Re: Test Message
From: Eric <eric_at_deptj.eu>
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 18:57:59 +0000
Message-ID: <slrnjjt8pn.8er.eric_at_teckel.deptj.eu>
On 2012-02-17, joel garry <joel-garry_at_home.com> wrote:
> On Feb 17, 3:29?am, "Preston" <dontwant..._at_nowhere.invalid> wrote:
<snip>
>> You're wasting your time Eric. Even if you accept the frankly ludicrous
>> premise that spammers either read replies to their posts or read a
>> group before spamming it, most usenet servers don't honour cancel
>> requests, & neither does Google Groups. The only way a cancel sometimes
>> works is if you send it within seconds of the original, before the post
>> leaves your provider's server.
>>
>> The only thing David & Joel achieve by replying to them is to propogate
>> the spam to everyone who didn't see the original due to using a proper
>> usenet provider and/or local rules. But I've been down this road with
>> them several times before to no avail.
>>
>> --
>> Preston.
>
> Google groups has honored every request I've ever made, some even
> months after they were posted (forgeries not posted by me, I never
> would have even thought to look until I accidentally ran across one,
> then knew what to look for). You still fail to realize spammers
> aren't a homogenous group, they don't all use the same spamware, they
> have different motivations. I've personally been thanked by some who
> were clueless (rare indeed, but it has happened). Causality is
> difficult to establish, but notice, this group is still here.
>
> I note Eric never said how he tried to cancel.
> http://noms.icanhascheezburger.com/2012/02/13/funny-food-photos-youre
> -doing-it-wrong-3/
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 18:57:59 +0000
Message-ID: <slrnjjt8pn.8er.eric_at_teckel.deptj.eu>
On 2012-02-17, joel garry <joel-garry_at_home.com> wrote:
> On Feb 17, 3:29?am, "Preston" <dontwant..._at_nowhere.invalid> wrote:
<snip>
>> You're wasting your time Eric. Even if you accept the frankly ludicrous
>> premise that spammers either read replies to their posts or read a
>> group before spamming it, most usenet servers don't honour cancel
>> requests, & neither does Google Groups. The only way a cancel sometimes
>> works is if you send it within seconds of the original, before the post
>> leaves your provider's server.
>>
>> The only thing David & Joel achieve by replying to them is to propogate
>> the spam to everyone who didn't see the original due to using a proper
>> usenet provider and/or local rules. But I've been down this road with
>> them several times before to no avail.
>>
>> --
>> Preston.
>
> Google groups has honored every request I've ever made, some even
> months after they were posted (forgeries not posted by me, I never
> would have even thought to look until I accidentally ran across one,
> then knew what to look for). You still fail to realize spammers
> aren't a homogenous group, they don't all use the same spamware, they
> have different motivations. I've personally been thanked by some who
> were clueless (rare indeed, but it has happened). Causality is
> difficult to establish, but notice, this group is still here.
>
> I note Eric never said how he tried to cancel.
> http://noms.icanhascheezburger.com/2012/02/13/funny-food-photos-youre
> -doing-it-wrong-3/
It didn't seem to be necessary to say to start with, but it was a proper cancel message created by slrn with
Control: cancel <msgid>
in the headers!
So no I wasn't doing it wrong!
> All I can guess is you guys are talking about something else and
> calling it a cancel, and perhaps have some strange ideas about
> propagation.
No we're not talking about something else, and you seem to be the one with the strange ideas about propagation.
And there you go about Google Groups again, like those people who have no idea about what Usenet is. As previously, I am left wondering if you can really be the same Joel Garry who has been posting to this newsgroup for years.
Eric
-- ms fnd in a lbryReceived on Fri Feb 17 2012 - 12:57:59 CST