Adding privacy statement to outgoing emails

am 02.11.2006 21:23:41 von Thom Cole

Is it possible to use procmail to add a statement to all outgoing emails?
If so, could someone point me in the direction of a FAQ for doing that?

Thanks

Re: Adding privacy statement to outgoing emails

am 02.11.2006 22:45:39 von Landmark

"Thom Cole" wrote:

>Is it possible to use procmail to add a statement to all outgoing emails?
>If so, could someone point me in the direction of a FAQ for doing that?

I'm puzzled as to why poeple do this. Every disclaimer and attempt to
impose conditions that I have ever seen on them is legally worthless.
Doing it just because other people do it doesn't seem a particularly
good reason to me.

Re: Adding privacy statement to outgoing emails

am 02.11.2006 23:54:27 von Troy Piggins

* Landmark wrote:
> "Thom Cole" wrote:
>
>>Is it possible to use procmail to add a statement to all outgoing emails?
>>If so, could someone point me in the direction of a FAQ for doing that?

http://goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/

> I'm puzzled as to why poeple do this. Every disclaimer and attempt to
> impose conditions that I have ever seen on them is legally worthless.
> Doing it just because other people do it doesn't seem a particularly
> good reason to me.

Here's one I got from somewhere that I send back to the more
ridiculous ones:

Disclaimer:
By sending an email to ANY of my addresses you are agreeing that:
1. I am by definition, "the intended recipient".
2. All information in the email is mine to do with as I see fit and make
such financial profit, political mileage, or good joke as it lends itself to.
In particular, I may quote it on usenet.
3. I may take the contents as representing the views of your company.
4. This overrides any disclaimer or statement of confidentiality that may be
included on your message.

--
Troy Piggins

Re: Adding privacy statement to outgoing emails

am 03.11.2006 00:55:35 von Alan Connor

On comp.mail.misc, in , "Thom
Cole" wrote:

> Is it possible to use procmail to add a statement to all
> outgoing emails? If so, could someone point me in the
> direction of a FAQ for doing that?

It's possible (easy, actually), but a waste of time.

Every time I see one of those things I just laugh and usually add
the sender's address to my blocklist.

If you want privacy, then don't send mail you want to be kept
private to anyone who hasn't agreed in advance, with a PGP/GPG
signed mail, to keep your mail private, and encyrpt and sign all
private communications to that person, requiring the same thing
in return.

If you don't take those minimum steps you would be laughed out
of court and conceivably fined or jailed for filing a frivolous
lawsuit.

Even if you _do_ take those steps, you probably would lose the
case. You'd have to prove that your private key was kept secure
at all times, and if you are running Windows (which you are right
now, according to your headers) that would be very hard to do.

Alan

--
http://home.earthlink.net/~alanconnor/contact.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~alanconnor/survival/index.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~alanconnor/linux-unix/index.html

Re: [kook] Re: Adding privacy statement to outgoing emails

am 03.11.2006 00:55:56 von Alan Connor FGA

Thanks for your kookfart, Beavis.

Re: Adding privacy statement to outgoing emails

am 03.11.2006 02:02:56 von Sam

Re: Adding privacy statement to outgoing emails

am 03.11.2006 05:46:43 von patrick

In news:20061103085103@usenet.piggo.com,

>> I'm puzzled as to why poeple do this. Every disclaimer and attempt to
>> impose conditions that I have ever seen on them is legally worthless.
>> Doing it just because other people do it doesn't seem a particularly
>> good reason to me.
>
> Here's one I got from somewhere that I send back to the more
> ridiculous ones:

[tripe deleted]

If you play email games with spammers, then you encourage them, and are by
anture one of them.

Re: Adding privacy statement to outgoing emails

am 03.11.2006 06:13:43 von Troy Piggins

* Patrick wrote:
> In news:20061103085103@usenet.piggo.com,
>
>>> I'm puzzled as to why poeple do this. Every disclaimer and attempt to
>>> impose conditions that I have ever seen on them is legally worthless.
>>> Doing it just because other people do it doesn't seem a particularly
>>> good reason to me.
>>
>> Here's one I got from somewhere that I send back to the more
>> ridiculous ones:
>
> [tripe deleted]
>
> If you play email games with spammers, then you encourage them, and are by
> anture one of them.

Hi Patrick,

Who said I'm playing email games with spammers?

The emails I'm talking about come from some of the biggest
law/accounting firms in Australia if not the world. The
disclaimer they put at the bottom of their emails might be 30
lines long while the email message itself might be a one liner
saying they confirm their attendance at a meeting.

Did you even /read/ this thread before your fingers started
working?

--
Troy Piggins

Re: Adding privacy statement to outgoing emails

am 03.11.2006 07:28:26 von Alan Connor

On comp.mail.misc, in <20061103150715@usenet.piggo.com>, "Troy
Piggins" wrote:

> * Patrick wrote:
>
>> In news:20061103085103@usenet.piggo.com,
>>
>>>> I'm puzzled as to why poeple do this. Every disclaimer and
>>>> attempt to impose conditions that I have ever seen on them
>>>> is legally worthless. Doing it just because other people do
>>>> it doesn't seem a particularly good reason to me.
>>> Here's one I got from somewhere that I send back to the more
>>> ridiculous ones:
>>
>> [tripe deleted]
>>
>> If you play email games with spammers, then you encourage
>> them, and are by anture one of them.
>
> Hi Patrick,
>
> Who said I'm playing email games with spammers?
>
> The emails I'm talking about come from some of the biggest
> law/accounting firms in Australia if not the world. The
> disclaimer they put at the bottom of their emails might be 30
> lines long while the email message itself might be a one liner
> saying they confirm their attendance at a meeting.
>
> Did you even /read/ this thread before your fingers started
> working?

