Path: ccw.ch!usenet From: Neil.Franklin.remove.this@ccw.ch Newsgroups: alt.consciousness.near-death-exp Subject: Re: Is this small enough? Date: 19 Jan 1998 06:26:41 +0100 Organization: My own Private Self Lines: 126 Message-ID: <7m7xyqy6.fsf@chonsp.franklin.lugs.ch> References: <34C01FF9.7224@ix.netcom.com> Reply-To: flauzeck@ix.netcom.com X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34 Robert Lauzeckas stated: >Try to read it now. In parts. May I deduct that at first your news reader decided to not transfer it because it was too large? Have you ever thought, that that may be because such large posts are not desired? And splitting it into multiple smaller ones is no more desirable either. A case of violating the spirit of the law while keeping to its words. In the Group Summary: R [ 689: Robert Lauzeckas ] Is this small enough? R [ 845: Robert Lauzeckas ] R [1244: Robert Lauzeckas ] R [1775: Robert Lauzeckas ] R [1983: Robert Lauzeckas ] R [ 390: Robert Lauzeckas ] R [1547: Robert Lauzeckas ] R [ 678: Robert Lauzeckas ] FORGET THE ABOVE MESS. TRY THIS INSTEAD. R [ 351: Robert Lauzeckas ] part-3 R [ 475: Robert Lauzeckas ] part-5 R [2037: Robert Lauzeckas ] Forget that garbage! Let me try again. R [ 503: Robert Lauzeckas ] part-6 R [ 475: Robert Lauzeckas ] part-7 R [ 380: Robert Lauzeckas ] part-8 R [ 370: Robert Lauzeckas ] part-9 These correspond to: Message-ID Lines Bytes <34C01FF9.7224@ix.netcom.com> 689 78651 <34C02C31.5576@ix.netcom.com> 845 61436 <34C02C96.3239@ix.netcom.com> 1244 90508 <34C02D11.49E4@ix.netcom.com> 1775 129251 <34C02D5A.B3@ix.netcom.com> 1983 144489 <34C02DA9.3D64@ix.netcom.com> 390 28213 <34C02CCC.4C5E@ix.netcom.com> 1547 112672 <34C02C01.32B0@ix.netcom.com> 678 49122 <34C02F93.383E@ix.netcom.com> 351 26307 <34C02FCB.7ACC@ix.netcom.com> 475 35412 <34C02BA2.3552@ix.netcom.com> 2037 148518 <34C02FF7.1932@ix.netcom.com> 503 37372 <34C03016.429E@ix.netcom.com> 475 35419 <34C03036.32F7@ix.netcom.com> 380 28403 <34C0305B.6CC6@ix.netcom.com> 370 27661 That makes: 78651 61436 + 90508 + 129251 + 144489 + 28213 + 112672 + 49122 + 26307 + 35412 + 148518 + 37372 + 35419 + 28403 + 27661 + p 1033434 Or with other word a full Megabyte! At 2000 Bytes/sec (you had luck, my newsfeed was having a good day) that makes 516 sec, that is 8 1/2 minutes. At $0.66/minute $6.00! That is 7% of my average dayly income. And that just for one posters messages in one newsgroup on one day. Oh yes: all of it .doc files, proprietary binary data. You are putting me in front of following decision: - put up with such costly actions (this was the second in 1 week) - quit alt.consciousness.near-death-exp (and any other you post to) - get you to stop posting (in the worst case by being thrown out) Guess which one of these I prefer? > I see that you are at Netcom. Their reaction to DrStranges message about the ticklish guys was very positive. This time I am just sending you an (second) public complaint. But should this behaviour keep on, then I will have to mail a copy of this to Netcom. I dislike having to have someone thrown off the net, please don't force me to. BTW: http://www.netcom.com/netcom/aug.html has following to say on this (* and *** added by me): 6.0 Usenet News Use 6.03 Netcom will investigate complaints regarding posts of inappropriate material to Usenet by accountholders and may, in its sole discretion, take action based on the rules below. Criteria for determining whether a post is inappropriate include, but are not limited to, the written charter/FAQ of the newsgroup(s) in question, the *established*Usenet*conventions* outlined below, the system resources consumed by the posting, and applicable laws. 6.07 Netiquette prohibits certain types of posts in most Usenet newsgroups. Types of prohibited posts include chain letters, pyramid schemes, *encoded* *binary*files*, job offers or listings, and personal ads. Netcom accountholders may post these types of message only in newsgroups which *specifically* *permit*them*in*the*charter or FAQ (if any). Netcom accountholders are responsible for determining whether or not a newsgroup permits a type of message before posting. *** binary includes MS-Word .doc files and using either base64 or uuencode. *** binary files or large files are not permitted in newsgroups without "binary" in their name. Yours, hoping for a less "large" future on a.c.nde -- Neil.Franklin.remove.this@ccw.ch, http://www.ccw.ch/Neil.Franklin/ for Geek Code, Papernet, Voicenet, PGP public key see http: If I go missing, its once again my newsfeed that has craped ###### From: Dr._Strange@alt.consciousness.near-death-exp (Dr. Strange) Newsgroups: alt.consciousness.near-death-exp Subject: Re: Is this small enough? Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 06:55:54 GMT Organization: . Lines: 26 Message-ID: <6a1hs9$faa@mtinsc03.worldnet.att.net> References: <34C01FF9.7224@ix.netcom.com> <7m7xyqy6.fsf@chonsp.franklin.lugs.ch> Reply-To: Dr._Strange@alt.consciousness.near-death-exp NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.67.33.214 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451 Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!news-xfer.siscom.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!Sprint!worldnet.att.net!newsadm On 19 Jan 1998 06:26:41 +0100, Neil.Franklin.remove.this@ccw.ch wrote: >Robert Lauzeckas stated: >>Try to read it now. In parts. > >May I deduct that at first your news reader decided to not transfer it >because it was too large? > >Have you ever thought, that that may be because such large posts are >not desired? And splitting it into multiple smaller ones is no more >desirable either. A case of violating the spirit of the law while >keeping to its words. > > I don't know what kind of filtering your newsreader supports, but I have a kill filter on his posts in Agent like this: 700 Author: Robert Lauzeckas & [100,*] I filter out any of his posts longer than 100 lines, because they have a tendency to ramble, and I simple don't have time to read them. -- If you know my e-mail address - Good! If you don't know my e-mail address - Good! ###### From: Robert Lauzeckas Newsgroups: alt.consciousness.near-death-exp Subject: Re: Is this small enough? Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 22:34:18 -0500 Organization: Netcom Lines: 122 Message-ID: <34C56CBA.5A11@ix.netcom.com> References: <34C01FF9.7224@ix.netcom.com> <7m7xyqy6.fsf@chonsp.franklin.lugs.ch> Reply-To: flauzeck@ix.netcom.com NNTP-Posting-Host: nwk-nj16-10.ix.netcom.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-NETCOM-Date: Tue Jan 20 9:34:05 PM CST 1998 X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; U) Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!atl-news-feed1.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!ix.netcom.com!news Neil.Franklin.remove.this@ccw.ch wrote: > > Robert Lauzeckas stated: > >Try to read it now. In parts. > > May I deduct that at first your news reader decided to not transfer it > because it was too large? > > Have you ever thought, that that may be because such large posts are > not desired? And splitting it into multiple smaller ones is no more > desirable either. A case of violating the spirit of the law while > keeping to its words. > > In the Group Summary: > > R [ 689: Robert Lauzeckas ] Is this small enough? > R [ 845: Robert Lauzeckas ] > R [1244: Robert Lauzeckas ] > R [1775: Robert Lauzeckas ] > R [1983: Robert Lauzeckas ] > R [ 390: Robert Lauzeckas ] > R [1547: Robert Lauzeckas ] > R [ 678: Robert Lauzeckas ] FORGET THE ABOVE MESS. TRY THIS INSTEAD. > R [ 351: Robert Lauzeckas ] part-3 > R [ 475: Robert Lauzeckas ] part-5 > R [2037: Robert Lauzeckas ] Forget that garbage! Let me try again. > R [ 503: Robert Lauzeckas ] part-6 > R [ 475: Robert Lauzeckas ] part-7 > R [ 380: Robert Lauzeckas ] part-8 > R [ 370: Robert Lauzeckas ] part-9 > > These correspond to: > > Message-ID Lines Bytes > <34C01FF9.7224@ix.netcom.com> 689 78651 > <34C02C31.5576@ix.netcom.com> 845 61436 > <34C02C96.3239@ix.netcom.com> 1244 90508 > <34C02D11.49E4@ix.netcom.com> 1775 129251 > <34C02D5A.B3@ix.netcom.com> 1983 144489 > <34C02DA9.3D64@ix.netcom.com> 390 28213 > <34C02CCC.4C5E@ix.netcom.com> 1547 112672 > <34C02C01.32B0@ix.netcom.com> 678 49122 > <34C02F93.383E@ix.netcom.com> 351 26307 > <34C02FCB.7ACC@ix.netcom.com> 475 35412 > <34C02BA2.3552@ix.netcom.com> 2037 148518 > <34C02FF7.1932@ix.netcom.com> 503 37372 > <34C03016.429E@ix.netcom.com> 475 35419 > <34C03036.32F7@ix.netcom.com> 380 28403 > <34C0305B.6CC6@ix.netcom.com> 370 27661 > > That makes: > > 78651 61436 + 90508 + 129251 + 144489 + 28213 + 112672 + 49122 + > 26307 + 35412 + 148518 + 37372 + 35419 + 28403 + 27661 + p > 1033434 > > Or with other word a full Megabyte! At 2000 Bytes/sec (you had luck, > my newsfeed was having a good day) that makes 516 sec, that