Path: ccw.ch!elna.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-hh.maz.net!fu-berlin.de!nntp.abs.net!feed2.news.erols.com!erols!woodstock.news.demon.net!demon!dispose.news.demon.net!demon!news.demon.co.uk!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!not-for-mail From: Koos Nolst Trenite Newsgroups: alt.metaphysics.lightwork,alt.paranet.metaphysics,alt.paranet.paranormal,alt.paranet.channeling,alt.paranet.psi,alt.paranet.science,alt.paranormal,alt.paranormal.channeling,alt.consciousness.mysticism,alt.consciousness.4th-way,alt.consciousness.near-death-exp,comp.org.cpsr.talk,talk.religion.newage,alt.life.afterlife,alt.out-of-body,de.alt.paranormal,z-netz.alt.esoterik,t-netz.esoterik Subject: How Richard Reiss kills people by Black Magic Date: Sun, 19 Apr 1998 00:43:29 +0100 Organization: trenite.de Message-ID: <35393AA1.302C@trenite.de> Reply-To: Koos.Trenite@trenite.de X-Mail2News-User: Koos.Trenite@trenite.de X-Mail2News-Path: mailout.easynet.de!artorg.local X-Trace: mail2news.demon.co.uk 892939572 17664 Koos.Trenite trenite.de X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01DT (Win95; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 135 How Richard Reiss kills people: By enforcing his confusion (that he sees EVERYTHING in reverse, and that he wants everybody dominated and feel "comfortable" and "happy" with it), onto others while hiding that he is the one enforcing it, while hiding that it is his confusion, created by him, while making them believe that it is THEIR OWN CONFUSION, (which they have to try to deal with - so that they try to control it or try to solve it, as if it is their own confusion, their own insanity, their own destructive intentions, as if they themselves have his extremely destructive intentions - but of course they don't manage to control it, because it is not their confusion). (On Richard Reiss, see for example: RI-1013i 'World Domination by the Scientology Syndicate's Final Solution' http://AmbassadorForMankind.org/ri-1013i.htm) [Koos:] What did you see Richard Reiss doing to Jutta, in Altenbuch, Spring 1986? [Freya:] Richard Reiss was keeping Jutta's attention stuck on him, but while making her not see that it was him, and while making her believe that she was looking at herself - as if Richard Reiss was her, was her past, was how she really is. I saw there was a black cloud of Suppressive Persons behind her, and Jutta must have thought that was herself, that the destructive intentions of those Suppressive Persons were her own. And because she thinks those intentions of the Suppressive Persons are "herself", she "has to execute them". Richard Reiss' confusion which he sits in (that he sees EVERYTHING in reverse, that he wants everybody dominated and comfortable and "happy" with it) and which he is enforcing on others as if it is their own, this must be the black cloud I saw behind Jutta. Richard Reiss was keeping her attention on his confusion and Jutta was trying to SOLVE it as if it is her own confusion. [Koos:] Richard Reiss keeps her attention on his confusion by enforcing the spiritual energy of the confusion onto her, and in this way she experiences it as if it is her own confusion and as if the spiritual energy is created by herself. She tries to stop herself from doing that, which of course doesn't work, and she tries to do all kinds of other strange things, to get away from the energy - all except putting the energy back to where it belongs, to Richard Reiss. And she doesn't do that - because it is intended by Richard Reiss that she believes it is her own creation, her own confusion, herself. Jutta's solution (to the confusion that Richard Reiss enforces on her and that she believes is herself) is: To pull at me like hell to get some life-force, and to force Reiss' confusion onto me and onto others, for me to handle, as if it is her confusion which she can't handle - as if that confusion is herself, and as if she can't handle it. Instead of Jutta facing Richard Reiss and assigning the confusion to its creator, to him. This is Black Magic - Richard Reiss is OT-Level-X (10) of Hubbard Scientology. And this is what is taught on the OT-Levels above OT-Level-VIII: Black Magic. L. Ron Hubbard does the same thing, he claims to be OT-Level-23. He is a pupil of Aleister Crowley. This is a well-known fact, not advertised by the Scientology Syndicate, whose members consider L. Ron Hubbard a perfect being, and consider Richard Reiss a near perfect being. Now you have an idea why I compare their propaganda and their beautiful slogans to the work of Nazi-Propaganda-Minister Josef Goebbels. They are nothing but spiritual killers, black magicians who do nothing but kill spiritual life and spiritual freedom. But people don't like truth very much. Here you have it anyway. You better use it, if you are interested in the well-being of your kids, and the well-being of your grandchildren. This is spiritual warfare and this is World War III, which started in 1965, with LRH going stark staring insane and thinking of himself he had become the perfect being. Koos with Freya Koos Nolst Trenite - Ambassador for Mankind Copyright 1998 by Koos Nolst Trenite Library of Ambassador for Mankind: http://AmbassadorForMankind.org Personal Web-page: http://ArtOrg.com ###### Path: ccw.ch!elna.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!uniol!fu-berlin.de!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!ix.netcom.com!news From: bartma12@ix.netcom.com(Bart Scott) Newsgroups: alt.metaphysics.lightwork,alt.paranet.metaphysics,alt.paranet.paranormal,alt.paranet.channeling,alt.paranet.psi,alt.paranet.science,alt.paranormal,alt.paranormal.channeling,alt.consciousness.mysticism,alt.consciousness.4th-way,alt.consciousness.near-death-exp,comp.org.cpsr.talk,talk.religion.newage,alt.life.afterlife,alt.out-of-body,de.alt.paranormal,z-netz.alt.esoterik,t-netz.esoterik Subject: Re: How Richard Reiss kills people by Black Magic Date: 18 Apr 1998 23:17:30 GMT Organization: Netcom Lines: 15 Message-ID: <6hbcaa$bk7@sjx-ixn11.ix.netcom.com> References: <35393AA1.302C@trenite.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: clv-oh44-23.ix.netcom.com X-NETCOM-Date: Sat Apr 18 4:17:30 PM PDT 1998 > http://AmbassadorForMankind.org/ri-1013i.htm) > http://AmbassadorForMankind.org >Personal Web-page: http://ArtOrg.com Is it time to pop this guy yet? This stuff has been going on for so long it is ridiculous. Bart ###### Path: ccw.ch!elna.