Why do you call him "Patrick" as if you know him?

There must be 100's of people who use that name. Occassionally.

http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search
Patrick
Results 1 - 100 of about 116,000 posts in the last year

116000 / 365
317.80821917808219178082

Allowing 10 hours a day for sleep and other things, that means he
would have to post more than once every 2.5 minutes, for 14
hours a day, every single day of the year. And that he doesn't
work for a living or go to school. That he doesn't do _anything_
but run his mouth on the Usenet.

Even if he was the only person using that name, you are not going
to get any quality out of someone like that.

That's why he uses a common name: So that he can post schitt
and then just run off and hide behind another alias, refusing
to take any responsibility for what he has posted.

I don't even download articles from people using common names for
aliases, for that very reason. Why bother reading schitt posted
by cowardly and dishonest motormouths?

Alan

--
http://home.earthlink.net/~alanconnor/contact.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~alanconnor/survival/index.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~alanconnor/linux-unix/index.html

Re: [kook] Re: Adding privacy statement to outgoing emails

am 03.11.2006 07:28:49 von Alan Connor FGA

Thanks for your kookfart, Beavis.

Re: Adding privacy statement to outgoing emails

am 03.11.2006 07:52:42 von Troy Piggins

* Alan Connor wrote:
> On comp.mail.misc, in <20061103150715@usenet.piggo.com>, "Troy
> Piggins" wrote:
>
>> * Patrick wrote:
>>
>>> In news:20061103085103@usenet.piggo.com,
>>>
>>>>> I'm puzzled as to why poeple do this. Every disclaimer and
>>>>> attempt to impose conditions that I have ever seen on them
>>>>> is legally worthless. Doing it just because other people do
>>>>> it doesn't seem a particularly good reason to me.
>>>> Here's one I got from somewhere that I send back to the more
>>>> ridiculous ones:
>>>
>>> [tripe deleted]
>>>
>>> If you play email games with spammers, then you encourage
>>> them, and are by anture one of them.
>>
>> Hi Patrick,
>>
>> Who said I'm playing email games with spammers?
>>
>> The emails I'm talking about come from some of the biggest
>> law/accounting firms in Australia if not the world. The
>> disclaimer they put at the bottom of their emails might be 30
>> lines long while the email message itself might be a one liner
>> saying they confirm their attendance at a meeting.
>>
>> Did you even /read/ this thread before your fingers started
>> working?
>
> Why do you call him "Patrick" as if you know him?

Same reason I call you "Alan". It may be his real name, it may
not. I don't care. It's just a way of referring to the poster
of the thread I was following up to.

I also don't care if he posts 1000 messages a day, or 1 message a
year. Your googlegroups count supposedly matches author's name of
"Patrick" - that doesn't prove anything. That's probably many
different people using the same alias. So? Who said your alias
has to be unique?

[snip]

--
Troy Piggins

[OT] [SLRN] Scoring Common Names (was: <snip>)

am 03.11.2006 09:28:43 von Alan Connor

On comp.mail.misc, in <20061103163906@usenet.piggo.com>, "Troy
Piggins" wrote:

I've included my entire article here, because Troy snipped
most of it:

Why do you call him "Patrick" as if you know him?

There must be 100's of people who use that name. Occassionally.

http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search
Patrick
Results 1 - 100 of about 116,000 posts in the last year

116000 / 365
317.80821917808219178082

Allowing 10 hours a day for sleep and other things, that means he
would have to post more than once every 2.5 minutes, for 14
hours a day, every single day of the year. And that he doesn't
work for a living or go to school. That he doesn't do _anything_
but run his mouth on the Usenet.

Even if he was the only person using that name, you are not going
to get any quality out of someone like that.

That's why he uses a common name: So that he can post schitt
and then just run off and hide behind another alias, refusing
to take any responsibility for what he has posted.

I don't even download articles from people using common names for
aliases, for that very reason. Why bother reading schitt posted
by cowardly and dishonest motormouths?

> * Alan Connor wrote:

>> Why do you call him "Patrick" as if you know him?
>
> Same reason I call you "Alan". It may be his real name, it may
> not. I don't care. It's just a way of referring to the poster
> of the thread I was following up to.

Okay. It just seemed like you were talking to someone you thought
you knew.

>
> I also don't care if he posts 1000 messages a day, or 1 message
> a year.

Yet you have a long and elaborate scorefile that kills thousands
of articles on a regular basis. Why not just read them all?

May as well read and reply to spam as read the articles of
someone who posts a thousand times a day.

They can't possibly have taken the time to even think about what
they are saying, much less seriously think about it. They are
just running their mouth.

> Your googlegroups count supposedly matches author's
> name of "Patrick" - that doesn't prove anything.

Yes it does. It proves that too many people use that name.
Or one compulsive poster does.

It's easy to check whether an alias has already been taken.
Just go to:

http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search

And plug names into the Author box until you find one that
returns 0 hits.

