On 26/02/24 21:38, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> immibis <news@immibis.com> wrote:
>> On 20/02/24 03:24, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>> llp <contact@usenet.ovh> wrote:
>>>> Adam H. Kerman:
>
>>>>>> . . .
>
>>>>> The cancel message's author may be verified with PGP-verify, right?
>
>>>> If you have seen this type of cancel, please let me know.
>>>> And if you haven't seen any, ask yourself why.
>
>>> Fair enough. I don't know enough about this, so I had better drop out of
>>> this discussion.
>
>> Dearheart, if you don't stop pretending to knowledgeable, you'll cross
>> the Moron Index threshold, which means that what you've posted has
>> become cancellable trolling. You really really really don't want to be
>> doing that through Ray's server.
>
>> Just learn to use your brain. Ask me. I'm here to help.
>
> It took you days to come up with that unoriginal thought.

Longer than it took you to realize you were talking about something you
knew nothing about?

You know, I'd never heard of Cancel-Key or Cancel-Lock before this
thread, either. Unlike you, I was able to figure that out.

immibis <news@immibis.com> wrote:
>On 26/02/24 21:38, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>immibis <news@immibis.com> wrote:
>>>On 20/02/24 03:24, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>>>llp <contact@usenet.ovh> wrote:
>>>>>Adam H. Kerman:
>>>>>>>. . .

>>>>>>The cancel message's author may be verified with PGP-verify, right?

>>>>>If you have seen this type of cancel, please let me know.
>>>>>And if you haven't seen any, ask yourself why.

>>>>Fair enough. I don't know enough about this, so I had better drop out of
>>>>this discussion.

>>>Dearheart, if you don't stop pretending to knowledgeable, you'll cross
>>>the Moron Index threshold, which means that what you've posted has
>>>become cancellable trolling. You really really really don't want to be
>>>doing that through Ray's server.

>>>Just learn to use your brain. Ask me. I'm here to help.

>>It took you days to come up with that unoriginal thought.

>Longer than it took you to realize you were talking about something you
>knew nothing about?

>You know, I'd never heard of Cancel-Key or Cancel-Lock before this
>thread, either. Unlike you, I was able to figure that out.

It's in every single article you post through Ray's server, sweetcheeks.
It has to do with 1st and 2nd party cancels only, not 3rd party cancels.
3rd party cancels are not verifiable with cancel lock.

No, you still haven't figured it out.

On 15/02/2024 21:52, llp wrote:
> As you probably know, abusive cancellations are issued via the paganini
> server and concern the fr hierarchy.

Paganini is run by a Maori so why are you complaining about it? He can
do whatever he wants; It's his baby; Kim Dot Com lives there because of
all the Maoris he can meet.

Now go and wash your face paying particular attention towards your lips
before complaining here.

immibis <news@immibis.com> wrote in news:uriolj$2mved$1@dont-email.me:

> On 20/02/24 03:24, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>> llp <contact@usenet.ovh> wrote:
>>> Adam H. Kerman:
>>
>>>>> . . .
>>
>>>> The cancel message's author may be verified with PGP-verify, right?
>>
>>> If you have seen this type of cancel, please let me know.
>>> And if you haven't seen any, ask yourself why.
>>
>> Fair enough. I don't know enough about this, so I had better drop out
>> of this discussion.
>
> Dearheart, if you don't stop pretending to knowledgeable, you'll cross
> the Moron Index threshold, which means that what you've posted has
> become cancellable trolling. You really really really don't want to be
> doing that through Ray's server.

Not to worry. Ray is consulting with Marco to fine tune scripts shaping
usenet content for the future.

> Just learn to use your brain. Ask me. I'm here to help.

It's more interesting to leverage the end results of scripting. Things
happen for the best sometimes.

BTW, I appreciate Ivo's service to the community. Thanks Ivo.

"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote in
news:urisrc$2nsnr$1@dont-email.me:

> immibis <news@immibis.com> wrote:
>>On 20/02/24 03:24, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>>llp <contact@usenet.ovh> wrote:
>>>>Adam H. Kerman:
>
>>>>>>. . .
>
>>>>>The cancel message's author may be verified with PGP-verify, right?
>
>>>>If you have seen this type of cancel, please let me know.
>>>>And if you haven't seen any, ask yourself why.
>
>>>Fair enough. I don't know enough about this, so I had better drop out
>>>of this discussion.
>
>>Dearheart, if you don't stop pretending to knowledgeable, you'll cross
>>the Moron Index threshold, which means that what you've posted has
>>become cancellable trolling. You really really really don't want to be
>>doing that through Ray's server.
>
>>Just learn to use your brain. Ask me. I'm here to help.
>
> It took you days to come up with that unoriginal thought.