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!ais.net!ix.netcom.com!news From: bartma12@ix.netcom.com(Bart Scott) Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: How Richard Reiss kills people by Black Magic Date: 19 Apr 1998 05:41:51 GMT Organization: Netcom Lines: 66 Message-ID: <6hc2qv$arp@dfw-ixnews11.ix.netcom.com> References: <6hbcaa$bk7@sjx-ixn11.ix.netcom.com> <353995F5.MD-0.198.ras2@get2net.dggk> NNTP-Posting-Host: clv-oh41-31.ix.netcom.com X-NETCOM-Date: Sun Apr 19 12:41:51 AM CDT 1998 In <353995F5.MD-0.198.ras2@get2net.dggk> "ras2" writes: > >On 18 Apr 1998 23:17:30 GMT, Bart Scott wrote: >> >> > http://AmbassadorForMankind.org/ri-1013i.htm) >> >> > http://AmbassadorForMankind.org >> >Personal Web-page: http://ArtOrg.com >> >> Is it time to pop this guy yet? > >Seems he's already popped all by himself a long >time ago. > >If you mean pop his account, then it's probably next to >impossible: > >-------- >Whois trenite.de > >domain: trenite.de >descr: Trenite >descr: Koos Nolst Trenite >descr: Herbstwiesen 10 >descr: D-91090 Gaiganz >descr: Germany >admin-c: KT12-RIPE >tech-c: HH24-RIPE >zone-c: HH24-RIPE >nserver: ns2.easynet.de >nserver: ecrc.de >mnt-by: DE-DOM >changed: jens@nic.de 951017 >changed: jens@nic.de 970505 >source: RIPE >[...] >-------- > >i.e. it's his own domain. You'd have to get his provider >to disconnect him and that must have been tried countless >times. > >> This stuff has been going on for so long it is ridiculous. > >Yes, I've been longing for a killfile ever since I encountered >him the first time. At least his latest posts have been much >shorter than usual. > >There's a FAQ on him. Pretty scary stuff. > >> Bart > >-R. >Back to the topic; just had to vent my irritation too. Path: ix.netcom.com!news.idt.net!feed2.news.erols.com!erols!woodstock.news.de on.net!demon!dispose.news.demon.net!demon!news.demon.co.uk!demon!mail2n ws.demon.co.uk!not-for-mail Demon.co.uk probably knows who he is... Bart ###### Path: ccw.ch!elna.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeed.uk.ibm.net!sackheads.org!ibm.net!news-lond.gip.net!news-stkh.gip.net!news.gsl.net!gip.net!masternews.telia.net!newsfeed1.swip.net!news.get2net.dk!not-for-mail From: "ras2" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: How Richard Reiss kills people by Black Magic Date: 19 Apr 98 06:13:10 +0200 Organization: email; change 'd**k' to 'dk' Lines: 52 Message-ID: <353995F5.MD-0.198.ras2@get2net.dggk> References: <6hbcaa$bk7@sjx-ixn11.ix.netcom.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: port53.pulje201.get2net.dk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Newsreader: MicroDot-II 0.198/CabalOS On 18 Apr 1998 23:17:30 GMT, Bart Scott wrote: > > > http://AmbassadorForMankind.org/ri-1013i.htm) > > > http://AmbassadorForMankind.org > >Personal Web-page: http://ArtOrg.com > > Is it time to pop this guy yet? Seems he's already popped all by himself a long time ago. If you mean pop his account, then it's probably next to impossible: -------- Whois trenite.de domain: trenite.de descr: Trenite descr: Koos Nolst Trenite descr: Herbstwiesen 10 descr: D-91090 Gaiganz descr: Germany admin-c: KT12-RIPE tech-c: HH24-RIPE zone-c: HH24-RIPE nserver: ns2.easynet.de nserver: ecrc.de mnt-by: DE-DOM changed: jens@nic.de 951017 changed: jens@nic.de 970505 source: RIPE [...] -------- i.e. it's his own domain. You'd have to get his provider to disconnect him and that must have been tried countless times. > This stuff has been going on for so long it is ridiculous. Yes, I've been longing for a killfile ever since I encountered him the first time. At least his latest posts have been much shorter than usual. There's a FAQ on him. Pretty scary stuff. > Bart -R. Back to the topic; just had to vent my irritation too. ###### Path: ccw.ch!elna.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!newspump.monmouth.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!news-peer-east.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!Sprint!news-peer.gip.net!news-stkh.gip.net!news.gsl.net!gip.net!masternews.telia.net!newsfeed1.swip.net!news.get2net.dk!not-for-mail From: "ras2" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: How Richard Reiss kills people by Black Magic Date: 19 Apr 98 17:23:46 +0200 Organization: email; change 'd**k' to 'dk' Lines: 30 Message-ID: <353A3322.MD-0.198.ras2@get2net.dggk> References: <6hc2qv$arp@dfw-ixnews11.ix.netcom.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: port48.pulje203.get2net.dk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Newsreader: MicroDot-II 0.198/CabalOS On 19 Apr 1998 05:41:51 GMT, Bart Scott wrote: > Path: > ix.netcom.com!news.idt.net!feed2.news.erols.com!erols!woodstock.news.de > on.net!demon!dispose.news.demon.net!demon!news.demon.co.uk!demon!mail2n > ws.demon.co.uk!not-for-mail Path tail from www.reference.com, same post: Path:...nntp.giganews.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.easynet.de!not-for-mail Wonder if he's sending them twice, one from Germany and one through the UK, but with the same message-id, so they only show up once. From two earlier posts: Path:...194.59.190.100.MISMATCH!newsfeed.ecrc.net!news.easynet.de!not-for-mail Path:...demon!news.demon.co.uk!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!not-for-mail mail2news... Didn't think you could get a demon account from outside the UK. > Demon.co.uk probably knows who he is... And easynet.de (they are hosting trenite.de). > Bart -R. ###### Path: ccw.ch!usenet From: Neil Franklin Newsgroups: alt.metaphysics.lightwork,alt.paranet.metaphysics,alt.paranet.paranormal,alt.paranet.channeling,alt.paranet.psi,alt.paranet.science,alt.paranormal,alt.paranormal.channeling,alt.consciousness.mysticism,alt.consciousness.4th-way,alt.consciousness.near-death-exp,comp.org.cpsr.talk,talk.religion.newage,alt.life.afterlife,alt.out-of-body,de.alt.paranormal,z-netz.alt.esoterik,t-netz.esoterik Subject: Re: How Richard Reiss kills people by Black Magic Date: Sun, 19 Apr 1998 22:46:02 +0200 Organization: My own Private Self Lines: 26 Message-ID: <353A628A.399254A@ccw.ch> References: <35393AA1.302C@trenite.de> <6hbcaa$bk7@sjx-ixn11.ix.netcom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.0.27 i486) Bart Scott wrote: > > > http://AmbassadorForMankind.org > >Personal Web-page: http://ArtOrg.com > > Is it time to pop this guy yet? > > This stuff has been going on for so long it is ridiculous. Yes it has. I have just counted 18 spams from him since March 15. In Koos'es posts: >X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net I am sending my complaint to there. Because that is where it is entering Usenet. I am sending the full header, so they should be able to find out how it gets into their system. If he then starts using an other entry point I will complain to them. -- private: Neil.Franklin.remove.this@ccw.ch http://www.ccw.ch/Neil.Franklin/ office: franklin.remove.this@arch.ethz.ch http://caad.arch.ethz.ch/~franklin/ Can a Microsoft allergy be claimed on job health insurence? ###### Path: ccw.ch!elna.