You _don't_ want to include the email address part because
they can change for good and valid reasons.

> That's probably many different people using the same alias.

No kidding. I said in the part of my article that you snipped
without noting the fact.

> So? Who said your alias has to be unique?

Honesty and integrity and ethics.

(Judging from this article of yours, I'd guess you've never even
heard of the concepts...)

So that people can killfile you if they wish to without
killfiling other people too.

So that they know they are talking to you instead of
someone else.

Why don't _you_ call yourself "Mike" or something like that if it
doesn't matter?

Here's the slrn scorefile entry I use for common names:

From: \CMike[) ]

That gets:

Mike <.*>

and

..*@.*\..* (Mike)

regardless of whether the letters m-i-k-e are upper or
lower case in any combination.

Alan

--
http://home.earthlink.net/~alanconnor/contact.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~alanconnor/survival/index.htm
http://home.earthlink.net/~alanconnor/linux-unix/index.html

Re: [OT] [SLRN] Scoring Common Names (was: <snip>)

am 03.11.2006 10:52:11 von Troy Piggins

["Followup-To:" header set to news.software.readers.]
* Alan Connor wrote:
> On comp.mail.misc, in <20061103163906@usenet.piggo.com>, "Troy
> Piggins" wrote:
>
> I've included my entire article here, because Troy snipped
> most of it:
>
>
>
>
>
> Why do you call him "Patrick" as if you know him?
>
> There must be 100's of people who use that name. Occassionally.
>
> http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search
> Patrick
> Results 1 - 100 of about 116,000 posts in the last year
>
> 116000 / 365
> 317.80821917808219178082
>
> Allowing 10 hours a day for sleep and other things, that means he
> would have to post more than once every 2.5 minutes, for 14
> hours a day, every single day of the year. And that he doesn't
> work for a living or go to school. That he doesn't do _anything_
> but run his mouth on the Usenet.
>
> Even if he was the only person using that name, you are not going
> to get any quality out of someone like that.
>
> That's why he uses a common name: So that he can post schitt
> and then just run off and hide behind another alias, refusing
> to take any responsibility for what he has posted.
>
> I don't even download articles from people using common names for
> aliases, for that very reason. Why bother reading schitt posted
> by cowardly and dishonest motormouths?
>
>
>
>> * Alan Connor wrote:
>
>
>
>>> Why do you call him "Patrick" as if you know him?
>>
>> Same reason I call you "Alan". It may be his real name, it may
>> not. I don't care. It's just a way of referring to the poster
>> of the thread I was following up to.
>
> Okay. It just seemed like you were talking to someone you thought
> you knew.
>
>> I also don't care if he posts 1000 messages a day, or 1 message
>> a year.
>
> Yet you have a long and elaborate scorefile that kills thousands
> of articles on a regular basis. Why not just read them all?

I have an elaborate scorefile that kills articles I don't want to
read so I don't have to read them all.

> May as well read and reply to spam as read the articles of
> someone who posts a thousand times a day.

Alan, I've replied a couple of times to you, and you post more
than any other regular I "know". More than the Patrick I replied
up this thread.

I fail to see how you can draw a comparison between the Patrick
we are referring to, and a googlegroups search for author names
Patrick, in all groups over a year. The guy I replied to could be
one of any number of Patricks, which may or may not be his real
name, who choose to use only a single name.

The message I replied to was hand typed, and there is no way you
could type those kinds of messages thousands of times a day, or
whatever your count was.

> They can't possibly have taken the time to even think about what
> they are saying, much less seriously think about it. They are
> just running their mouth.

Or as I point out, they aren't typing that many messages, they
are different ppl with the same name. So what.

>> Your googlegroups count supposedly matches author's
>> name of "Patrick" - that doesn't prove anything.
>
> Yes it does. It proves that too many people use that name.
> Or one compulsive poster does.

Too many is more than one?

> It's easy to check whether an alias has already been taken.
> Just go to:
>
> http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search
>
> And plug names into the Author box until you find one that
> returns 0 hits.

Why should I care if I have a unique name? What about the real
Fred Smith - that's pretty common, but it's his real name. Why
shouldn't he be able to post using his real name?

> You _don't_ want to include the email address part because
> they can change for good and valid reasons.
>
>> That's probably many different people using the same alias.
>
> No kidding. I said in the part of my article that you snipped
> without noting the fact.

Yes I did, I included a [snip] note.

>> So? Who said your alias has to be unique?
>
> Honesty and integrity and ethics.
>
> (Judging from this article of yours, I'd guess you've never even
> heard of the concepts...)

Take from it what you will.

> So that people can killfile you if they wish to without
> killfiling other people too.
>
> So that they know they are talking to you instead of
> someone else.

Alan, you're smarter than that. This is the real world. People
are going to overlap aliases/names. Live with it. You can't
killfile based on the author's name alone without possibly
killfiling unintended bystanders.

Use something smarter that's unique like message id and email
address combos.

> Why don't _you_ call yourself "Mike" or something like that if it
> doesn't matter?

Because I have honesty, integrity and ethics I use my real name.
Haha. Just kidding - I know many good posters who use aliases,
nothing against that. Not my cup of tea though, using aliases.

> Here's the slrn scorefile entry I use for common names:
>
> From: \CMike[) ]
>
> That gets:
>
> Mike <.*>
>
> and
>
> .*@.*\..* (Mike)
>
> regardless of whether the letters m-i-k-e are upper or
> lower case in any combination.

