Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
>Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
>>>Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

>>>[...]

>>>>Again: The most outrageous position you took was that abusive but
>>>>non-spammed articles shouldn't have been cancelled. You specifically
>>>>included articles with attached zipped archives that were highly likely
>>>>to include viruses.

>>> Bit of a bummer that I never actually said what you imply in that last
>>>sentence, isn't it!?

>>That's actually your position, so don't lie about it.

> Nope, that's not my position, but *your* misrepresentation/straw man.

Don't lie about it.

It's actually your position. You told the canceller not to cancel those
articles and certain other abusive articles because they didn't exceed
thresholds for cancellable spam in Tim Skirvin's FAQ.

> If it *were* my position, you would/should have quoted chapter and
>verse, but you didn't, because you can't. So the one lying here is,
>again, you.

>[Repeat of over-the-top insult showing you have no argument.]

It's actually your position. Don't lie about it.

Message-ID: <uoekla.h2o.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>

[addressing the canceller]

Your other examples of "spam", namely "(sale of THC gummies,
of illegal false documents, or with a .zip containing a virus)"
are *not* valid grounds for cancellation. They're just what you
don't like or consider 'wrong', i.e. your opinion.

Your advice is DANGEROUS, not just unsolicited. NO ONE should listen to
you. You've proven yourself to be a fuckhead, and now, a lying fuckhead.

This was the very thing you stated on how very illegitimate your
position was, that you are telling the canceller that articles with
attachments that are zip archives that are highly likely to contain
viruses are not legitimate targets for cancellation.

Your advice is dangerous. No one should listen to you.

You, sir, have proven yourself to be a fuckhead and a liar.

I intend to continue calling you out on your dangerous advice unless and
until you cease offering it.

llp <contact@usenet.ovh> wrote:
>Adam H. Kerman:
>>Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
>>>Ivo Gandolfo <usenet@bofh.team> wrote:
>>>>On 20/01/2024 20:42, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

>>>>[cut]

>>>>>You have zero credibility with such a comment. In fact, you've literally
>>>>>apologized for the posting of articles highly likely to be harmful.
>>>>>That you have made statements in favor of distributing such articles
>>>>>despite the high likelihood for harm truly makes you a fuckhead.

>>>>>You have been trolling.

>>>>>That's incontrovertible proof that you, sir, are a fuckhead.

>>>>[cut]

>>>>>They ignored you in the past. They ignore you today. They will continue
>>>>>to ignore you in future.

>>>>>For the good of Usenet, you MUST BE ignored.

>>>>Thanks Adam, I couldn't have said it better.

>>> It would be nice if you'd commented on what I *actually* wrote,
>>>instead of Adam H. Kerman's misrepresentations/straw men. But
>>>considering your next paragraph, there's probably little chance of that.

>>Your advice is dangerous and MUST NOT be followed. You took the issuer
>>of cancels to task for targeting articles with attached zipped archives
>>that are highly likely to contain viruses.

>Be serious. He never said that.

He actually did.

Message-ID: <uoekla.h2o.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>

[addressing the canceller]

Your other examples of "spam", namely "(sale of THC gummies,
of illegal false documents, or with a .zip containing a virus)"
are *not* valid grounds for cancellation. They're just what you
don't like or consider 'wrong', i.e. your opinion.

You've done yourself no favors by treating him like your ally.

He's not. He's trolling.

>If Olivier Miakinen only deleted this, there'd be no problem.

Even you consider such articles to be abuse. I'm telling you that Frank
Slootweg is trolling here and not your ally.

>But it has deleted thousands of legitimate articles perfectly
>themed to the groups posted.

>Be helpful: instead, ask the facetious canceller to stop his abusive
>cancels of people he don't like. The cancellation of real spam has
>never been an issue on the French hierarchy.

Thus spake "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com>
> It's actually your position. Don't lie about it.
> Message-ID: <uoekla.h2o.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>
> [addressing the canceller]
> Your other examples of "spam", namely "(sale of THC gummies,
> of illegal false documents, or with a .zip containing a virus)"
> are *not* valid grounds for cancellation. They're just what you
> don't like or consider 'wrong', i.e. your opinion.

This quote doesn't seem correct. It was actually Olivier Miakinen who
mentioned "spam with a .zip" and the wording was wrong, anyway. Those posts did
not contain any attachments at all, they contained URLs pointing to .zip
files that supposedly contained virusses. O.M.'s cancel notices are
misleading in this case:

.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| From: miakibot <miakibot@miakinen.net>
| Subject: cmsg cancel <f4097357-795f-4a3f-a289-15eb27225a31n@googlegroups.com>
| Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2024 12:28:21 +0100
| Followup-To: poster
| Newsgroups: fr.rec.radio
| | Spam attack with virus download (byfrom)
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
\________________________________________________________________________________

See original content at http://al.howardknight.net/?ID=170589770300

So your raging indignation is completely uncalled for;

> Your advice is DANGEROUS, not just unsolicited. NO ONE should listen to
> you. You've proven yourself to be a fuckhead, and now, a lying fuckhead.