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news-fra1.dfn.de!Cabal.CESspool!bofh.vszbr.cz!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!newshub.northeast.verio.net!news-feed1.tiac.net!posterchild2!news@tiac.net From: ely@tiac.net (Eric) Newsgroups: alt.metaphysics.lightwork,alt.paranet.metaphysics,alt.paranet.paranormal,alt.paranet.channeling,alt.paranet.psi,alt.paranet.science,alt.paranormal,alt.paranormal.channeling,alt.consciousness.mysticism,alt.consciousness.4th-way,alt.consciousness.near-death-exp,comp.org.cpsr.talk,talk.religion.newage,alt.life.afterlife,alt.out-of-body,de.alt.paranormal,z-netz.alt.esoterik,t-netz.esoterik Subject: Re: How Richard Reiss kills people by Black Magic Date: Mon, 20 Apr 1998 00:52:50 GMT Organization: The Internet Access Company, Inc. Lines: 35 Message-ID: <6he61v$3ob@news-central.tiac.net> References: <35393AA1.302C@trenite.de> <6hbcaa$bk7@sjx-ixn11.ix.netcom.com> <353A628A.399254A@ccw.ch> Reply-To: ely@tiac.net NNTP-Posting-Host: p15.ts1.danve.ma.tiac.com X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82 Your publicly made complaint is spam. Koos' words, true or not, are, at least, relevant to the topic of consciousness/awareness. On Sun, 19 Apr 1998 22:46:02 +0200, you wrote: >Bart Scott wrote: >> >> > http://AmbassadorForMankind.org >> >Personal Web-page: http://ArtOrg.com >> >> Is it time to pop this guy yet? >> >> This stuff has been going on for so long it is ridiculous. >Yes it has. I have just counted 18 spams from him since March 15. >In Koos'es posts: >>X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net >I am sending my complaint to there. Because that is where it is entering >Usenet. I am sending the full header, so they should be able to find out >how it gets into their system. >If he then starts using an other entry point I will complain to them. >-- >private: Neil.Franklin.remove.this@ccw.ch > http://www.ccw.ch/Neil.Franklin/ >office: franklin.remove.this@arch.ethz.ch > http://caad.arch.ethz.ch/~franklin/ >Can a Microsoft allergy be claimed on job health insurence? ###### Path: ccw.ch!elna.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news-fra1.dfn.de!news-ber1.dfn.de!news-lei1.dfn.de!news-nue1.dfn.de!uni-erlangen.de!newspump.monmouth.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!ix.netcom.com!news From: bartma12@ix.netcom.com(Bart Scott) Newsgroups: alt.metaphysics.lightwork,alt.paranet.metaphysics,alt.paranet.paranormal,alt.paranet.channeling,alt.paranet.psi,alt.paranet.science,alt.paranormal,alt.paranormal.channeling,alt.consciousness.mysticism,alt.consciousness.4th-way,alt.consciousness.near-death-exp,comp.org.cpsr.talk,talk.religion.newage,alt.life.afterlife,alt.out-of-body,de.alt.paranormal,z-netz.alt.esoterik,t-netz.esoterik Subject: Re: How Richard Reiss kills people by Black Magic Date: 20 Apr 1998 03:16:23 GMT Organization: Netcom Lines: 10 Message-ID: <6heem7$76m@dfw-ixnews5.ix.netcom.com> References: <35393AA1.302C@trenite.de> <6hbcaa$bk7@sjx-ixn11.ix.netcom.com> <353A628A.399254A@ccw.ch> <6he61v$3ob@news-central.tiac.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: clv-oh41-53.ix.netcom.com X-NETCOM-Date: Sun Apr 19 10:16:23 PM CDT 1998 In <6he61v$3ob@news-central.tiac.net> ely@tiac.net (Eric) writes: >Your publicly made complaint is spam. Koos' words, true or not, are, >at least, relevant to the topic of consciousness/awareness. Koos is specific to Scientology. Scientology is a cult and specific cults do not relate to most of the NGs involved. Bart ###### Path: ccw.ch!usenet From: Neil Franklin Newsgroups: alt.metaphysics.lightwork,alt.paranet.metaphysics,alt.paranet.paranormal,alt.paranet.channeling,alt.paranet.psi,alt.paranet.science,alt.paranormal,alt.paranormal.channeling,alt.consciousness.mysticism,alt.consciousness.4th-way,alt.consciousness.near-death-exp,comp.org.cpsr.talk,talk.religion.newage,alt.life.afterlife,alt.out-of-body,de.alt.paranormal,z-netz.alt.esoterik,t-netz.esoterik Subject: Re: How Richard Reiss kills people by Black Magic Date: Mon, 20 Apr 1998 23:51:33 +0200 Organization: My own Private Self Lines: 54 Message-ID: <353BC365.A81C460@ccw.ch> References: <35393AA1.302C@trenite.de> <6hbcaa$bk7@sjx-ixn11.ix.netcom.com> <353A628A.399254A@ccw.ch> <6he61v$3ob@news-central.tiac.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.0.27 i486) Eric wrote: > > >Yes it has. I have just counted 18 spams from him since March 15. > Your publicly made complaint is spam. > > at least, relevant to the topic of consciousness/awareness. 1. From the viewpoint of alt.out-of-body where I (and Bart) read/post he _is_ off topic. Nothing about _going_ out of body in it. It may be on topic in the group you read it in, but not in all of them. This comes from massive crossposting (allways a sign of not taking part in the NGs subject discussion, just flooding them with ones drivel). 2. It seems that you use the definition spam = off-topic post. I use the definition of spam = posts that violate netiquette. These include (but are not limited to) posts that are: - overly long (his rants are) - not aimed at a discussion (his post are an monolog) - repetively posted (he is repetedly posting his Web pages) - massive crossposts (he posts to 18 groups) Generally his behaviour consists of throwing stuff at the readers of the 18 involved NGs without any respect for what the readers of these groups have declaired their interest in. That is classic spammer behaviour. > Koos' words, true or not, are, I never said anything about true, but I do think he is suffering from an massive case of delusion. BTW Eric: If you mail and post please indicate this. I read and answer all mails before reading news. -- Neil.Franklin.remove@ccw.ch http://www.ccw.ch/Neil.Franklin/ franklin.remove@arch.ethz.ch http://caad.arch.ethz.ch/~franklin/ This computer has 2 cats, one in /bin, one on top purring. ###### Path: ccw.ch!elna.