Peace.

--
Troy Piggins

Re: Adding privacy statement to outgoing emails

am 03.11.2006 12:22:50 von Landmark

Troy Piggins wrote:

>http://goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/

Thanks for the interesting link Troy. It made excellent reading. I
hope you don't mind me calling you Troy as if I actually know you.
After all, there must be millions of people called Troy who use the
Internet.... ;-)

Re: Adding privacy statement to outgoing emails

am 03.11.2006 13:02:00 von Troy Piggins

* Landmark wrote:
> Troy Piggins wrote:
>
>>http://goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/
>
> Thanks for the interesting link Troy. It made excellent reading. I
> hope you don't mind me calling you Troy as if I actually know you.
> After all, there must be millions of people called Troy who use the
> Internet... ;-)

:)

--
Troy Piggins

Re: [OT] [SLRN] Scoring Common Names (was: <snip>)

am 03.11.2006 13:09:52 von Sam

Re: Adding privacy statement to outgoing emails

am 03.11.2006 13:09:54 von Sam

Re: Adding privacy statement to outgoing emails

am 03.11.2006 16:21:19 von Frank Slootweg

Thom Cole wrote:
> Is it possible to use procmail to add a statement to all outgoing emails?
> If so, could someone point me in the direction of a FAQ for doing that?

Since nobody responded to your actual question, ...

I think it's rather strange to use procmail for this. While you can do
lots of things with procmail, it's primarily intended for *incoming*
mail, not outgoing mail (at least not for static stuff like adding a
privacy statement).

Since you say "all outgoing emails", I assume that's for all outgoing
mail for *all users*, i.e. not only for one person. If so, then the
appending has to be done by whichever common MSA (Mail Submission Agent)
your system uses, or, if that system also runs an (outgoing) MTA (Mail
Transfer Agent) a.k.a. 'mail server', it can be done by that MTA.

Since we don't know which MUA (Mail User Agent, 'mailer'), MSA and MTA
you use, I think the question is unanswerable for the moment, and we
need more information on your setup.

OTOH, if everybody uses (more or less) the same MUA/mailer *and* can
be trusted, the solution can be as simple as adding the privacy
statement as a pseudo signature (or as part of the real signature).

Re: [OT] [SLRN] Scoring Common Names (was: <snip>)

am 03.11.2006 22:11:14 von Alan Connor

On comp.mail.misc, in <20061103192154@usenet.piggo.com>, "Troy
Piggins" wrote:

>> thought you knew.

>>
>>> I also don't care if he posts 1000 messages a day, or 1
>>> message a year.
>>
>> Yet you have a long and elaborate scorefile that kills
>> thousands of articles on a regular basis. Why not just read
>> them all?
>
> I have an elaborate scorefile that kills articles I don't want
> to read so I don't have to read them all.

No kidding. What an amazing revelation.

>> May as well read and reply to spam as read the articles of
>> someone who posts a thousand times a day.
>
> Alan, I've replied a couple of times to you, and you post more
> than any other regular I "know". More than the Patrick I
> replied up this thread.

Now there's another untruth, Troy.

(Especially considering that you are quite aware that "Patrick"
is a nymshifter.)

When you are wrong, and someone calls you on it, I have noticed,
you go off the deep end and start posting bitchy garbage.

Why don't you grow up?

Alan

Re: [kook] Re: [OT] [SLRN] Scoring Common Names (was: <snip>)

am 03.11.2006 22:11:40 von Alan Connor FGA

Thanks for your kookfart, Beavis.

Re: [OT] [SLRN] Scoring Common Names (was: <snip>)

am 03.11.2006 23:49:21 von SINNER

* Alan Connor wrote in news.software.readers:

> When you are wrong, and someone calls you on it, I have noticed,
> you go off the deep end and start posting bitchy garbage.

Oh the irony

Deja vu too.

--
David

Re: [OT] [SLRN] Scoring Common Names (was: <snip>)

am 04.11.2006 00:26:38 von Sam

Re: [OT] [SLRN] Scoring Common Names (was: <snip>)

am 04.11.2006 01:50:02 von Alan Connor

I wonder why he removed comp.mail.misc from the "Newsgroups:"
header.

On news.software.readers, in <4r1u9pFp7h3kU1@individual.net>, "Patrick" wrote:

Correction: Someone who _sometimes_ calls himself "Patrick" wrote:

> Path: text.usenetserver.com!out01b.usenetserver.com!news.usenetser ver.com!in01.usenetserver.com!news.usenetserver.com!fu-berli n.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail

individual.net.

No longer free. And there are better and cheaper newsservers out
there. No reason to use it except one: It gives someone perfect
anonymity. No identifiers in the headers that can be used by
anyoone who isn't at individual.net, and not even most of them.

Just type something different on the "From:" line and you seem
to be a new person.

And there are, of course, other, optional headers that can
be added, none of which mean anything.

Is he actually using OE? Maybe. I doubt it. No one but a
seasoned Useneter has even heard of individual.net, and none
of them use OE, which is a piece of schitt newsreader.

> From: "Patrick"

And the use of a common name makes that anonymity just that
much more thorough.