Usenet is a hard place, Adam. Look at your sacrifices and contributions.

Ricardo Hernandez <rhernandez@unojuan.mx> wrote:
>"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>immibis <news@immibis.com> wrote:
>>>On 20/02/24 03:24, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>>>llp <contact@usenet.ovh> wrote:
>>>>>Adam H. Kerman:

>>>>>>>. . .

>>>>>>The cancel message's author may be verified with PGP-verify, right?

>>>>>If you have seen this type of cancel, please let me know.
>>>>>And if you haven't seen any, ask yourself why.

>>>>Fair enough. I don't know enough about this, so I had better drop out
>>>>of this discussion.

>>>Dearheart, if you don't stop pretending to knowledgeable, you'll cross
>>>the Moron Index threshold, which means that what you've posted has
>>>become cancellable trolling. You really really really don't want to be
>>>doing that through Ray's server.

>>>Just learn to use your brain. Ask me. I'm here to help.

>>It took you days to come up with that unoriginal thought.

>Usenet is a hard place, Adam. Look at your sacrifices and contributions.

It's so odd that there have been no shortage of people slamming me, but
there's just this one fuckhead who hides behind would-be anonymizing
servers, setting up sockpuppet after sockpuppet to do so. It's amazingly
cowardly. You truly think this has thwarted my many teams of henchmen
from finding you in short order to beat you to death?

Adam H. Kerman Tue, 27 Feb 2024 15:07:45
in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet :

> It's so odd that there have been no shortage of people slamming me,
> but there's just this one fuckhead who hides behind would-be
> anonymizing servers, setting up sockpuppet after sockpuppet to do so.
> It's amazingly cowardly. You truly think this has thwarted my many
> teams of henchmen from finding you in short order to beat you to
> death?

I don't see Dizum posts on my server, maybe you should change yours ?

On 26/02/24 22:12, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> immibis <news@immibis.com> wrote:
>> On 26/02/24 21:38, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>> immibis <news@immibis.com> wrote:
>>>> On 20/02/24 03:24, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>>>> llp <contact@usenet.ovh> wrote:
>>>>>> Adam H. Kerman:
>
>>>>>>>> . . .
>
>>>>>>> The cancel message's author may be verified with PGP-verify, right?
>
>>>>>> If you have seen this type of cancel, please let me know.
>>>>>> And if you haven't seen any, ask yourself why.
>
>>>>> Fair enough. I don't know enough about this, so I had better drop out of
>>>>> this discussion.
>
>>>> Dearheart, if you don't stop pretending to knowledgeable, you'll cross
>>>> the Moron Index threshold, which means that what you've posted has
>>>> become cancellable trolling. You really really really don't want to be
>>>> doing that through Ray's server.
>
>>>> Just learn to use your brain. Ask me. I'm here to help.
>
>>> It took you days to come up with that unoriginal thought.
>
>> Longer than it took you to realize you were talking about something you
>> knew nothing about?
>
>> You know, I'd never heard of Cancel-Key or Cancel-Lock before this
>> thread, either. Unlike you, I was able to figure that out.
>
> It's in every single article you post through Ray's server, sweetcheeks.
> It has to do with 1st and 2nd party cancels only, not 3rd party cancels.
> 3rd party cancels are not verifiable with cancel lock.
>
That's right. 3rd-party cancels fail the cancel-key test, because they
are illegitimate, sweetcheeks. Servers which check the cancel-key/lock
will not accept them, honeybun.

On 27/02/24 15:17, Eric M wrote:
> Adam H. Kerman Tue, 27 Feb 2024 15:07:45
> in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet :
>
>> It's so odd that there have been no shortage of people slamming me,
>> but there's just this one fuckhead who hides behind would-be
>> anonymizing servers, setting up sockpuppet after sockpuppet to do so.
>> It's amazingly cowardly. You truly think this has thwarted my many
>> teams of henchmen from finding you in short order to beat you to
>> death?
>
> I don't see Dizum posts on my server, maybe you should change yours ?

He thinks all the people who write negative things about him are all the
same person.

Eric M <conanospamic@gmail.com> wrote:
>Adam H. Kerman Tue, 27 Feb 2024 15:07:45:

>>It's so odd that there have been no shortage of people slamming me,
>>but there's just this one fuckhead who hides behind would-be
>>anonymizing servers, setting up sockpuppet after sockpuppet to do so.
>>It's amazingly cowardly. You truly think this has thwarted my many
>>teams of henchmen from finding you in short order to beat you to
>>death?

