On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 09:29:03 -0500, Jerry Stuckle
RafaMinu wrote:
Gary L. Burnore wrote:
In <
[email protected]> on Thu, 03 Jan
2008 14:03:11 -0500, Jerry Stuckle <
[email protected]>
wrote:
Dick Gaughan wrote:
In <C3A2D429.F13D%
[email protected]> on Thu, 03 Jan 2008
I don't get it. Why was the original post spam?
It wasn't. It was many things, including being a
pathetically-badly disguised festering heap of marketing shite,
but it wasn't spam.
Those insisting it was spam are merely flaunting their
cluelessness. A post is *only* defined as being spam when it
breaches the Breidbart Index. Nobody has provided any evidence
that that particular bit of midge's effluence has exceeded the BI.
The Breidbart Index is woefully out of date.
When was that decided? I must have missed that debate.
It's been dismissed as virtually meaningless for quite a while, now.
SPAM has changed, but the index hasn't.
In a.w.w, ads of any kind are considered SPAM.
What aww might or might not consider is about as relevant outside
aww as a spider's fart. I'm not reading this thread in aww.
Fine. I am reading this in a.w.w., and it is spam here.
The BI was adopted as a way of avoiding would-be Usenet vigilantes
deciding to classify posts as spam on the basis that they disliked
the contents. This discussion shows that the wisdom of that
concern still has relevance.
So you have some meaningless, out of date measurement which doesn't say
something is spam or not, but only classifies the severity of the SPAM.
Right. Try again.
Until someone else comes up with a better content-blind objective
definition of spam, the BI is still the benchmark.
There is. The charter and/or FAQs for the newsgroup. And the FAQs for
a.w.w., which were agreed to by the majority of the regulars here,
classify this as spam.
LIA[SLAP]
FAQs aren't charters and are not enforceable. Charters in unmoderated
alt gorups are also uninforceable. Off charter in comp groups, on the
other hand, is something that can get your news provider's attention.
That's funny. I've gotten quite a few hosting of accounts canceled
because I've reported spam.
Only if it's real spam. What you're calling spam isn't. There are
very specific rules.
And according to the FAQ's in a.w.w, it is spam.
A FAQ is only a list of frequently asked questions, Jerry. It is no
way enforceable and can't change the meaning of the word. >> They're
called alt. for a reason.
Sorry, you 're about 10 years behind the curve.
Gee, it's the good ones who cancel accounts because I show them the
spam.
Nope. Only a fool would believe what you're calling spam is actually
spam.
Only a fool would believe unsolicited ads where they are not wanted is
not SPAM.
However, it seems you've just called a lot of respected hosting
companies fools.
It is ENFORCEABLE (get a spell checker).
More proof of how you really are? Good! You're showing every newbie
in comp.lang.php that you're an idiot. Hope that's what you wanted.
It's what you're getting.
Nope. Just that YOU are. Can't even afford a spell checker.
And it DOES mean something.
Nothing at all.
Sorry.
Liar.
You're the one calling someone a LIAR! ROFLMAO!
Your arguments don't work.
It's not an argument, it's a fact.
Show me where it is a FACT. Otherwise, it is just YOUR OPINION. And
YOUR ARGUMENT.
They're too far out of date.
Good thing is, you don't get to decide.
Neither do you.
But in this case the op is a troll well-known in a.w.w. He just morphed
names, and it took a little while to catch on (good catch, Karl!).
SO? What does that have to do with comp.lang.php?
I didn't start it.
So you're so controlled you simply MUST post to comp.lang.php. Got
it. You're owned, bigtime.
I have the right to defend myself - especially against charges of
criminal activity. Period. You don't like it? Ignore the thread if
you don't like it.
I'm just trying to show people who Rafael
Martinez-Minuesa Martinez really is
You're doing just fine at showing he's the holder of your leash. Now
sit like a good little poodle.
ROFLMAO! You're even more stoopid than most people if you believe that.
And if I called you a fraud and a liar, will you just ignore it? I
think not. What would your employer do if he/she found out?
- a troll and a spammer.
SPAM is BI>20. His post was off topic, sure. But not spam. If you're
saying off topic is spam then your posts to comp.lang.php (and
comp.infosystems.
www..... are spam too). Difference being: YOU can
lose your account for it faster than he can. Wanna see?
Wrong, Gary. And has been for years. You are woefully out of date.
You DON'T get to say what SPAM is, you pitiful SCAMMER.
The Usenet is not yours and there are far more knowledgeable and
experienced people than you who know much better than you.
If you were not so arrogant and had just a little bit of common sense
you'd listen to them.
And neither do you, trolling fraud.
Ah yes, everyone's a troll and fraud for pointing out what a hypocrite
you are.