> Newsgroups: news.software.readers
> Subject: Re: [OT] [SLRN] Scoring Common Names (was: )
> Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2006 14:31:11 -0800
> Lines: 9
> Message-ID: <4r1u9pFp7h3kU1@individual.net>
> References: <20061103085103@usenet.piggo.com> <4qvvtlFoq6urU1@individual.net> <20061103150715@usenet.piggo.com> <20061103163906@usenet.piggo.com> <20061103192154@usenet.piggo.com>
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> X-Trace: individual.net 9EAOp7ToPbL2b/IaAehwPwdJo3ytX8rF3OM2k/ZN2Iluq8dTOL
> X-Priority: 3
> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807
> X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1807
> Xref: usenetserver.com news.software.readers:319282
> X-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2006 17:31:24 EST (text.usenetserver.com)
>
> In news:20061103192154@usenet.piggo.com, Troy Piggins
> wrote:
>
>> Alan, you're smarter than that.
>
> No he's not. The fact that you're trying to engage him in
> conversation illustrates that you're not either.

Yet another example of the juvenile abuse from this troll
that started the thread.

It's easy to be a snot-nosed punk when you can just drop
the alias at any time and adopt another one.

Yes, "Patrick", I read anyone's posts that I choose to, whenever
I choose to. And I don't read them whenever I choose to.

And if you don't like anything about my style, well, you'll
just have to hold your breath until you are blue in the face.

Nothing else a dishonest coward like you can do.

Here, once again, is how you kill or gag posts from vermin
like this:

Here's the slrn scorefile entry I use for common names:

From: \CPatrick[) ]

That gets:

Patrick <.*>

and

..*@.*\..* (Patrick)

regardless of whether the letters p-a-t-r-i-c-k are upper or
lower case in any combination of cases.

Alan

--
http://home.earthlink.net/~alanconnor/contact.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~alanconnor/survival/index.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~alanconnor/linux-unix/index.html

Re: [kook] Re: [OT] [SLRN] Scoring Common Names (was: <snip>)

am 04.11.2006 01:50:27 von Alan Connor FGA

Thanks for your kookfart, Beavis.

Re: Adding privacy statement to outgoing emails

am 04.11.2006 03:26:43 von DFS

Landmark wrote:

> "Thom Cole" wrote:

>>Is it possible to use procmail to add a statement to all outgoing emails?
>>If so, could someone point me in the direction of a FAQ for doing that?

> I'm puzzled as to why poeple do this. Every disclaimer and attempt to
> impose conditions that I have ever seen on them is legally worthless.

I run a mailing list, and I've configured my mailing list software to add
the following to the bottom of each mail it re-sends:

"NOTE: If there is a disclaimer or other legal boilerplate in the above
message, it is NULL AND VOID. You may ignore it."

I mean, HONESTLY! People are sending mail to a mailing list (that they
*know* is being archived all over the place) with fascist disclaimers.

The list information page (where you sign up) even says prominently:

"NOTE: By posting to the MIMEDefang list, you agree that any
dislcaimer, legal boilerplate, or restrictions added to your posting
are null and void, and will have no effect."

I wonder what a corporate lawyer would make of viewing his client's
messages in the archive, with the above note appended. :-)

--
David.

Re: [OT] [SLRN] Scoring Common Names (was: <snip>)

am 04.11.2006 03:52:22 von Troy Piggins

* Alan Connor wrote:
> On comp.mail.misc, in <20061103192154@usenet.piggo.com>, "Troy
> Piggins" wrote:
>
>>> thought you knew.
>
>>>
>>>> I also don't care if he posts 1000 messages a day, or 1
>>>> message a year.
>>>
>>> Yet you have a long and elaborate scorefile that kills
>>> thousands of articles on a regular basis. Why not just read
>>> them all?
>>
>> I have an elaborate scorefile that kills articles I don't want
>> to read so I don't have to read them all.
>
> No kidding. What an amazing revelation.

Sorry - I just regained consciousness from smashing my head
against the wall and my fingers have only just started working
again. I found it was less painful than trying to have a
reasonable discussion with you when you are in AC mode.

>>> May as well read and reply to spam as read the articles of
>>> someone who posts a thousand times a day.
>>
>> Alan, I've replied a couple of times to you, and you post more
>> than any other regular I "know". More than the Patrick I
>> replied up this thread.
>
> Now there's another untruth, Troy.

Prove it. Prove that the Patrick I replied to has posted more
than you.

Patrick's posts based on email address in last year = 25
http://groups.google.com/groups?as_q=&num=10&scoring=r&hl=en &as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_ugroup=&as_usubject=&as_uauthors=p .a.t.r.ick%40stratsrv.coin&lr=&as_drrb=q&as_qdr=y&as_mind=1& as_minm=1&as_miny=1981&as_maxd=4&as_maxm=11&as_maxy=2006&saf e=off

Alan Connor's posts based on email address in last year = 2,630
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&nu m=10&q=author%3Ai3x9mdw%40j9n35c.invalid&as_drrb=q&as_qdr=y& safe=off&qt_s=Search

Of course I realise that anyone can change email address, but I
trust you when you say you always use the same one.

> (Especially considering that you are quite aware that "Patrick"
> is a nymshifter.)

I don't care if he's a nymshifter. I don't know him/her from a
bar of soap.

> When you are wrong, and someone calls you on it, I have noticed,
> you go off the deep end and start posting bitchy garbage.

I have noticed that when someone calls you on your inadequate
powers of determining someone's identity by reading their message
headers only, you snip their relevant arguments that pick holes
in your argument, then get abusive.