>I don't see Dizum posts on my server, maybe you should change yours ?

I'm a user on news.eternal-september.org. I would never ask Ray to
refuse to accept posts originating at Dizum. Nor would Ray do so.

immibis <news@immibis.com> wrote:
>On 26/02/24 22:12, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>immibis <news@immibis.com> wrote:
>>>On 26/02/24 21:38, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>>>immibis <news@immibis.com> wrote:
>>>>>On 20/02/24 03:24, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>>>>>llp <contact@usenet.ovh> wrote:
>>>>>>>Adam H. Kerman:

>>>>>>>>>. . .

>>>>>>>>The cancel message's author may be verified with PGP-verify, right?

>>>>>>>If you have seen this type of cancel, please let me know.
>>>>>>>And if you haven't seen any, ask yourself why.

>>>>>>Fair enough. I don't know enough about this, so I had better drop out of
>>>>>>this discussion.

>>>>>Dearheart, if you don't stop pretending to knowledgeable, you'll cross
>>>>>the Moron Index threshold, which means that what you've posted has
>>>>>become cancellable trolling. You really really really don't want to be
>>>>>doing that through Ray's server.

>>>>>Just learn to use your brain. Ask me. I'm here to help.

>>>>It took you days to come up with that unoriginal thought.

>>>Longer than it took you to realize you were talking about something you
>>>knew nothing about?

>>>You know, I'd never heard of Cancel-Key or Cancel-Lock before this
>>>thread, either. Unlike you, I was able to figure that out.

>>It's in every single article you post through Ray's server, sweetcheeks.
>>It has to do with 1st and 2nd party cancels only, not 3rd party cancels.
>>3rd party cancels are not verifiable with cancel lock.

>That's right. 3rd-party cancels fail the cancel-key test, because they
>are illegitimate, sweetcheeks.

You're still incredibly confused due to your serious reading comprehension
problem. "Legitimate", according to your proprietary definition, isn't
a prerequisite in the standard for issuing a cancel control message. Syntax is.
Your stupid opinion is irrelevant.

>Servers which check the cancel-key/lock will not accept them, honeybun.

You fail to understand the basic principle of Usenet: News administrators
run Usenet. The issuer of the cancel message does not run Usenet. A
News administrator, and not you, makes the rules for the server he
administers. Use of cancel lock to accept first and second party cancels
has nothing to do with whether he chooses to process third-party cancellers
from a canceller that he's decided to trust.

As llp pointed out, it may not be a best practice given that the
mechanism isn't set up to verify the canceller's identity. Regardless,
it's possible to act upon these cancels.

This is how Usenet works. It's never illegitimate to send a control
message. Despite "control" in the name, there is no obligation for the
News administrator to act upon it.

Same with checkgroups issued by a hierarchy administrator. A news
administrator chooses how to offer Usenet to his users, not the
hierarchy administrator. He has no obligation to process checkgroups. He
can choose to create a newsgroup locally that the hierarchy
administrator does not recognize, and he can choose not to create
specific newsgroups the hierarchy administrator does recognize.

The hierarchy administrator may be doing all sorts of goofy things that
are not popular among News administrators that have created newsgroups
in that hierarchy. Just because he has issued a control message doesn't
make it legitimate. The only requirement is good syntax. It doesn't have
to be acted upon by a News administator.

To understand how all this works, you have to distinguish in your mind
the difference between the person issuing the control message and the
person acting upon the control message. They are two different actors.

I'm sure you won't. It's beyond your understanding.

immibis <news@immibis.com> wrote:
>On 27/02/24 15:17, Eric M wrote:
>>Adam H. Kerman Tue, 27 Feb 2024 15:07:45:

>>>It's so odd that there have been no shortage of people slamming me,
>>>but there's just this one fuckhead who hides behind would-be
>>>anonymizing servers, setting up sockpuppet after sockpuppet to do so.
>>>It's amazingly cowardly. You truly think this has thwarted my many
>>>teams of henchmen from finding you in short order to beat you to
>>>death?

>>I don't see Dizum posts on my server, maybe you should change yours ?

>He thinks all the people who write negative things about him are all the
>same person.

Don't be ridiculous. I have never in my life believed that a sockpuppet
is a person.

Eric M <conanospamic@gmail.com> wrote:
> Adam H. Kerman Tue, 27 Feb 2024 15:07:45
> in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet :
>
> > It's so odd that there have been no shortage of people slamming me,
> > but there's just this one fuckhead who hides behind would-be
> > anonymizing servers, setting up sockpuppet after sockpuppet to do so.
> > It's amazingly cowardly. You truly think this has thwarted my many
> > teams of henchmen from finding you in short order to beat you to
> > death?
>
> I don't see Dizum posts on my server, maybe you should change yours ?