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-hh.maz.net!fu-berlin.de!howland.erols.net!news-feed1.tiac.net!posterchild2!news@tiac.net From: ely@tiac.net (Eric) Newsgroups: alt.metaphysics.lightwork,alt.paranet.metaphysics,alt.paranet.paranormal,alt.paranet.channeling,alt.paranet.psi,alt.paranet.science,alt.paranormal,alt.paranormal.channeling,alt.consciousness.mysticism,alt.consciousness.4th-way,alt.consciousness.near-death-exp,comp.org.cpsr.talk,talk.religion.newage,alt.life.afterlife,alt.out-of-body,de.alt.paranormal,z-netz.alt.esoterik,t-netz.esoterik Subject: Re: How Richard Reiss kills people by Black Magic Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 05:15:18 GMT Organization: The Internet Access Company, Inc. Lines: 24 Message-ID: <6hh9q1$n4c@news-central.tiac.net> References: <35393AA1.302C@trenite.de> <6hbcaa$bk7@sjx-ixn11.ix.netcom.com> <353A628A.399254A@ccw.ch> <6he61v$3ob@news-central.tiac.net> <6heem7$76m@dfw-ixnews5.ix.netcom.com> Reply-To: ely@tiac.net NNTP-Posting-Host: p4.ts1.danve.ma.tiac.com X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82 bartma12@ix.netcom.com(Bart Scott) wrote: >In <6he61v$3ob@news-central.tiac.net> ely@tiac.net (Eric) writes: >>Your publicly made complaint is spam. Koos' words, true or not, are, >>at least, relevant to the topic of consciousness/awareness. >Koos is specific to Scientology. Scientology is a cult and specific >cults do not relate to most of the NGs involved. Koos is specific to Scientology but there are those who see a broader bandwith and can relate his posts to the topic of "Deception" which would relate to many of the NGs involved. In fact, even the on-topic posts in most of the ng's are deceptive. Good luck with this one, Eric >Bart ###### Path: ccw.ch!elna.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news-fra1.dfn.de!Cabal.CESspool!bofh.vszbr.cz!howland.erols.net!news-feed1.tiac.net!posterchild2!news@tiac.net From: ely@tiac.net (Eric) Newsgroups: alt.metaphysics.lightwork,alt.paranet.metaphysics,alt.paranet.paranormal,alt.paranet.channeling,alt.paranet.psi,alt.paranet.science,alt.paranormal,alt.paranormal.channeling,alt.consciousness.mysticism,alt.consciousness.4th-way,alt.consciousness.near-death-exp,comp.org.cpsr.talk,talk.religion.newage,alt.life.afterlife,alt.out-of-body,de.alt.paranormal,z-netz.alt.esoterik,t-netz.esoterik Subject: Re: How Richard Reiss kills people by Black Magic Date: Tue, 21 Apr 1998 05:16:10 GMT Organization: The Internet Access Company, Inc. Lines: 72 Message-ID: <6hh9rm$n4c@news-central.tiac.net> References: <35393AA1.302C@trenite.de> <6hbcaa$bk7@sjx-ixn11.ix.netcom.com> <353A628A.399254A@ccw.ch> <6he61v$3ob@news-central.tiac.net> <353BC365.A81C460@ccw.ch> Reply-To: ely@tiac.net NNTP-Posting-Host: p4.ts1.danve.ma.tiac.com X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82 It's clear to me that you've put more thought into what spam is than many others I've come across. My main concerns are that a) a person is not posting in response out of anger. Taking action, such as notifying ISPs, etc, is one thing, while beginning a thread on the SPAM'er and his spam is another; b) that we don't label something spam simply because it annoys us. True SPAM is off-topic stuff while "netiquette" is the social conventions of the day. Anything remotely in the ballpark, even if it is annoying lengthy, in my opinion, should simply be left alone if one doesn't like it, that is, unless a real and tangible problem can be observed or predicted from such annoying posts. Thanks for your reply. Eric PS. Though Koos' whose words I don't often read, and, in fact, avoid, seems off the beaten path, his anti-Scientology stance is commendable. There's been more than enough evidence and information over the years to show that Cos is blatantly deceptive in its practices. That's another topic entirely... At 08:48 PM 4/20/98 +0200, you wrote: >ely@tiac.net wrote us: >> Your publicly made complaint is spam. >> >Yes it has. I have just counted 18 spams from him since March 15. > >> at least, relevant to the topic of consciousness/awareness. > >1. From the viewpoint of alt.out-of-body where I (and Bart) read/post >he _is_ off topic. Nothing about _going_ out of body in it. It may be >on topic in the group you read it in, but not in all of them. > >This comes from massive crossposting (allways a sign of not taking >part in the NGs subject discussion, just flooding them with ones >drivel). > > >2. It seems that you use the definition spam = off-topic post. > >I use the definition of spam = posts that violate netiquette. These >include (but are not limited to) posts that are: > >- overly long (his rants are) >- not aimed at a discussion (his post are an monolog) >- repetively posted (he is repetedly posting his Web pages) >- massive crossposts (he posts to 18 groups) > >Generally his behaviour consists of throwing stuff at the readers of >the 18 involved NGs without any respect for what the readers of these >groups have declaired their interest in. > >That is classic spammer behaviour. > > >> Koos' words, true or not, are, > >I never said anything about true, but I do think he is suffering from >an massive case of delusion. > > >Yours > >-- >Neil.Franklin.remove@ccw.ch http://www.ccw.ch/Neil.Franklin/ >franklin.remove@arch.ethz.ch http://caad.arch.ethz.ch/~franklin/ > > ###### Path: ccw.ch!elna.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!feed1.news.luth.se!luth.se!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.xcom.net!feed2.news.erols.com!erols!howland.erols.net!news.net.uni-c.dk!news.uni-c.dk!news.uni-c.dk!news.get2net.dk!not-for-mail From: "ras2" Newsgroups: alt.metaphysics.lightwork,alt.paranet.metaphysics,alt.paranet.paranormal,alt.paranet.channeling,alt.paranet.psi,alt.paranet.science,alt.paranormal,alt.paranormal.channeling,alt.consciousness.mysticism,alt.consciousness.4th-way,alt.consciousness.near-death-exp,comp.org.cpsr.talk,talk.religion.newage,alt.life.afterlife,alt.out-of-body,de.alt.paranormal,z-netz.alt.esoterik,t-netz.esoterik Subject: Re: How Richard Reiss kills people by Black Magic Date: 21 Apr 98 16:29:40 +0200 Organization: email; remove any letters between 'd' and 'k' Lines: 25 Message-ID: <353CC974.MD-0.198.ras2@get2net.dtgk> References: <6hh9rm$n4c@news-central.tiac.