> Why don't you grow up?

Oh good one.

Tell Bruce Burhans, Tom Littlefoot, Farley Benn, and all the
other voices in your head to have a nice day, would ya?

--
Troy Piggins

Re: [OT] [SLRN] Scoring Common Names (was: <snip>)

am 04.11.2006 04:53:38 von Alan Connor

On news.software.readers, in <20061104121705@usenet.piggo.com>,
"Troy Piggins" wrote:

> * Alan Connor wrote:
>
>> On comp.mail.misc, in <20061103192154@usenet.piggo.com>, "Troy
>> Piggins" wrote:
>>
>>>> thought you knew.
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> I also don't care if he posts 1000 messages a day, or 1
>>>>> message a year.
>>>> Yet you have a long and elaborate scorefile that kills
>>>> thousands of articles on a regular basis. Why not just read
>>>> them all?
>>> I have an elaborate scorefile that kills articles I don't
>>> want to read so I don't have to read them all.
>>
>> No kidding. What an amazing revelation.
>
> Sorry - I just regained consciousness from smashing my head
> against the wall and my fingers have only just started working
> again. I found it was less painful than trying to have a
> reasonable discussion with you when you are in AC mode.

More juvenile and bitchy insults. I was hoping you would take my
suggestion and grow up.

>>>> May as well read and reply to spam as read the articles of
>>>> someone who posts a thousand times a day.
>>> Alan, I've replied a couple of times to you, and you post
>>> more than any other regular I "know". More than the Patrick
>>> I replied up this thread.
>>
>> Now there's another untruth, Troy.
>
> Prove it. Prove that the Patrick I replied to has posted more
> than you.

> Patrick's posts based on email address in last year = 25
> http://groups.google.com/groups?as_q=&num=10&scoring=r&hl=en &as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_ugroup=&as_usubject=&as_uauthors=p .a.t.r.ick%40stratsrv.coin&lr=&as_drrb=q&as_qdr=y&as_mind=1& as_minm=1&as_miny=1981&as_maxd=4&as_maxm=11&as_maxy=2006&saf e=off

Are you clueless? He's using individual.net. He's a seasoned
Useneter. That's obvious from just his posting style. No newbie
with only 25 posts has even heard of individual.net and wouldn't
see any reason to use it if he had.

You don't honestly believe that he has posted only 25 times.

Here's his earliest post on comp.mail.misc in my local cache:

From: "Patrick"
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc
Subject: Re: SMTP MIME Attachments
Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 15:54:37 -0700
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <4dhi5jF1ane6qU1@individual.net>

You honestly believe that someone going to the hassle (and it
is) of using individual.net has only posted 25 times in the
last 5 months?

No. You don't.

If he was just an occassional user, he wouldn't be posting the
crap he does. He'd make his posts count.

> Alan Connor's posts based on email address in last year = 2,630
> http://groups.google.com/groups/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&nu m=10&q=author%3Ai3x9mdw%40j9n35c.invalid&as_drrb=q&as_qdr=y& safe=off&qt_s=Search
>

That's because I don't change aliases or email addresses.

> Of course I realise that anyone can change email address, but I
> trust you when you say you always use the same one.

I don't. It's not a real email address. And I obviously don't
have any other aliases or I'd use them to fight those who
employ hundreds to harass me.

I've been tempted, believe me. But I realized that I'd just
be playing their game and I don't let punks jerk me around.
They can't hurt me.

>> (Especially considering that you are quite aware that
>> "Patrick" is a nymshifter.)
>
> I don't care if he's a nymshifter. I don't know him/her from a
> bar of soap.

I do. And I say so.

You seem to believe that I don't have a right to say what I
feel.

I despise these dishonest cowards who hide behind multiple
aliases, refusing to take responsibility for what they post
and pretending to be more than one person.

They make the Usenet a shithole. They are truly vermin.

>> When you are wrong, and someone calls you on it, I have
>> noticed, you go off the deep end and start posting bitchy
>> garbage.
>
> I have noticed that when someone calls you on your inadequate
> powers of determining someone's identity by reading their
> message headers only, you snip their relevant arguments that
> pick holes in your argument, then get abusive.

More bitchy bullshit. Let's see some evidence.

Let me guess: Suddenly you just don't have the time.

>> Why don't you grow up?
>
> Oh good one.
>
> Tell Bruce Burhans, Tom Littlefoot, Farley Benn, and all the
> other voices in your head to have a nice day, would ya?

You are acting like a punk, Troy. Only punks rely on stinking
trolls for their information.

And only stinking trolls have ever accused me of being those
people.

Know why? Because they have guilty consciences about pretending
to be so many different people themselves.

It's called "projection", Troy. Classic neurotic behavior.

Alan

--
http://home.earthlink.net/~alanconnor/contact.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~alanconnor/survival/index.html
http://home.earthlink.net/~alanconnor/linux-unix/index.html

Re: [kook] Re: [OT] [SLRN] Scoring Common Names (was: <snip>)

am 04.11.2006 04:54:04 von Alan Connor FGA

Thanks for your kookfart, Beavis.

Re: [OT] [SLRN] Scoring Common Names (was: <snip>)

am 04.11.2006 05:42:20 von Sam

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.
The Internet standard for MIME PGP messages, RFC 2015, was published in 1996.
To open this message correctly you will need to install E-mail or Usenet
software that supports modern Internet standards.