Why would he want to change servers (for this 'reason')? Just filter
what you don't want, 'problem' solved.

Thus spake "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com>
> Eric M <conanospamic@gmail.com> wrote:
>>I don't see Dizum posts on my server, maybe you should change yours ?
> I'm a user on news.eternal-september.org. I would never ask Ray to
> refuse to accept posts originating at Dizum. Nor would Ray do so.

And immibis is using E-S, too. Just saying ...

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

Adam H. Kerman Tue, 27 Feb 2024 16:13:59
in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet :

>> I don't see Dizum posts on my server, maybe you should change yours ?

> I'm a user on news.eternal-september.org. I would never ask Ray to
> refuse to accept posts originating at Dizum. Nor would Ray do so.

This is intersting, Dizum is far worse than Google that has been heavily
filtered, I'm not looking for any logic anymore :)

Frank Slootweg a écrit le Tue, 27 Feb 2024 17:08:51
dans news.admin.net-abuse.usenet :

>> I don't see Dizum posts on my server, maybe you should change yours ?

> Why would he want to change servers (for this 'reason')? Just filter
> what you don't want, 'problem' solved.

This is a question of civilization, French usenet evolved differently
than Big8 usenet.

Eric M <conanospamic@gmail.com> wrote:
>Adam H. Kerman Tue, 27 Feb 2024 16:13:59:

>>>I don't see Dizum posts on my server, maybe you should change yours ?

>>I'm a user on news.eternal-september.org. I would never ask Ray to
>>refuse to accept posts originating at Dizum. Nor would Ray do so.

>This is intersting, Dizum is far worse than Google that has been heavily
>filtered, I'm not looking for any logic anymore :)

Attacking me isn't a form of abuse. It cannot be compared to the NoCeMs
issued as countermeasures against abuse that originated at Google
Groups, hundreds of thousands of articles at a time, plus the drug spam
and the advertising.

Eric M <conanospamic@gmail.com> wrote:
> Frank Slootweg a écrit le Tue, 27 Feb 2024 17:08:51
> dans news.admin.net-abuse.usenet :
>
> >> I don't see Dizum posts on my server, maybe you should change yours ?
>
> > Why would he want to change servers (for this 'reason')? Just filter
> > what you don't want, 'problem' solved.
>
> This is a question of civilization, French usenet evolved differently
> than Big8 usenet.

It has nothing to do with "civilization". And what does "French
usenet" have to do with anything?

FYI, I don't like most (all?) Dizum posts/posters, so I filter Dizum.
As I said, 'problem' solved.

But each admin is free to (not) carry whatever does (not) please hir
and likewise, each user is free to filter whatever does not please hir.

Bottom line: Again you're basically advocating to censor stuff you
don't like. It's not going to work.

Eric M <conanospamic@gmail.com> wrote:
> Adam H. Kerman Tue, 27 Feb 2024 16:13:59
> in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet :
>
> >> I don't see Dizum posts on my server, maybe you should change yours ?
>
> > I'm a user on news.eternal-september.org. I would never ask Ray to
> > refuse to accept posts originating at Dizum. Nor would Ray do so.
>
> This is intersting, Dizum is far worse than Google that has been heavily
> filtered, I'm not looking for any logic anymore :)

Get real! Dizum generates nowhere even remotely close to the Google
spam of the previous few months.

Anyway, it's up to Ray to decide if he carries Dizum posts or not.
It's not upto you, Adam, me or anyone else.

Likewise, it's upto the admin of your server (Yamo?) to not carry
Dizum posts, *if* that's what he's doing.

Frank Slootweg a écrit le Tue, 27 Feb 2024 19:41:31 dans
news.admin.net-abuse.usenet :

>> This is a question of civilization, French usenet evolved differently
>> than Big8 usenet.

> It has nothing to do with "civilization". And what does "French
> usenet" have to do with anything?

You have an american point of view, with the first amendement. We have
an european point of view, here you cannot say something antisemitic in
public, we had a sort of war a while ago so maybe we are more vigilant
on this kind of things.

> FYI, I don't like most (all?) Dizum posts/posters, so I filter Dizum.
> As I said, 'problem' solved.

But people answer to people using Dizum, so your filter is useless.

> But each admin is free to (not) carry whatever does (not) please hir
> and likewise, each user is free to filter whatever does not please hir.

Yes, of course, according to the laws of his country.

> Bottom line: Again you're basically advocating to censor stuff you
> don't like. It's not going to work.

