Re: Order entry service available
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 14:55:18 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <1e7d6f9f-e37c-4b39-9e9a-01514b649324_at_rz3g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>
On Feb 13, 1:54 pm, Eric <e..._at_deptj.eu> wrote:
> On 2012-02-13, joel garry <joel-ga..._at_home.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Feb 12, 4:13?pm, Eric <e..._at_deptj.eu> wrote:
> >> On 2012-02-12, ddf <orat..._at_msn.com> wrote:
>
> >> > On Feb 11, 9:27?am, Eric <e..._at_deptj.eu> wrote:
> >> >> On 2012-02-10, ddf <orat..._at_msn.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> > On Feb 9, 11:11?pm, vikram <kingkon..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> >> <spam snipped>
>
> >> >> > This is the wrong place to post your SPAM. ?Remove it immediately.
>
> >> >> Are you really so naive as to believe either that he would want to
> >> >> remove it or that there is actually any way for him to do so?
>
> >> > No, however it is common policy to post such notifications regardless
> >> > of the integrity of the original poster.
>
> >> > I'm surprised you haven't noticed that.
>
> >> I have, but I consider it to be moderately pointless.
>
> >> Asking for removal is definitely pointless since it is, as I said,
> >> impossible.
>
> > Not pointless, it is for the other millions of spammers who might not
> > realize they are spammers and look before posting.
>
> Naive.
Quixotic, not naive. Only the magnitude of effect is arguable, if you think it is entirely null, the naivete is obvious.
>
> > Not sure why you say he _can't_ remove a posting, doesn't most posting
> > software have such an option?
>
> This is Usenet, the only way to remove a posting is to send a
> cancellation, and
>
> 1) there is no absolute guarantee that a cancellation will reach all the
> servers the message did
>
> 2) many servers ignore cancellations since they are quite easy to forge
>
> 3) some of the servers that ignore cancellations keep publicly
> accessible archives.
That's true, but you are being entirely too mechanistic. You are incorrectly assuming that because some cancels are ignored, all will be and everyone will always be using servers that ignore. That's like saying "don't use antibiotics because it will cause resistance." True about the resistance, but do you really want to be a blind syphilitic?
What you seem to be missing is that as an unmoderated forum, we have to work in tandem to netcop. Different people have different ideas on how to do that, and since there are different spamming attacks - spammers are not a homogenous group, the merely clueless might watch and learn from responses - there needs be different defense mechanisms. Amazingly enough, despite so many "death of usenet" assertions that it is a very old joke about "news at 11," this group is still here and useful. Many of us have been here since before the beginning (which isn't a non sequitur, it used to be cdo before cdos). Some of us have seen that chest-pounding and clear assertions do work against spammers - logic is not the primary factor, behavior is.
jg
-- _at_home.com is bogus. http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6316/125/Received on Mon Feb 13 2012 - 16:55:18 CST