It would seem Bill is the biggest Charter offender these days.

"HE" needs to read the damn thing and follow it, if he did the poor
script kiddies wouldn't have anything to whine about.

Mike

jeff wrote:
> Did you eat paint chips as a child?
>
> From the charter: "The articles sent to the Jeep listserver will be
> cross-posted to Usenet but not vise versa."
>
> Read Carefully:
> When this usenet group was proposed the volume of messages to the JEEP-L
> server was getting unmanageable. R.A.M.J+W was created to offload the
> JEEP-L server. In order to create a migratory path, posts to the old
> JEEP-L were automatically forwarded to usenet, however since the intent
> was to offload JEEP-L the reverse was not done. The line in the charter
> simply explains this mechanism. There is _NO_ restriction on cross-posting.
>
> BTW, you should go read your ***.net TOS again. You have been flooding
> this group with your cut and paste responses, posting binaries, and in
> general disrupting the group with your unwarranted abuse complaints.
> Each is a violation of your ***.net Terms Of Service.
>

 

It would seem Bill is the biggest Charter offender these days.

"HE" needs to read the damn thing and follow it, if he did the poor
script kiddies wouldn't have anything to whine about.

Mike

jeff wrote:
> Did you eat paint chips as a child?
>
> From the charter: "The articles sent to the Jeep listserver will be
> cross-posted to Usenet but not vise versa."
>
> Read Carefully:
> When this usenet group was proposed the volume of messages to the JEEP-L
> server was getting unmanageable. R.A.M.J+W was created to offload the
> JEEP-L server. In order to create a migratory path, posts to the old
> JEEP-L were automatically forwarded to usenet, however since the intent
> was to offload JEEP-L the reverse was not done. The line in the charter
> simply explains this mechanism. There is _NO_ restriction on cross-posting.
>
> BTW, you should go read your ***.net TOS again. You have been flooding
> this group with your cut and paste responses, posting binaries, and in
> general disrupting the group with your unwarranted abuse complaints.
> Each is a violation of your ***.net Terms Of Service.
>

 

It would seem Bill is the biggest Charter offender these days.

"HE" needs to read the damn thing and follow it, if he did the poor
script kiddies wouldn't have anything to whine about.

Mike

jeff wrote:
> Did you eat paint chips as a child?
>
> From the charter: "The articles sent to the Jeep listserver will be
> cross-posted to Usenet but not vise versa."
>
> Read Carefully:
> When this usenet group was proposed the volume of messages to the JEEP-L
> server was getting unmanageable. R.A.M.J+W was created to offload the
> JEEP-L server. In order to create a migratory path, posts to the old
> JEEP-L were automatically forwarded to usenet, however since the intent
> was to offload JEEP-L the reverse was not done. The line in the charter
> simply explains this mechanism. There is _NO_ restriction on cross-posting.
>
> BTW, you should go read your ***.net TOS again. You have been flooding
> this group with your cut and paste responses, posting binaries, and in
> general disrupting the group with your unwarranted abuse complaints.
> Each is a violation of your ***.net Terms Of Service.
>

 

It would seem Bill is the biggest Charter offender these days.

"HE" needs to read the damn thing and follow it, if he did the poor
script kiddies wouldn't have anything to whine about.

Mike

jeff wrote:
> Did you eat paint chips as a child?
>
> From the charter: "The articles sent to the Jeep listserver will be
> cross-posted to Usenet but not vise versa."
>
> Read Carefully:
> When this usenet group was proposed the volume of messages to the JEEP-L
> server was getting unmanageable. R.A.M.J+W was created to offload the
> JEEP-L server. In order to create a migratory path, posts to the old
> JEEP-L were automatically forwarded to usenet, however since the intent
> was to offload JEEP-L the reverse was not done. The line in the charter
> simply explains this mechanism. There is _NO_ restriction on cross-posting.
>
> BTW, you should go read your ***.net TOS again. You have been flooding
> this group with your cut and paste responses, posting binaries, and in
> general disrupting the group with your unwarranted abuse complaints.
> Each is a violation of your ***.net Terms Of Service.
>

 

In article <4624520c$0$16332$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>
"L.W. \(Bill\) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote:
>
> And they are also ******* like the queers in the movie Brokenback
> Mountain, and I think you, definitely not man enough.
>

Can we get a retroactive abortion here, please!