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: port28.pulje205.get2net.dk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Newsreader: MicroDot-II 0.198/CabalOS On Tue, 21 Apr 1998 05:16:10 GMT, Eric wrote: > It's clear to me that you've put more thought into what spam is than > many others I've come across. My main concerns are that a) a person > is not posting in response out of anger. Taking action, such as > notifying ISPs, etc, is one thing, while beginning a thread on the > SPAM'er and his spam is another; b) that we don't label something spam > simply because it annoys us. True SPAM is off-topic stuff while > "netiquette" is the social conventions of the day. Anything remotely > in the ballpark, even if it is annoying lengthy, in my opinion, should > simply be left alone if one doesn't like it, that is, unless a real > and tangible problem can be observed or predicted from such annoying > posts. For the definition of spam most anti-spammers (and ISPs) use: http://www.uiuc.edu/ph/www/tskirvin/faqs/spam.html Koos can probably not be said to be a 'real' spammer, but his crossposts are rather excessive. On the other hand, since he's always using the same address in the From: field, he should be pretty easy to killfile. He's obviously not going to listen to any advice on proper posting netiquette, so it's either complain or killfile. ###### Path: ccw.ch!usenet From: Neil Franklin Newsgroups: alt.metaphysics.lightwork,alt.paranet.metaphysics,alt.paranet.paranormal,alt.paranet.channeling,alt.paranet.psi,alt.paranet.science,alt.paranormal,alt.paranormal.channeling,alt.consciousness.mysticism,alt.consciousness.4th-way,alt.consciousness.near-death-exp,comp.org.cpsr.talk,talk.religion.newage,alt.life.afterlife,alt.out-of-body,de.alt.paranormal,z-netz.alt.esoterik,t-netz.esoterik Subject: Re: How Richard Reiss kills people by Black Magic Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 01:23:01 +0200 Organization: My own Private Self Lines: 49 Message-ID: <353D2A55.B9AC81A9@ccw.ch> References: <35393AA1.302C@trenite.de> <6hbcaa$bk7@sjx-ixn11.ix.netcom.com> <353A628A.399254A@ccw.ch> <6he61v$3ob@news-central.tiac.net> <353BC365.A81C460@ccw.ch> <6hh9rm$n4c@news-central.tiac.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.0.27 i486) Eric wrote: > My main concerns are that a) a person > is not posting in response out of anger. Well it wasn't anger, I am just simply getting fed up with him. > b) that we don't label something spam > simply because it annoys us. True SPAM is off-topic stuff while > "netiquette" is the social conventions of the day. Actually I regard netiquette as a codification of the types of behaviour, which (when followed by all) will lead to an stable and usable Usenet. Violating netiquette is IMHO any behaviour, that (when adapted by all*) will lead to the collapse of the Usenet. * I do not believe in exeptions for "special" people/groups, as they tend to get out of hand (I their case is important, so is mine). > PS. Though Koos' whose words I don't often read, and, in fact, avoid, > seems off the beaten path, his anti-Scientology stance is commendable. > There's been more than enough evidence and information over the years > to show that Cos is blatantly deceptive in its practices. That's > another topic entirely... I full agree on this one. That is why I waited 18 posts, hoping that he would stop after a while. Unfortunately he didn't. And I don't believe in the "the cause justifies the abuse" point of view. After all, this would allow anyone who percieves their cause as important to drop civilised behaviour. The result would be just as bad as dropping civilisation entirely. Those who want civilisation (and I belong to those) have to be prepared to accept that this means limiting ones means. In all cases. An monthly or even biweekly announce post pointing to his website would be acceptable, but every few days an entire file from it is too much, inacceptible. -- Neil.Franklin.remove@ccw.ch http://www.ccw.ch/Neil.Franklin/ franklin.remove@arch.ethz.ch http://caad.arch.ethz.ch/~franklin/ This computer has 2 cats, one in /bin, one on top purring. ###### Path: ccw.ch!elna.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-hh.maz.net!fu-berlin.de!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!ix.netcom.com!news From: bartma12@ix.netcom.com(Bart Scott) Newsgroups: alt.metaphysics.lightwork,alt.paranet.metaphysics,alt.paranet.paranormal,alt.paranet.channeling,alt.paranet.psi,alt.paranet.science,alt.paranormal,alt.paranormal.channeling,alt.consciousness.mysticism,alt.consciousness.4th-way,alt.consciousness.near-death-exp,comp.org.cpsr.talk,talk.religion.newage,alt.life.afterlife,alt.out-of-body,de.alt.paranormal,z-netz.alt.esoterik,t-netz.esoterik Subject: Re: How Richard Reiss kills people by Black Magic Date: 22 Apr 1998 02:10:04 GMT Organization: Netcom Lines: 15 Message-ID: <6hjjhs$805@dfw-ixnews9.ix.netcom.com> References: <6hh9rm$n4c@news-central.tiac.net> <353CC974.MD-0.198.ras2@get2net.dtgk> NNTP-Posting-Host: clv-oh44-109.ix.netcom.com X-NETCOM-Date: Tue Apr 21 9:10:04 PM CDT 1998 In <353CC974.MD-0.198.ras2@get2net.dtgk> "ras2" writes: >Koos... >He's obviously not going to listen to any advice on proper posting >netiquette, so it's either complain or killfile. So, um basically... click, BOOM, Koos has been killed by his own Richard Reiss post. Scientology all the way... Doo Dah... :-) Bart ###### Path: ccw.ch!elna.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-hh.maz.net!fu-berlin.de!howland.erols.net!news-feed1.tiac.net!posterchild2!news@tiac.net From: ely@tiac.net (Eric) Newsgroups: alt.metaphysics.lightwork,alt.paranet.metaphysics,alt.paranet.paranormal,alt.paranet.channeling,alt.paranet.psi,alt.paranet.science,alt.paranormal,alt.paranormal.channeling,alt.consciousness.mysticism,alt.consciousness.4th-way,alt.consciousness.near-death-exp,comp.org.cpsr.talk,talk.religion.newage,alt.life.afterlife,alt.out-of-body,de.alt.paranormal,z-netz.alt.esoterik,t-netz.esoterik Subject: Re: How Richard Reiss kills people by Black Magic Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 03:21:00 GMT Organization: The Internet Access Company, Inc. Lines: 77 Message-ID: <6hjnf4$kdq@news-central.tiac.net> References: <35393AA1.302C@trenite.de> <6hbcaa$bk7@sjx-ixn11.ix.netcom.com> <353A628A.399254A@ccw.ch> <6he61v$3ob@news-central.tiac.net> <353BC365.A81C460@ccw.ch> <6hh9rm$n4c@news-central.tiac.net> <353D2A55.B9AC81A9@ccw.ch> Reply-To: ely@tiac.net NNTP-Posting-Host: p8.ts3.danve.ma.tiac.com X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82 Neil Franklin wrote: >Eric wrote: >> My main concerns are that a) a person >> is not posting in response out of anger. >Well it wasn't anger, I am just simply getting fed up with him. Consider me shocked that you see no correlation between "angry" and "fed up". :-) >> b) that we don't label something spam >> simply because it annoys us. True SPAM is off-topic stuff