is 8 1/2 > minutes. At $0.66/minute $6.00! That is 7% of my average dayly income. > > And that just for one posters messages in one newsgroup on one day. > > Oh yes: all of it .doc files, proprietary binary data. > > You are putting me in front of following decision: > - put up with such costly actions (this was the second in 1 week) > - quit alt.consciousness.near-death-exp (and any other you post to) > - get you to stop posting (in the worst case by being thrown out) > > Guess which one of these I prefer? > > > > > I see that you are at Netcom. Their reaction to DrStranges message about > the ticklish guys was very positive. > > This time I am just sending you an (second) public complaint. But > should this behaviour keep on, then I will have to mail a copy of this > to Netcom. I dislike having to have someone thrown off the net, please > don't force me to. > > BTW: http://www.netcom.com/netcom/aug.html has following to say on > this (* and *** added by me): > > 6.0 Usenet News Use > 6.03 > Netcom will investigate complaints regarding > posts of inappropriate material to Usenet by > accountholders and may, in its sole discretion, > take action based on the rules below. Criteria for > determining whether a post is inappropriate > include, but are not limited to, the written > charter/FAQ of the newsgroup(s) in question, the > *established*Usenet*conventions* outlined below, the > system resources consumed by the posting, and > applicable laws. > > 6.07 > Netiquette prohibits certain types of posts in most > Usenet newsgroups. Types of prohibited posts > include chain letters, pyramid schemes, *encoded* > *binary*files*, job offers or listings, and personal ads. > Netcom accountholders may post these types of > message only in newsgroups which *specifically* > *permit*them*in*the*charter or FAQ (if any). > Netcom accountholders are responsible for > determining whether or not a newsgroup permits > a type of message before posting. > > *** binary includes MS-Word .doc files and using either base64 or uuencode. > > *** binary files or large files are not permitted in newsgroups > without "binary" in their name. > > Yours, hoping for a less "large" future on a.c.nde > > -- > Neil.Franklin.remove.this@ccw.ch, http://www.ccw.ch/Neil.Franklin/ > for Geek Code, Papernet, Voicenet, PGP public key see http: > If I go missing, its once again my newsfeed that has craped Who are you to tell anyone what is desirable! Get lost thought police. ###### Path: ccw.ch!usenet From: Neil.Franklin.remove.this@ccw.ch Newsgroups: alt.consciousness.near-death-exp Subject: Re: Is this small enough? Date: 21 Jan 1998 03:36:30 +0100 Organization: My own Private Self Lines: 35 Message-ID: References: <34C01FF9.7224@ix.netcom.com> <7m7xyqy6.fsf@chonsp.franklin.lugs.ch>Reply-To: Dr._Strange@alt.consciousness.near-death-exp <6a1hs9$faa@mtinsc03.worldnet.att.net> X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34 Robert Lauzeckas stated: >Try to read it now. In parts. Neil.Franklin.remove.this@ccw.ch wrote: >May I deduct that at first your news reader decided to not transfer it >because it was too large? Dr._Strange@alt.consciousness.near-death-exp (Dr. Strange) wrote: >I don't know what kind of filtering your newsreader supports, but I have a >kill filter on his posts in Agent like this: > 700 Author: Robert Lauzeckas & [100,*] The problem is not the newsreader. To avoid large connect times I use an external program that downloads all newsgroups I am interested in in one go. This saves a lot of time being connected by not having to do all the scanning of the message headers while connected. So long I only download newsgroups that are mostly interesting (I drop any group with less that 75% interesting) this is the most efficient. Unfortunately the only filering this program knows is groupname and a max amount of messages, no size limit. >I filter out any of his posts longer than 100 lines, because they have a >tendency to ramble, and I simple don't have time to read them. That is no problem for me. I have the time. And I actually quite like his posts. That adds to the anger of an large unreadabel download the knowledge that there is something interesting in there that I can't get at. -- Neil.Franklin.remove.this@ccw.ch, http://www.ccw.ch/Neil.Franklin/ for Geek Code, Papernet, Voicenet, PGP public key see http: If I go missing, its once again my newsfeed that has craped ###### Path: ccw.ch!usenet From: Neil.Franklin.remove.this@ccw.ch Newsgroups: alt.consciousness.near-death-exp Subject: Re: Is this small enough? Date: 23 Jan 1998 01:17:23 +0100 Organization: My own Private Self Lines: 39 Message-ID: References: <34C01FF9.7224@ix.netcom.com> <7m7xyqy6.fsf@chonsp.franklin.lugs.ch> <34C56CBA.5A11@ix.netcom.com> X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34 Robert Lauzeckas stated: > Try to read it now. In parts. Neil.Franklin.remove.this@ccw.ch wrote: > BTW: http://www.netcom.com/netcom/aug.html has following to say on > this (* and *** added by me): > Yours, hoping for a less "large" future on a.c.nde Robert Lauzeckas answered: > Who are you to tell anyone what is desirable! The same thing that a few million other Useneters are: Someone who is pissed off at the downward developments in behavior in the last few years. As a such I have informed you, that your behaviour (most likely innocently) is against the accepted (by millions) rules of Usenet society. And incidently also against the contract you signed when you got your Internet account at Netcom. All I ask you, is to adapt to the accepted norms this society has developed over the last 17 years. > Get lost thought police. I am not policing your thoughts; you may think what you want. I am not policing your expressing of them; this you may also do. I am policing your behaviour, which is damaging to (and as such not accepted by) the society you are partaking in. I do this as any decent citizen of any developed society does. I suppose it is a sign if the times when asking for considerate behaviour gets one lambasted as thought police. Yours, still in hope of a legible Usenet. -- Neil.Franklin.remove.this@ccw.ch, http://www.ccw.ch/Neil.Franklin/ for Geek Code, Papernet, Voicenet, PGP public key see http: If I go missing, its once again my newsfeed that has craped ###### From: Robert Lauzeckas Newsgroups: alt.consciousness.near-death-exp Subject: Re: Is this small enough? Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 12:31:05 -0500 Organization: Netcom Lines: 48 Message-ID: <34CE19D9.15C8@ix.netcom.com> References: <34C01FF9.7224@ix.netcom.com> <7m7xyqy6.fsf@chonsp.franklin.lugs.ch> <34C56CBA.5A11@ix.netcom.com> Reply-To: flauzeck@ix.netcom.com NNTP-Posting-Host: wfd-nj2-08.ix.netcom.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-NETCOM-Date: Tue Jan 27 11:31:34 AM CST 1998 X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; U) To: Neil.Franklin.remove.this@ccw.ch Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!news-xfer.siscom.net!streamer1.cleveland.iagnet.net!qual.net!iagnet.net!news-peer.gip.net!news.gsl.net!gip.net!ix.netcom.com!news Neil.Franklin.remove.this@ccw.ch wrote: > > Robert Lauzeckas stated: > > Try to read it now. In parts. > Neil.Franklin.remove.this@ccw.ch wrote: > > BTW: http://www.netcom.com/netcom/aug.html has following to say on > > this (* and *** added by me): > > Yours, hoping for a less "large" future on a.c.nde > Robert Lauzeckas answered: > > Who are you to tell anyone what is desirable! > > The same thing that a few million other Useneters are: Someone who is > pissed off at the downward developments in behavior in the last few > years. > > As a such I have informed you, that your behaviour (most likely > innocently) is against the accepted (by millions) rules of Usenet > society. And incidently also against the contract you signed when you > got your Internet account at Netcom. > > All I ask you, is to adapt to the accepted norms this society has > developed over the last 17 years. > > > Get lost thought police. > > I am not policing your thoughts; you may think what you want. > I am not policing your expressing of them; this you may also do. > I am policing your behaviour, which is damaging to (and as such not > accepted by) the society you are partaking in. > > I do this as any decent citizen of any developed society does. > > I suppose it is a sign if the times when asking for considerate > behaviour gets one lambasted as thought police. > > Yours, still in hope of a legible Usenet. > > -- > Neil.Franklin.remove.this@ccw.ch, http://www.ccw.ch/Neil.Franklin/ > for Geek Code, Papernet, Voicenet, PGP public key see http: > If I go missing, its once again my newsfeed that has craped Right, glad to hear it. So you're not the thought police, good. My essay will be posted using an URL. Then it shouldn't bother you. Robert L.