> This was the very thing you stated on how very illegitimate your
> position was, that you are telling the canceller that articles with
> attachments that are zip archives that are highly likely to contain
> viruses are not legitimate targets for cancellation.

> Your advice is dangerous. No one should listen to you.

> You, sir, have proven yourself to be a fuckhead and a liar.

> I intend to continue calling you out on your dangerous advice unless and
> until you cease offering it.

Ex falso quodlibet.

--
Пу́тін — хуйло́
https://www.eternal-september.org

Ray Banana <rayban@raybanana.net> wrote:
>Thus spake "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com>
>> It's actually your position. Don't lie about it.
>> Message-ID: <uoekla.h2o.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>
>> [addressing the canceller]
>> Your other examples of "spam", namely "(sale of THC gummies,
>> of illegal false documents, or with a .zip containing a virus)"
>> are *not* valid grounds for cancellation. They're just what you
>> don't like or consider 'wrong', i.e. your opinion.

>This quote doesn't seem correct. It was actually Olivier Miakinen who
>mentioned "spam with a .zip" and the wording was wrong, anyway. Those posts did
>not contain any attachments at all, they contained URLs pointing to .zip
>files that supposedly contained virusses.

Thank you for pointing that out.

>O.M.'s cancel notices are
>misleading in this case:
>
> .--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>| From: miakibot <miakibot@miakinen.net>
>| Subject: cmsg cancel <f4097357-795f-4a3f-a289-15eb27225a31n@googlegroups.com>
>| Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2024 12:28:21 +0100
>| Followup-To: poster
>| Newsgroups: fr.rec.radio
>|
>| Spam attack with virus download (byfrom)
>| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> \________________________________________________________________________________
>
>See original content at http://al.howardknight.net/?ID=170589770300

>So your raging indignation is completely uncalled for;

Frank Slootweg's criticism of Olivier Miakinen in this instance was
that it didn't meet the threshold to be cancellable spam in Tim
Skirvin's FAQ. He would not address whether the articles were abuse.

You looked it up; Frank Slootweg didn't.

>>Your advice is DANGEROUS, not just unsolicited. NO ONE should listen to
>>you. You've proven yourself to be a fuckhead, and now, a lying fuckhead.

>>This was the very thing you stated on how very illegitimate your
>>position was, that you are telling the canceller that articles with
>>attachments that are zip archives that are highly likely to contain
>>viruses are not legitimate targets for cancellation.

>>Your advice is dangerous. No one should listen to you.

>>You, sir, have proven yourself to be a fuckhead and a liar.

>>I intend to continue calling you out on your dangerous advice unless and
>>until you cease offering it.

>Ex falso quodlibet.

Adam H. Kerman a présenté l'énoncé suivant :
> llp <contact@usenet.ovh> wrote:

>> If Olivier Miakinen only deleted this, there'd be no problem.
>
> Even you consider such articles to be abuse.

Like all responsible newsmasters, I can usually recognize spam.
I think the tens of thousands of nocems issued attest to this ;-)

> I'm telling you that Frank Slootweg is trolling here and not your ally.

Don't be like the many trolls I know who stick on personnal squarrel
and forget the root of the problem: it's not Frank, nor You, nor me.
It's the will of one man (Olivier) to impose his vision of flood
or spam on free.fr users through cyber cancels.

>> But it has deleted thousands of legitimate articles perfectly
>> themed to the groups posted.
>
>> Be helpful: instead, ask the facetious canceller to stop his abusive
>> cancels of people he don't like. The cancellation of real spam has
>> never been an issue on the French hierarchy.

Sincerely.

--
Admin of news.usenet.ovh

Adam H. Kerman wrote :

> Frank Slootweg's criticism of Olivier Miakinen in this instance was
> that it didn't meet the threshold to be cancellable spam in Tim
> Skirvin's FAQ. He would not address whether the articles were abuse.
>
> You looked it up; Frank Slootweg didn't.

Did you or did you prefer to make false and insulting accusations about Frank?

You didn't so :

>> You, sir, have proven yourself to be a fuckhead and a liar.

For the good of Usenet, you MUST BE ignored.

llp <contact@usenet.ovh> wrote:
>Adam H. Kerman :
>>llp <contact@usenet.ovh> wrote:

>>>If Olivier Miakinen only deleted this, there'd be no problem.

>>Even you consider such articles to be abuse.

>Like all responsible newsmasters, I can usually recognize spam.
>I think the tens of thousands of nocems issued attest to this ;-)

>>I'm telling you that Frank Slootweg is trolling here and not your ally.

>Don't be like the many trolls I know who stick on personnal squarrel
>and forget the root of the problem: it's not Frank, nor You, nor me.
>It's the will of one man (Olivier) to impose his vision of flood
>or spam on free.fr users through cyber cancels.

It's 2024.