while >> "netiquette" is the social conventions of the day. >Actually I regard netiquette as a codification of the types of >behaviour, which (when followed by all) will lead to an stable >and usable Usenet. Violating netiquette is IMHO any behaviour, >that (when adapted by all*) will lead to the collapse of the >Usenet. You wish to codify human expression on the net? Hammurabi would have been proud of you. :-) However, as benevolent as your intentions seem, some subtle and not-so-subtle forms of violence would be required. Doubtful you see this. You seem to really enjoy your vision of something called "a stable and useable net." And if its inception is what you use to justify your position then the very best of luck to you sir. >* I do not believe in exeptions for "special" people/groups, as >they tend to get out of hand (I their case is important, so is >mine). But if your vision of netiquette (and a stable and useable net) is important, then so is mine...right? >> PS. Though Koos' whose words I don't often read, and, in fact, avoid, >> seems off the beaten path, his anti-Scientology stance is commendable. >> There's been more than enough evidence and information over the years >> to show that Cos is blatantly deceptive in its practices. That's >> another topic entirely... >I full agree on this one. That is why I waited 18 posts, hoping >that he would stop after a while. Unfortunately he didn't. Why not 19, or 17? Was your agenda safe up until the 19th post, but not a moment sooner or later? >And I don't believe in the "the cause justifies the abuse" point >of view. After all, this would allow anyone who percieves their >cause as important to drop civilised behaviour. The result would >be just as bad as dropping civilisation entirely. Life has a way about it. I'd fashioned myself as one who would resist using cause to justify abuse, but it seems I must reconsider. I didn't consider his posting abusive, though. >Those who want civilisation (and I belong to those) have to be >prepared to accept that this means limiting ones means. In all >cases. >An monthly or even biweekly announce post pointing to his website >would be acceptable, but every few days an entire file from it is >too much, inacceptible. Acceptable to what authority? Eric >-- >Neil.Franklin.remove@ccw.ch http://www.ccw.ch/Neil.Franklin/ >franklin.remove@arch.ethz.ch http://caad.arch.ethz.ch/~franklin/ >This computer has 2 cats, one in /bin, one on top purring. ###### Path: ccw.ch!usenet From: Neil Franklin Newsgroups: alt.metaphysics.lightwork,alt.paranet.metaphysics,alt.paranet.paranormal,alt.paranet.channeling,alt.paranet.psi,alt.paranet.science,alt.paranormal,alt.paranormal.channeling,alt.consciousness.mysticism,alt.consciousness.4th-way,alt.consciousness.near-death-exp,comp.org.cpsr.talk,talk.religion.newage,alt.life.afterlife,alt.out-of-body,de.alt.paranormal,z-netz.alt.esoterik,t-netz.esoterik Subject: Re: How Richard Reiss kills people by Black Magic Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 23:52:16 +0200 Organization: My own Private Self Lines: 158 Message-ID: <353E6690.7762A642@ccw.ch> References: <35393AA1.302C@trenite.de> <6hbcaa$bk7@sjx-ixn11.ix.netcom.com> <353A628A.399254A@ccw.ch> <6he61v$3ob@news-central.tiac.net> <353BC365.A81C460@ccw.ch> <6hh9rm$n4c@news-central.tiac.net> <353D2A55.B9AC81A9@ccw.ch> <6hjnf4$kdq@news-central.tiac.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.0.27 i486) Eric wrote: > > Neil Franklin wrote: > >Well it wasn't anger, I am just simply getting fed up with him. > > Consider me shocked that you see no correlation between "angry" and > "fed up". :-) Consider me baffled by your shock :-). Anger IMHO has to do with becoming aggressive and uncontrolled (mental image: blood shooting into face). To be fed up doesn't have any of this. > >Actually I regard netiquette as a codification of the types of > >behaviour, which (when followed by all) will lead to an stable > >and usable Usenet. Violating netiquette is IMHO any behaviour, > >that (when adapted by all*) will lead to the collapse of the > >Usenet. > > You wish to codify human expression on the net? Even more baffled :-) I can only assume that you define the word "codify" differently than I do. I was using codify as "put into writing/code what is usually being done". Or in this case "what is considered right to do". And I _was_ talking of behavioural standards not expression. One can express what ever point of view one wants, I was talking about the manner in which this is to be done. > Hammurabi would have been proud of you. :-) Who/what is Hammurabi? He/she/it is not known in this part of the world. Don't forget that Usenet messages are spread worldwide, local celebratories and institutions may not be known to all readers. Tip: From: addresses with 2-letter bits at the end are an good pointer that the person writing is somewhere out in the wide world. > However, as benevolent as your intentions > seem, some subtle and not-so-subtle forms of violence would be > required. Doubtful you see this. Such as tossing someone off the net, or blocking their access :-)? It is the right of any society to defend itsself against people that are destroying its base (deliberatly or an as side effect), either by making the destructive behaviour lossfull for the destroyer or by hindering that person in engaging in said behaviour. Just use as little force as neccessary to stop the perpetrator. > You seem to really enjoy your > vision of something called "a stable and useable net." Baffled again, from your term "something called". I would assume that it is obvious what the word "stable" means when applied to "net" and what implication "unstable" has on the usefullness of the net. I generally like things that work. And stay that way. IFAIK most people share this trait with me. > And if its inception is what you use to justify your position then > the very best of luck to you sir. Inception? I regard the existing net as stable and usable. I also regard it as in danger of becoming unstable and so unusable. Against that I intend to defend it. Normal citizens duty. Spam is one of the dangers it is facing. So I try my best to stop spammers. > >* I do not believe in exeptions for "special" people/groups, as > >they tend to get out of hand (I their case is important, so is > >mine). > > But if your vision of netiquette (and a stable and useable net) is > important, then so is mine...right? Assuming your visions do not include destroying the net I have no problem with accepting