--=_mimegpg-commodore.email-scan.com-13396-1162615339-0001
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Usenet Beavis writes:

> I wonder why he removed comp.mail.misc from the "Newsgroups:"
> header.

For the same reason you removed alt.asshole.alan-connor, perhaps?

>
> On news.software.readers, in <4r1u9pFp7h3kU1@individual.net>, "Patrick" wrote:
>
> Correction: My mental superior who _always_ likes to smack my bitch up
> wrote:
>
>> Path: text.usenetserver.com!out01b.usenetserver.com!news.usenetser ver.com!in01.usenetserver.com!news.usenetserver.com!fu-berli n.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
>
> individual.net.
>
> I am no longer sane. There are no better kookbags than me out
> there. No reason to read anyone else's kookfarts except one: it
> demonstrates why all the other Usenet kookbags fail by comparison with
> the Usenet Beavis.

Don't settle for a cheap imitation, folks. Always go with the original
product.

> Just type "Usenet Beavis" into the Google search box, and you'll see
> everything you need to know.

Good advice.

> And there are, of course, other, kookfarts that I post all the
> time, for everyone's amusement.

They are all meticulously cataloged in the Beavis FAQ.

> Is he actually my mental superior? Maybe.

Definitely.

> I'm a kookbag. No one but a
> Usenet newbie has never heard of the Usenet Beavis, King Of Kookfarts, and
> pretty much everyone knows that I'm the Usenet's village idiot.

But I find it that a periodic reminder is always necessary.

>> From: "Patrick"
>
> And the use of a common name makes me have a kookfart every time.

I have a better idea. Let's make a list of all the things that does not
make you toss your cookies. I have a feeling it'll turn out to be a shorter
list.

>>
>>> Alan, you're smarter than that.
>>
>> No he's not. The fact that you're trying to engage him in
>> conversation illustrates that you're not either.
>
> Yet another example of my mental superior smacking my bitch up.

Let me know if you want any more examples.

> It's easy to be my mental superior, when you can use me as an example
> of what happens when you drink alcohol during pregnancy.

Friends don't let friends take Beavis seriously.

> Yes, "Patrick", I read everyone's posts about me because I'm lonely and
> I'm starving for anyone to pay any attention to me.

Bigfoot's affections is not enough for you, any more?

> And if you don't like anything about my style, well, I'll be
> happy to more even kookier rants.

Go ahead, Beavis.

> There's nothing else a deranged kookbag like me knows to do.

Don't ever change.

> Here, once again, is how you smack my bitch up:
>
> http://www.pearlgates.net/nanae/kooks/ac/

And don't forget http://www.geocities.com/suhatrasabib

> Beavis
>
>
> --
> http://www.geocities.com/suhatrasabib
> http://www.pearlgates.net/nanae/kooks/ac/
> http://tinyurl.com/23r3f

--=_mimegpg-commodore.email-scan.com-13396-1162615339-0001
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBFTBorx9p3GYHlUOIRAqPoAJsFmAPmFh1MP01cDj2QVuxd6CrzVACf UxAg
jeginFfVNajnhffTTJbK/D0=
=h8gb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=_mimegpg-commodore.email-scan.com-13396-1162615339-0001--

Re: [OT] [SLRN] Scoring Common Names (was: <snip>)

am 04.11.2006 05:42:28 von Sam

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.
The Internet standard for MIME PGP messages, RFC 2015, was published in 1996.
To open this message correctly you will need to install E-mail or Usenet
software that supports modern Internet standards.

--=_mimegpg-commodore.email-scan.com-13396-1162615347-0002
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Usenet Beavis writes:

> On news.software.readers, in <20061104121705@usenet.piggo.com>,
> "Troy Piggins" wrote:
>
>> Sorry - I just regained consciousness from smashing my head
>> against the wall and my fingers have only just started working
>> again. I found it was less painful than trying to have a
>> reasonable discussion with you when you are in AC mode.
>
> More smacking my bitch up. I was hoping you would take my suggestion
> and ask me how I spent the whole week with Bigfoot.

Well, how did it go?

>> Patrick's posts based on email address in last year = 25
>> http://groups.google.com/groups?as_q=&num=10&scoring=r&hl=en &as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_ugroup=&as_usubject=&as_uauthors=p .a.t.r.ick%40stratsrv.coin&lr=&as_drrb=q&as_qdr=y&as_mind=1& as_minm=1&as_miny=1981&as_maxd=4&as_maxm=11&as_maxy=2006&saf e=off
>
> I am clueless. I have no clue whatsoever how Usenet works, and that's
> why I'm blabbering utter gibberish, like a drooling moron.

Right.

> You don't honestly believe that I have a brain.

Npoe.

> Here's his earliest post on comp.mail.misc in my local cache:
>
> From: "Patrick"
> Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc
> Subject: Re: SMTP MIME Attachments
> Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 15:54:37 -0700
> Lines: 16
> Message-ID: <4dhi5jF1ane6qU1@individual.net>
>
> You honestly believe that I have any idea what I'm talking about? Only
> the good Lord above has any idea why I'm having a kookfart know, and for
> what reason.

You are a scientific mystery, Beavis.

> If I have anything between my ears, I wouldn't be posting the crap that
> I do.

But then, where would we get such high quality entertainment.

