|
Home > Archive > Impotence Support > June 2006 > Re: Jerry -- well, maybe not the real Jerry
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Re: Jerry -- well, maybe not the real Jerry
|
|
|
| your.name@here wrote:
> "Jerry Sturdivant" <jerryst@cox.net> wrote:
>
>
> Sorry - you must have me confused with someone else. I've been using Usenet
> since the late 70s, managed more than my share of Usenet servers, created more
> than one mainstream newsgroup, and know how Usenet works down to the protocol
> level.
>
> Its generally considered rude to post FAQ type information more than once a
> month - a standard you seem to follow for your other postings in this group.
> However, since this is an unmoderated group, you are free to do as you like.
>
> While you may have found one person who will remove an extranious newsgroup from
> one topic, you also manage to annoy all the regular people who follow the
> newsgroup every day.
>
> I'd rather not killfile you as you do post useful and interesting posts, but
> daily roboposts don't help.
>
>
> You need to be more careful with your attributions. I did not post that...
Howdy folk,
Late last week, during two 24 hour periods, I ran IP locator traces and
ISP identifications on about 90% of the posts to this ng. The other
ten percent were posted via overseas relays that masked the location,
identity and the originating protocol used for the original email or
file upload. Sometimes there were fewer actual participants than there
were handles. Other times there were multiple participants using the
same handle & email address.
Some "posts" that appeared on existing threads, weren't really on those
threads but were just titled to look that way. One post that had my
handle and return email address wasn't my post at all. I'd been
spoofed. All of that was, in turn, complicated by both accidental and
intentional cross-posting.
During that period, the situation was chaotic and it was difficult to
draw inferences about who's-who without raising the hood and going
beyond the email headers--not worthwhile, time wise. Clearly, the kids
were co-ordinating their changes of name, email address and handle via
another communications channel(s). It finally boiled down to 5, maybe
8, posters, possibly organized into two separate gangs who were "winding
this group up." As the emotions erupted over in other affected ngs,
things got worse.
Obviously, we had let these folk inflame this ng. and cause us to boil
over onto other turf.
Now, I might be dead wrong on my thinking -- things may not be as they
seem. We may have been inside the test-tube(s) of one or more doctoral
candidates (behavioral science types) who triggered all this fist
fighting across newsgroups. Maybe they made notes of the 'fun' we were
having and recorded the results. If that's so, and he/she -- is/are
reading this, send me a personal invite to your defense -- I'll not
speak but, I owe you a lunch; cuz, you sucked me in. (:-)
All of this will pass and the outstanding threads will die a natural
death. Meanwhile everyone, take a deep breath, have a great weekend
and, "this too shall pass."
....Lmac
|
| |
|
|