 

In article <4624520c$0$16332$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>
"L.W. \(Bill\) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote:
>
> And they are also ******* like the queers in the movie Brokenback
> Mountain, and I think you, definitely not man enough.
>

Can we get a retroactive abortion here, please!

 

In article <4624520c$0$16332$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>
"L.W. \(Bill\) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote:
>
> And they are also ******* like the queers in the movie Brokenback
> Mountain, and I think you, definitely not man enough.
>

Can we get a retroactive abortion here, please!

 

In article <4624520c$0$16332$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>
"L.W. \(Bill\) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote:
>
> And they are also ******* like the queers in the movie Brokenback
> Mountain, and I think you, definitely not man enough.
>

Can we get a retroactive abortion here, please!

 

Bob Officer <bobofficers@127.0.0.7> wrote:

>On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 21:49:00 -0700, in alt.usenet.kooks, "L.W.
>\(Bill\) ------ III" <----------@***.net> top posting ----wit and
>spud peeling netKKKop wrote:
>
>> Us the responsible people that use their real name and address.
>
>I am puzzled by you lack of logic. Do you actually believe the use of
>a real name and e-mail address is someone an indicator of being
>"responsible"?
>
>I wish to introduce you to Edmond Wollmann, Bruce Dan Kettler,
>Raymond Karczewski, Steven R Young, Richard Bullis, Peter Stapleton,
>HugH Jeffcoat, Sylvia Sullivan, Gerald C Newton, Charles Cagel, JP
>Turcard, Jay Stevens, Dr. Andrew B. Chung, Brad Guth, Andre Liven,
>Jayne Kulikauskas and the late Earl Curley. None of which have one
>shred of responsibility, posted with their real name and real e-mail
>address.
>
>What you were bragging about has just been shown to a be a logical
>fallacy. Proud now?
>
>
>
>May I add you name to the above list of kooks?
>
>>Apposed to you cowards.
>
>Do you need me to show the fallacy of your claim, one half has
>already been shown to be a fallacy, the other half can be discounted
>also in the same manner.
>
>I can show there is no logical relationship between those that post
>with a real name and e-mail address and the level of personal
>responsibility.
>
>Actually you would be my prime and newest example.

Wee Davie Tholen also whines about people who post to usenet with
pseudonyms and calls them "cowards". Bill here is in good company.

--
Supreme Leader of the Brainwashed Followers of Art Deco

"Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Deco?
The section is clearly attributed to Art Deco, not to you, Deco."
-- Dr. David Tholen

"Who is "David Tholen", Daedalus? Still suffering from
attribution problems?"
-- Dr. David Tholen

 

Bob Officer <bobofficers@127.0.0.7> wrote:

>On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 21:49:00 -0700, in alt.usenet.kooks, "L.W.
>\(Bill\) ------ III" <----------@***.net> top posting ----wit and
>spud peeling netKKKop wrote:
>
>> Us the responsible people that use their real name and address.
>
>I am puzzled by you lack of logic. Do you actually believe the use of
>a real name and e-mail address is someone an indicator of being
>"responsible"?
>
>I wish to introduce you to Edmond Wollmann, Bruce Dan Kettler,
>Raymond Karczewski, Steven R Young, Richard Bullis, Peter Stapleton,
>HugH Jeffcoat, Sylvia Sullivan, Gerald C Newton, Charles Cagel, JP
>Turcard, Jay Stevens, Dr. Andrew B. Chung, Brad Guth, Andre Liven,
>Jayne Kulikauskas and the late Earl Curley. None of which have one
>shred of responsibility, posted with their real name and real e-mail
>address.
>
>What you were bragging about has just been shown to a be a logical
>fallacy. Proud now?
>
>
>
>May I add you name to the above list of kooks?
>
>>Apposed to you cowards.
>
>Do you need me to show the fallacy of your claim, one half has
>already been shown to be a fallacy, the other half can be discounted
>also in the same manner.
>
>I can show there is no logical relationship between those that post
>with a real name and e-mail address and the level of personal
>responsibility.
>
>Actually you would be my prime and newest example.

Wee Davie Tholen also whines about people who post to usenet with
pseudonyms and calls them "cowards". Bill here is in good company.

--
Supreme Leader of the Brainwashed Followers of Art Deco

"Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Deco?
The section is clearly attributed to Art Deco, not to you, Deco."
-- Dr. David Tholen

"Who is "David Tholen", Daedalus? Still suffering from
attribution problems?"
-- Dr. David Tholen