>> Usenet Beavis's posts based on email address in last year = 2,630
>> http://groups.google.com/groups/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&nu m=10&q=author%3Ai3x9mdw%40j9n35c.invalid&as_drrb=q&as_qdr=y& safe=off&qt_s=Search
>>
>
> That's because I was dropped on my head, as a child.

I see.

> I don't have a brain. It's not real. And I obviously don't
> have any clue as to how Usenet works, I'm still figuring out
> the nuances of DNS.

So, Beavis, are you still confused about Earthlink's wildcard DNS entry?

> I've been tempted, believe me, to grow a brain. But I realized
> that nobody would pay any attention to me, if I was a normal
> person. That's why I try to be a first-class kookbag, so that
> people pay attention to me.

Well, you've got everyone's attention, but you're still not happy.

>>> (Especially considering that you are quite aware that
>> I don't care if he's a nymshifter. I don't know him/her from a
>> bar of soap.
>
> I do. And I say so, because it's what all the voices in my head
> are telling me.

What else do they say?

> You seem to believe that I don't have a brain.

He's right.

> I hate being ignored by my mental superiors. That's why I'm a Beavis.

Well, there's that, but there are also other reasons.

> I make the Usenet a shithole.

Don't give yourself too much credit, Beavis.

>> message headers only, you snip their relevant arguments that
>> pick holes in your argument, then get abusive.
>
> I can post more bitchy bullshit. Just ask.

Consider yourself axed.

> Let me guess: Suddenly I begin foaming at the mouth.

What took you so long?

>>> Why don't you grow up?
>>
>> Oh good one.
>>
>> Tell Bruce Burhans, Tom Littlefoot, Farley Benn, and all the
>> other voices in your head to have a nice day, would ya?
>
> You are acting like my mental superior, Troy. Only they point
> their fingers at me, and laugh.

The entire Usenet is doing that.

> And only my mental superiors have ever accused me of being friends
> with Bigfoot.

http://tinyurl.com/23r3f

> Know why? Because I am kookbag.

Mr. Obvious to the white courtesy phone, please.

> I'm a called "kookbag", Troy. Classic Usenet style.

Nah. I can recall netkooks even bigger than you are.

> Beavis
>
> --
> http://www.geocities.com/suhatrasabib
> http://www.pearlgates.net/nanae/kooks/ac/
> http://tinyurl.com/23r3f

--=_mimegpg-commodore.email-scan.com-13396-1162615347-0002
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBFTBozx9p3GYHlUOIRAjPQAJwK36KaeM7iadPVCPJ/PTcQYEn2lACf fzTs
H5lQLyOgLwFDTyq46hbuvio=
=4wnB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=_mimegpg-commodore.email-scan.com-13396-1162615347-0002--

Re: [OT] [SLRN] Scoring Common Names (was: <snip>)

am 04.11.2006 05:46:22 von Alan Connor

On news.software.readers, in , "Alan Connor" wrote:

Actually, Troy. I lied. I do have another alias. Have for years.

Know why? Because I need certain information from the Usenet and
I can't get it with a bunch of punk trolls hounding me.

You don't honestly believe that I'd let punks like "Sam" get in
my way, do you?

But that alias isn't on the trolls' list you posted. Which
shouldn't surprise you. Trolls are the least trustworthy and
least competent people on the Usenet.

And I don't use that alias dishonestly. I don't use it to harass
and bully people by pretending I'm more than one person.

It doesn't change all the time so that I can post shit and then
pretend that I never posted it.

I wish I didn't have to do it all, but reality is what it is.

I blame the newssadmins, more than anyone else. The people who
run the newsservers. They could cut trolling and spam down to
nothing if they wanted to. Like all the good mailing lists do.

But they like trolls and trolls are often spammers. Trolls buy a
lot of accounts. Very good customers.

Now wouldn't you think the trolls would be able to figure out
what my other alias is, given the fact that I just admitted to
having one, if they have the skill to (supposedly) identify those
other people as me?

But they won't. They couldn't find their own assholes with a
map and pack of hunting dogs. All they can do is run their
mouths.

For someone other than me to read.

Yes, Troy, I'll be happy to tell you what that other alias is,
and prove that it's mine. I know that you wouldn't tell anyone.
And that you _would_ tell everyone that the trolls were wrong
when you knew they were.

Alan

Re: [kook] Re: [OT] [SLRN] Scoring Common Names (was: <snip>)

am 04.11.2006 05:46:47 von Alan Connor FGA

Thanks for your kookfart, Beavis.

Re: [OT] [SLRN] Scoring Common Names (was: <snip>)

am 04.11.2006 15:21:17 von Sam

Re: Adding privacy statement to outgoing emails

am 06.11.2006 22:07:56 von Alan Clifford

On Thu, 2 Nov 2006, Landmark wrote:

L> I'm puzzled as to why poeple do this. Every disclaimer and attempt to
L> impose conditions that I have ever seen on them is legally worthless.
L> Doing it just because other people do it doesn't seem a particularly
L> good reason to me.
L>

I managed to craft an html reply that persuades the disclaimer inserter at
work to insert the crap within an html comment. Unfortunately, I keep
forgetting to switch html on in Outlook :-(

--
Alan

( If replying by mail, please note that all "sardines" are canned.
There is also a password autoresponder but, unless this a very
old message, a "tuna" will swim right through. )