them. > >I full agree on this one. That is why I waited 18 posts, hoping > >that he would stop after a while. Unfortunately he didn't. > > Why not 19, or 17? Was your agenda safe up until the 19th post, but > not a moment sooner or later? Why did the rope brake at 2.345kg, not at 2.333 or 2.444? Because that is when it did. We have here an saying "the drop that made the barrel overflow", that nicely fits this case. What about such things as unevenly distributed time to do it. OTOH perhaps it was the phase of the moon:-)? As you seem so baffled about the "magical" 18 I will rephrase my sentance: "That is why I waited _so_many_ posts, hoping...". Acceptable :-)? > >And I don't believe in the "the cause justifies the abuse" point > >of view. After all, this would allow anyone who percieves their > >cause as important to drop civilised behaviour. The result would > >be just as bad as dropping civilisation entirely. > > Life has a way about it. Let life drive you where it wants to, or do you best to direct it towards where you want to go. I was brought up to recognize the value of the second. That is normal here where I live. There again we have been a democracy since 1291, we have a bit of tradition in doing this. > I'd fashioned myself as one who would resist > using cause to justify abuse, but it seems I must reconsider. Why would you now use abuse for an jusified cause? Because someone has declared it bad? I don't get the logic behind that one. More baffled. > I didn't consider his posting abusive, though. Like all spam it is abusive of an infrastructure we users all pay for (in money and more important in time (reading!)). We do so in the hope of getting the benefits of society (other readers, an exchange of ideas) from it. Spammers increase the costs, results is some participants leaving, that reduces the benefit, more leaving, ... vicious circle until the society collapses, we all lose. > >An monthly or even biweekly announce post pointing to his website > >would be acceptable, but every few days an entire file from it is > >too much, inacceptible. > > Acceptable to what authority? That is IMHO the rate for regular reposts that most people favour. Just the Impression I have got from various discussions on this question in diffent groups. As for authority: Usenet is an anarchistic society, there exists no authority in it (exeption moderated groups). Just the sum of the points people have made over time. Codified (in my use of the word) as netiquette. To the various crossposted groups: unfortunately I do not know on which group Eric reads, so I can't prune the list (he is not an a.o-o-b regular). I therefore am sending this as the last post in this thread. Thanks for your listening. Goodbye. -- private: Neil.Franklin.remove@ccw.ch http://www.ccw.ch/Neil.Franklin/ office: franklin.remove@arch.ethz.ch http://caad.arch.ethz.ch/~franklin/ This computer has 2 cats, one in /bin, one on top purring. ###### Path: ccw.ch!elna.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-hh.maz.net!fu-berlin.de!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!199.0.65.142!news-feed1.tiac.net!posterchild2!news@tiac.net From: ely@tiac.net (Eric) Newsgroups: alt.metaphysics.lightwork,alt.paranet.metaphysics,alt.paranet.paranormal,alt.paranet.channeling,alt.paranet.psi,alt.paranet.science,alt.paranormal,alt.paranormal.channeling,alt.consciousness.mysticism,alt.consciousness.4th-way,alt.consciousness.near-death-exp,comp.org.cpsr.talk,talk.religion.newage,alt.life.afterlife,alt.out-of-body,de.alt.paranormal,z-netz.alt.esoterik,t-netz.esoterik Subject: Re: How Richard Reiss kills people by Black Magic Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 04:14:26 GMT Organization: The Internet Access Company, Inc. Lines: 216 Message-ID: <6hmev2$njq@news-central.tiac.net> References: <35393AA1.302C@trenite.de> <6hbcaa$bk7@sjx-ixn11.ix.netcom.com> <353A628A.399254A@ccw.ch> <6he61v$3ob@news-central.tiac.net> <353BC365.A81C460@ccw.ch> <6hh9rm$n4c@news-central.tiac.net> <353D2A55.B9AC81A9@ccw.ch> <6hjnf4$kdq@news-central.tiac.net> <353E6690.7762A642@ccw.ch> Reply-To: ely@tiac.net NNTP-Posting-Host: p10.ts1.danve.ma.tiac.com X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82 Neil Franklin wrote: (How am I using the "Picture of Man?") >Eric wrote: >> >> Neil Franklin wrote: >> >Well it wasn't anger, I am just simply getting fed up with him. >> >> Consider me shocked that you see no correlation between "angry" and >> "fed up". :-) >Consider me baffled by your shock :-). Anger IMHO has to do with >becoming aggressive and uncontrolled (mental image: blood shooting into >face). To be fed up doesn't have any of this. Ah, so showing restraint in your expression of dissatisfaction is enough justification for adding more noise to the SPAM in question. I think I get it now. >> >Actually I regard netiquette as a codification of the types of >> >behaviour, which (when followed by all) will lead to an stable >> >and usable Usenet. Violating netiquette is IMHO any behaviour, >> >that (when adapted by all*) will lead to the collapse of the >> >Usenet. >> >> You wish to codify human expression on the net? >Even more baffled :-) I can only assume that you define the word >"codify" differently than I do. I was using codify as "put into >writing/code what is usually being done". Or in this case "what is >considered right to do". That sets off alarms and raises hairs. Who would be responsible for such an undertaking? >And I _was_ talking of behavioural standards not expression. One can >express what ever point of view one wants, I was talking about the >manner in which this is to be done. "Be a good boy" sort of stuff, right? Codification on these matters has already taken place. They are called "The Ten Commandments." It's interesting and odd that instead of applying the wonderfully crafted Commandments, humans still seek new ways of controlling life through complex codification and the self-righteous insistence that such measures are necessary and just. >> Hammurabi would have been proud of you. :-) >Who/what is Hammurabi? He/she/it is not known in this part of the world. >Don't forget that Usenet messages are spread worldwide, local >celebratories and institutions may not be known to all readers. H. was an ancient ruler who developed what became known as "Hammurabi's Code." It's summarized in the phrase, "Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth." If you kill my slave, I get to take yours, etc. Interesting reference, but not a major point in this thread. >Tip: From: addresses with 2-letter bits at the end are an good pointer >that the person writing is somewhere out in the wide world. >> However, as benevolent as your intentions >> seem, some subtle and not-so-subtle forms of violence would be >> required. Doubtful you see this. >Such as tossing someone off the net, or blocking their access :-)? >It is the right of any society to defend itsself against people that are >destroying its base (deliberatly or an as side effect), either by making >the destructive behaviour lossfull for the destroyer or by hindering >that person in engaging in said behaviour. Just use as little force as >neccessary to stop the perpetrator. From where does this "right" originate? Is it from the same place as the "right" that allows any person to try to destroy a society in which he does not believe? Without jumping to conclusions about my beliefs, tell me why it appears you are coming down on the side of society and not the individual. Does an individual have the "right" to try to destroy a sick society that is involved in the act of genocide? Isn't your point not about "rights" but rather about what you think is right and proper? >> You seem to really enjoy your >> vision of something called "a stable and useable net." >Baffled again, from your term "something called". I would assume that it >is obvious what the word "stable" means when applied to "net" and what >implication "unstable" has on the usefullness of the net. If it isn't a "stable and useable net" yet, then it is just a vision of something -called- "a stable and useable net" which you are indulging in. Why deny that...enjoy it if you can...not that it will ever happen, but still, you can enjoy your dreams. >I generally like things that work. And stay that way. IFAIK most people >share this trait with me. Does it follow that most poeple generally don't like things that don't work. And do you share that trait with those people as well? >> And if its inception is what you use to justify your position then >> the very best of luck to you sir. >Inception? I regard the existing net as stable and usable. I also regard >it as in danger of becoming unstable and so unusable. Against that I >intend to defend it. Normal citizens duty. Spam is one of the dangers it >is facing. So I try my best to stop spammers. Defend away; and try your best. And good luck! >> >* I do not believe in exeptions for "special" people/groups, as >> >they tend to get out of hand (I their case is important, so is >> >mine). >> >> But if your vision of netiquette (and a stable and useable net) is >> important, then so is mine...right? >Assuming your visions do not include destroying the net I have no >problem with accepting them. I wasn't asking whether or not you accept them, but that the logic of your statement is questionable. >> >I full agree on this one. That is why I waited 18 posts, hoping >> >that he would stop after a while. Unfortunately he didn't. >> >> Why not 19, or 17? Was your agenda safe up until the 19th post, but >> not a moment sooner or later? >Why did the rope brake at 2.345kg, not at 2.333 or 2.444? Because that >is when it did. We have here an saying "the drop that made the barrel >overflow", that nicely fits this case. What about such things as >unevenly distributed time to do it. OTOH perhaps it was the phase of the >moon:-)? >As you seem so baffled about the "magical" 18 I will rephrase my >sentance: "That is why I waited _so_many_ posts, hoping...". Acceptable >:-)? So why did you wait so many posts? >> >And I don't believe in the "the cause justifies the abuse" point >> >of view. After all, this would allow anyone who percieves their >> >cause as important to drop civilised behaviour. The result would >> >be just as bad as dropping civilisation entirely. >> >> Life has a way about it. >Let life drive you where it wants to, or do you best to direct it >towards where you want to go. I was brought up to recognize the value of >the second. That is normal here where I live. There again we have been a >democracy since 1291, we have a bit of tradition in doing this. Has the traditions of "rape, pillage and murder" been developing steadily as well? >> I'd fashioned myself as one who would resist >> using cause to justify abuse, but it seems I must reconsider. >Why would you now use abuse for an jusified cause? Because someone has >declared it bad? I don't get the logic behind that one. More baffled. You can't be -more- baffled, just more -aware- at how baffled you are in general. :-) The lines to which you refer were not stated clearly. They were meant to say that I would need to reconsider what was abusive...not that abusive behavior is justifiable. >> I didn't consider his posting abusive, though. >Like all spam it is abusive of an infrastructure we users all pay for >(in money and more important in time (reading!)). We do so in the hope >of getting the benefits of society (other readers, an exchange of ideas) >from it. Spammers increase the costs, results is some participants >leaving, that reduces the benefit, more leaving, ... vicious circle >until the society collapses, we all lose. Good point. I'm sold. >> >An monthly or even biweekly announce post pointing to his website >> >would be acceptable, but every few days an entire file from it is >> >too much, inacceptible. >> >> Acceptable to what authority? >That is IMHO the rate for regular reposts that most people favour. Just >the Impression I have got from various discussions on this question in >diffent groups. >As for authority: Usenet is an anarchistic society, there exists no >authority in it (exeption moderated groups). Just the sum of the points >people have made over time. Codified (in my use of the word) as >netiquette. >To the various crossposted groups: unfortunately I do not know on which >group Eric reads, so I can't prune the list (he is not an a.o-o-b >regular). I therefore am sending this as the last post in this thread. >Thanks for your listening. Goodbye. It's been nice talking to you from over here on alt.consciousness.4th-way. Though I'm not a regular on a.o.o.b. (which might better read b.o.o.b. :-) jk) I am a regular to the o.o.b. experience. My early years were filled with them to the point where I was not comfortable going to sleep until I was absolutely exhausted. Bye, Eric >-- >private: Neil.Franklin.remove@ccw.ch http://www.ccw.ch/Neil.Franklin/ >office: franklin.remove@arch.ethz.ch http://caad.arch.ethz.ch/~franklin/ >This computer has 2 cats, one in /bin, one on top purring.