It's not what I don't like, it's a server that has a long history of
abuse (exactly like Google, but you did not cry to censorship when
people cleaned the Google shit), do they still have "sewer output" in
their path ?

Frank Slootweg a écrit le Tue, 27 Feb 2024 19:42:20 dans
news.admin.net-abuse.usenet :

> Get real! Dizum generates nowhere even remotely close to the Google
> spam of the previous few months.

There was a discussion not long to determine where the spammers
will go after Google, Dizum seems to be an alternative.

> Anyway, it's up to Ray to decide if he carries Dizum posts or not.
> It's not upto you, Adam, me or anyone else.

Well can I still say what I want, or do you want to censor me ? :)

> Likewise, it's upto the admin of your server (Yamo?) to not carry
> Dizum posts, *if* that's what he's doing.

Yes, and I'm happy with that. On the fr.* hierarchy the Dizum posts
were cancelled for years but the bot that did it stopped working
unfortunately.

On 27 Feb 2024, "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> posted some
news:urkqbg$37rfg$2@dont-email.me:

> Ricardo Hernandez <rhernandez@unojuan.mx> wrote:
>>"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>>immibis <news@immibis.com> wrote:
>>>>On 20/02/24 03:24, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>>>>llp <contact@usenet.ovh> wrote:
>>>>>>Adam H. Kerman:
>
>>>>>>>>. . .
>
>>>>>>>The cancel message's author may be verified with PGP-verify,
>>>>>>>right?
>
>>>>>>If you have seen this type of cancel, please let me know.
>>>>>>And if you haven't seen any, ask yourself why.
>
>>>>>Fair enough. I don't know enough about this, so I had better drop
>>>>>out of this discussion.
>
>>>>Dearheart, if you don't stop pretending to knowledgeable, you'll
>>>>cross the Moron Index threshold, which means that what you've posted
>>>>has become cancellable trolling. You really really really don't want
>>>>to be doing that through Ray's server.
>
>>>>Just learn to use your brain. Ask me. I'm here to help.
>
>>>It took you days to come up with that unoriginal thought.
>
>>Usenet is a hard place, Adam. Look at your sacrifices and
>>contributions.
>
> It's so odd that there have been no shortage of people slamming me,
> but there's just this one fuckhead who hides behind would-be
> anonymizing servers, setting up sockpuppet after sockpuppet to do so.

PJR needs inspiration. That's why he pokes people like you with sticks.

> It's amazingly cowardly. You truly think this has thwarted my many
> teams of henchmen from finding you in short order to beat you to
> death?

Death threats now?

immibis <news@immibis.com> wrote:

[...]

> That's right. 3rd-party cancels fail the cancel-key test, because they
> are illegitimate, sweetcheeks. Servers which check the cancel-key/lock
> will not accept them, honeybun.
>

"sweetcheeks"? "honeybun"?

As I said previously: you are disagreeable.

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator

My pet rock Gordon just is.

On 27 Feb 2024, Eric M <conanospamic@gmail.com> posted some
news:url7a1$l6a$1@rasp.pasdenom.info:

> Adam H. Kerman Tue, 27 Feb 2024 16:13:59
> in news.admin.net-abuse.usenet :
>
>>> I don't see Dizum posts on my server, maybe you should change yours
>>> ?
>
>> I'm a user on news.eternal-september.org. I would never ask Ray to
>> refuse to accept posts originating at Dizum. Nor would Ray do so.
>
> This is intersting, Dizum is far worse than Google that has been
> heavily filtered, I'm not looking for any logic anymore :)

Any doofus could use google.

Dizum enables free speech and uplifting banter.

On 27 Feb 2024, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> posted some
news:urldpk.vd4.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net:

> Eric M <conanospamic@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Frank Slootweg a �crit le Tue, 27 Feb 2024 17:08:51
>> dans news.admin.net-abuse.usenet :
>>
>> >> I don't see Dizum posts on my server, maybe you should change
>> >> yours ?
>>
>> > Why would he want to change servers (for this 'reason')? Just
>> > filter
>> > what you don't want, 'problem' solved.
>>
>> This is a question of civilization, French usenet evolved differently
>> than Big8 usenet.
>
> It has nothing to do with "civilization". And what does "French
> usenet" have to do with anything?
>
> FYI, I don't like most (all?) Dizum posts/posters, so I filter
> Dizum.
> As I said, 'problem' solved.

That's the beauty of usenet. Everyone is free to set their own limits
of enlightenment.

> But each admin is free to (not) carry whatever does (not) please hir
> and likewise, each user is free to filter whatever does not please
> hir.
>
> Bottom line: Again you're basically advocating to censor stuff you
> don't like. It's not going to work.

PKB