Why cannot the several major News administrators in France get together
to address the underlying issue directly, that specific well-used
News servers with very old configurations be replaced with modern News
servers? Approach the administrators of those News sites and figure out
a way to help them upgrade their News servers.

Once upgraded, the issue of whether cancel messages are generated to
counter abuse will have been rendered moot.

>>>But it has deleted thousands of legitimate articles perfectly
>>>themed to the groups posted.

>>>Be helpful: instead, ask the facetious canceller to stop his abusive
>>>cancels of people he don't like. The cancellation of real spam has
>>>never been an issue on the French hierarchy.

On 27 Dec 2023, Ivo Gandolfo <usenet@bofh.team> posted some
news:umi862$14jdj$1@paganini.bofh.team:

> On 27/12/2023 22:44, llp wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> I want to inform you that non-consensual global cancellations for
>> "flood" and concerning the "fr" hierarchy are being issued from the
> [cut]
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Admin of news.usenet.ovh
>
> Nope, you just don't like the outcome
>
> http://al.howardknight.net/?STYPE=msgid&MSGI=<umh49a%24jtn%241%40cabale
> .usenet-fr.net>
>
> If it were truly abusive as you have been claiming for months now, I
> would never have offered space for a similar service. But since
> Olivier has much more experience in the hierarchy than you, and above
> all much more support, he also has my almost unconditional support. As
> I already told you in the past, try to improve your service because
> every day Usenet needs better services and don't worry about what
> happens outside your server. I remind you that Usenet itself was born
> as democratic anarchy.
>
>
> Sincerely

+1 to Ivo. Thanks for the services you provide.

On 1/27/24 12:32, Chez wrote:
> +1 to Ivo. Thanks for the services you provide.

Does this include the thousands of cancellations of a legitimate user?

On 27 Jan 2024, immibis <news@immibis.com> posted some
news:up320i$3da25$1@dont-email.me:

> On 1/27/24 12:32, Chez wrote:
>> +1 to Ivo. Thanks for the services you provide.
>
> Does this include the thousands of cancellations of a legitimate user?

We can thank Ray for that. Ivo is using his filtering.

After Ray started tweaking filters a few months ago, we figured out that
we could reply a certain way to one of his more offensive user's posts and
it would kill the entire thread on some servers, so we did. Seems there
was a lot of collateral damage. Most of the legit posts are still out
there depending on the server used however, but not E-S or the violin
server.

Let's see if this post gets through. Someone is blocking dizum posts in
certain groups now.

London Eye vient de nous annoncer :
> On 27 Jan 2024, immibis <news@immibis.com> posted some
> news:up320i$3da25$1@dont-email.me:
>
>> On 1/27/24 12:32, Chez wrote:
>>> +1 to Ivo. Thanks for the services you provide.
>>
>> Does this include the thousands of cancellations of a legitimate user?
>
> We can thank Ray for that. Ivo is using his filtering.

Ivo use also Miakibot cyber-cancel from Olivier Miakinen.
It's this robot that knowingly cancels legitimate messages and who,
in the past, deleted 3600 messages at once (a year's worth of
messages).

Ray fights spam effectively but without resorting to censorship
like the robot used by Ivo's server.

> Let's see if this post gets through. Someone is blocking dizum posts
> in certain groups now.

Your message is on the various servers I have consulted.

--
Admin of news.usenet.ovh

llp <contact@usenet.ovh> wrote:
>London Eye vient de nous annoncer :
>>27 Jan 2024, immibis <news@immibis.com> posted:
>>>On 1/27/24 12:32, Chez wrote:

>>>>+1 to Ivo. Thanks for the services you provide.

>>>Does this include the thousands of cancellations of a legitimate user?

>>We can thank Ray for that. Ivo is using his filtering.

>Ivo use also Miakibot cyber-cancel from Olivier Miakinen.
>It's this robot that knowingly cancels legitimate messages and who,
>in the past, deleted 3600 messages at once (a year's worth of
>messages).

>Ray fights spam effectively but without resorting to censorship
>like the robot used by Ivo's server.

He didn't state that it was due to cancels. It sounds like he's
discussing NoCeMs.

I keep telling you that, in the end, the result can be the same.

>>Let's see if this post gets through. Someone is blocking dizum posts
>>in certain groups now.

>Your message is on the various servers I have consulted.

On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 11:32:22 -0000 (UTC)
Chez <invalid@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1 to Ivo. Thanks for the services you provide.

+1 Ivo. Years of service with a smile.

His detractors can kiss off. Bitch nuggets.

On Sun, 28 Jan 2024 15:20:42 +0100
llp <contact@usenet.ovh> wrote:

> Ivo use also Miakibot cyber-cancel from Olivier Miakinen.
> It's this robot that knowingly cancels legitimate messages and who,
> in the past, deleted 3600 messages at once (a year's worth of
> messages).
>
> Ray fights spam effectively but without resorting to censorship
> like the robot used by Ivo's server.

If Ivo stopped suddenly your nose would break off in his ass.