>>>>> Alan Connor writes:
> No valid email address and no NNTP-Posting-Host IP, and
> you are out of luck.
Well you don't use a valid email address either.
And many NNTP servers don't add an NNTP-Posting-Host: header by default.
[snip]
--
Neil
Neil Woods
> >>>>> Alan Connor writes:
>
> > No valid email address and no NNTP-Posting-Host IP, and
> > you are out of luck.
>
> Well you don't use a valid email address either.
Sorry, but he does. See his sig.
> And many NNTP servers don't add an NNTP-Posting-Host: header by default.
As the post *does* have a NNTP-Posting-Host: header, I think his beef
is that the host.domain does not resolve to an IP address.
On comp.mail.misc, in <42ad4d01$0$622$dbd45001@news.wanadoo.nl>,
"Frank Slootweg" wrote:
> Neil Woods
>
>> >>>>> Alan Connor writes:
>>
>> > No valid email address and no NNTP-Posting-Host IP, and you
>> > are out of luck.
>>
>> Well you don't use a valid email address either.
>
> Sorry, but he does. See his sig.
But he can't use it, because he's a little dickless coward
that won't use his real return address to mail me.
(And incompetent too: _I_ can beat my own filter when used
by others.)
My filter takes care of spammers AND trolls for me.
He doesn't realize that if he was a real threat to anyone,
instead of being a snivelling punk loser that just posts shit on
the Usenet, that he'd have been tracked down and hospitalized
long ago. The poor feeb actually thinks that his sophomoric troll
tricks hide his tracks.
>> And many NNTP servers don't add an NNTP-Posting-Host: header
>> by default.
Duh.
>
> As the post *does* have a NNTP-Posting-Host: header, I think
> his beef is that the host.domain does not resolve to an IP
> address.
Bingo
AC
--
alanconnor AT earthlink DOT net
Use your real return address or I'll never know you
even tried to mail me. http://tinyurl.com/2t5kp
~
> But he can't use it, because he's a little dickless coward
> that won't use his real return address to mail me.
>
I don't usually reply to these childish anger storms but
there is a technical error that should be pointed out
here. Unless we are getting into universal person id's,
biometrics, genetic codes and so on there's no such thing
as a real return address.
bogey
On comp.mail.misc, in <42ad54f4$0$2022$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net>, "Bogart" wrote:
>
>> But he can't use it, because he's a little dickless coward
>> that won't use his real return address to mail me.
>>
>
> I don't usually reply to these childish anger storms but
> there is a technical error that should be pointed out
> here. Unless we are getting into universal person id's,
> biometrics, genetic codes and so on there's no such thing
> as a real return address.
>
> bogey
I wasn't angry and there is too such a thing as a 'real'
return address: It's one that will get mail to the
person who has posted the address as their own.
DUH <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< !!!!!!!!!!
Your first inclination was correct: You should have kept
your bitchy and ignorant mouth shut.
AC
--
alanconnor AT earthlink DOT net
Use your real return address or I'll never know you
even tried to mail me. http://tinyurl.com/2t5kp
~
This is a MIME GnuPG-signed message. If you see this text, it means that
your E-mail or Usenet software does not support MIME signed messages.
--=_mimegpg-commodore.email-scan.com-3989-1118667259-0003
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Usenet Beavis writes:
>
> I wasn't angry
Right. You were having your regularly-scheduled kookfart.
> and there is too such a thing as a 'real'
> return address: It's one that will get mail to the
> person who has posted the address as their own.
Unfortunately, there's no way to prove this theory in this case, Beavis,
because you automatically delete all your mail.
> DUH <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< !!!!!!!!!!
Double-duh.
> Your first inclination was correct: You should have kept
> your bitchy and ignorant mouth shut.
Hypocrite.
You first, Beavis. You shut _your_ bitch and ignorant mouth. Only then can
you demand that others do the same.
--=_mimegpg-commodore.email-scan.com-3989-1118667259-0003
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQBCrYH7x9p3GYHlUOIRAjo/AJ9CgRFHSSLkcE5p0ckzIRBa/Bd46ACd G6aS
q2HVnk+pAICH62jxOOslj1k=
=7SSr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=_mimegpg-commodore.email-scan.com-3989-1118667259-0003--
On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 09:37:07 +0000, Alan Connor wrote:
>
> (And incompetent too: _I_ can beat my own filter when used by others.)
>
> AC
So, you've just admitted that
a) Your filter can be beaten
and
b) You've spammed people who obviously didn't want to receve your mail (or
why would you have to beat the filter).
And you wonder why people think you're a kook.
>>I don't usually reply to these childish anger storms but
>>there is a technical error that should be pointed out
>>here. Unless we are getting into universal person id's,
>>biometrics, genetic codes and so on there's no such thing
>>as a real return address.
>>
>>bogey
>
>
> I wasn't angry and there is too such a thing as a 'real'
> return address: It's one that will get mail to the
> person who has posted the address as their own.
which is entirely under the control of the person.
No address is real, its the way people use them that
makes them real. Addresses are just strings.
There is no mapping from address to person.
Most people use many identities in life and in different
ways. Which are the real ones ? The answer
requires more understanding of the world than
we have.
So, given that by reading and replying to your posts I am
ascribing a kind of meaningfullness to them,
a kind of "real post" 'ness I ask myself
why I am doing it ? And in asking that I
realise I'm just wasting time and shall desist
and put my focus somewhere more interesting.
Usenet never changes, does it.
bogey
In article
Alan Connor
>On comp.mail.misc, in <42ad54f4$0$2022$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net>, "Bogart" wrote:
>>
>>> But he can't use it, because he's a little dickless coward
>>> that won't use his real return address to mail me.
>>>
>>
>> I don't usually reply to these childish anger storms but
>> there is a technical error that should be pointed out
>> here. Unless we are getting into universal person id's,
>> biometrics, genetic codes and so on there's no such thing
>> as a real return address.
>>
>> bogey
>
>I wasn't angry and there is too such a thing as a 'real'
>return address: It's one that will get mail to the
>person who has posted the address as their own.
>
>DUH <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< !!!!!!!!!!
>
>Your first inclination was correct: You should have kept
>your bitchy and ignorant mouth shut.
>
So you lied after all when you said that your filters prevent you from
seeing messages from trolls and called "Bogart" a troll?
Now you are responding to him directly, you moron.
No wonder every thinks that you are a kook.
>You should have kept
>your bitchy and ignorant mouth shut.
You should consider taking that advice, along with seeking professional
help.