behavior online has nothing to do with
"Carol". It has to do with YOUR choices.
People who have no clue as to your history
or "Carol's" history on rec.ponds have been
victims of your attacks.

but who the hell
reallyb cares what you or anyone else cares, its only USENET!

It is easy to deny that words have effects in
real life. Anyone who uses that excuse is
deluding himself or herself.

I may
have a lot of experience and stuff to offer but its not gonna be on
this medium by any means....

Then go away. ::shrug:: After all, as
you say, it's "only USENET".

You know I do not have any problems on web
based forums,

I do not "know" that at all, since I tend to avoid
web based forums.

evidently they are not as much of pampered assholes like
this bunch is!

Many web based forums are strictly controlled,
much more so than is typical on USENET
newsgroups. Behavior such as you have
exhibited on rec.ponds in the recent weeks would
get you banned permanently from many
web based forums. Ergo, your statement
makes no sense.

Gail




-------
I forgot more about ponds and koi than I'll ever know!

Reposted for prosperity!


On Fri, 22 Dec 2006 10:25:01 -0600, Tristan
wrote:

Get a ckue GAil get a ****ing clue, YOur getting off on this crap
plain and simple. I am glad something in all these years has caused
you to have an orgasim..............was it good, did it make you
shake and tremble and scream.....;-) ....Attacking you I think not,
your seemto want to stay engaged in blow for blwo topics.....or you
would totally ignore any post , si thats proof to me you get off on
the attention like CArol, both of you are attention whores. So I
assume its safe to assume you have a deviate need to respond so you
can have an orgasim.........interesting to say the least! Now all we
have to do is figure out The Revs perversions!







On Fri, 22 Dec 2006 16:16:18 GMT, "Gail Futoran"
wrote:

"Tristan" wrote in message
news:017mo253kmjt33nlvblrdra2ir0thqahvt@4a x.com...


tsk tsk tsk....its not any of your concern why I do what I do.....now
is it Gail. You worry about your own dam ass and I'll see that mine is
taken care of.

It is my concern when you attack me personally
for no reason.

But yu may be surprised there is reaally very few
assholes that really hate me.

It is incredibly easy to overlook misbehavior
in newsgroups until one becomes the victim of
those attacks.

The ONLY reason I have been engaging you is
because of the rec.ponds.moderated proposal and
my commitment to be involved in the discussion,
no matter how distasteful at times.

Its mianly a few centered around the
moderation crap and choices,

No. I have seen the same kind of behavior
you exhibit in rec.ponds occurring in all
manner of newsgroups. It's a function of
basic civility, or the lack thereof, not any
procedures under discussion.

and of course Carol,

Your behavior online has nothing to do with
"Carol". It has to do with YOUR choices.
People who have no clue as to your history
or "Carol's" history on rec.ponds have been
victims of your attacks.

but who the hell
reallyb cares what you or anyone else cares, its only USENET!

It is easy to deny that words have effects in
real life. Anyone who uses that excuse is
deluding himself or herself.

I may
have a lot of experience and stuff to offer but its not gonna be on
this medium by any means....

Then go away. ::shrug:: After all, as
you say, it's "only USENET".

You know I do not have any problems on web
based forums,

I do not "know" that at all, since I tend to avoid
web based forums.

evidently they are not as much of pampered assholes like
this bunch is!

Many web based forums are strictly controlled,
much more so than is typical on USENET
newsgroups. Behavior such as you have
exhibited on rec.ponds in the recent weeks would
get you banned permanently from many
web based forums. Ergo, your statement
makes no sense.

Gail




-------
I forgot more about ponds and koi than I'll ever know!



-------
I forgot more about ponds and koi than I'll ever know!

And yet one more just to make sure folks get their moneys worth and it
brings gail yet more acid reflux!

Reposted for prosperity!


On Fri, 22 Dec 2006 10:25:01 -0600, Tristan
wrote:

Get a ckue GAil get a ****ing clue, YOur getting off on this crap
plain and simple. I am glad something in all these years has caused
you to have an orgasim..............was it good, did it make you
shake and tremble and scream.....;-) ....Attacking you I think not,
your seemto want to stay engaged in blow for blwo topics.....or you
would totally ignore any post , si thats proof to me you get off on
the attention like CArol, both of you are attention whores. So I
assume its safe to assume you have a deviate need to respond so you
can have an orgasim.........interesting to say the least! Now all we
have to do is figure out The Revs perversions!







On Fri, 22 Dec 2006 16:16:18 GMT, "Gail Futoran"
wrote:

"Tristan" wrote in message
news:017mo253kmjt33nlvblrdra2ir0thqahvt@4a x.com...


tsk tsk tsk....its not any of your concern why I do what I do.....now
is it Gail. You worry about your own dam ass and I'll see that mine is
taken care of.

It is my concern when you attack me personally
for no reason.

But yu may be surprised there is reaally very few
assholes that really hate me.

It is incredibly easy to overlook misbehavior
in newsgroups until one becomes the victim of
those attacks.

The ONLY reason I have been engaging you is
because of the rec.ponds.moderated proposal and
my commitment to be involved in the discussion,
no matter how distasteful at times.

Its mianly a few centered around the
moderation crap and choices,

No. I have seen the same kind of behavior
you exhibit in rec.ponds occurring in all
manner of newsgroups. It's a function of
basic civility, or the lack thereof, not any
procedures under discussion.

and of course Carol,

Your behavior online has nothing to do with
"Carol". It has to do with YOUR choices.
People who have no clue as to your history
or "Carol's" history on rec.ponds have been
victims of your attacks.

but who the hell
reallyb cares what you or anyone else cares, its only USENET!

It is easy to deny that words have effects in
real life. Anyone who uses that excuse is
deluding himself or herself.

I may
have a lot of experience and stuff to offer but its not gonna be on
this medium by any means....

Then go away. ::shrug:: After all, as
you say, it's "only USENET".

You know I do not have any problems on web
based forums,

I do not "know" that at all, since I tend to avoid
web based forums.

evidently they are not as much of pampered assholes like
this bunch is!

Many web based forums are strictly controlled,
much more so than is typical on USENET
newsgroups. Behavior such as you have
exhibited on rec.ponds in the recent weeks would
get you banned permanently from many
web based forums. Ergo, your statement
makes no sense.

Gail




-------
I forgot more about ponds and koi than I'll ever know!



-------
I forgot more about ponds and koi than I'll ever know!