Unbelievable, Easy News trashes arbitrary message bodies from Perl groups

[sln]

I forgot to tell you. The message headers are on your server. The body of the message
is no longer available. Is that something new, sort of latent body distribution in the Usenet
arena? Maybe comes 30 minutes later?

You knew the intent of my message. Unless there is some sort of unique "Header Servers" and
"Body Servers".

-me
----- Original Message -----
From: me
To: (e-mail address removed)
Sent: Sunday, May 03, 2009 2:20 PM
Subject: Re: [Ticket #825385] '[Sorry. This message is no longer available.]'


So let me get this straight.

I originate a post to/on EasyNews servers, it gets posted to Usenet but doesen't
hit your YOUR server for 30 minutes?

Thats not even possible. This is a some other problem.

I'm very unhappy with your service. I am looking into a different provider.

-me
----- Original Message -----
From: Support via RT
To: me
Sent: Sunday, May 03, 2009 1:57 PM
Subject: [Ticket #825385] '[Sorry. This message is no longer available.]'


Hello,

Posts normally take in the order of 30 minutes to appear on our servers,
though they do make it out to Usenet sooner than this. We have plans to
implement a posting-oriented server for people who value speed, but at
the moment, posts simply take a bit to appear. Please let us know if you
have any questions or concerns.


Easynews Support Team

 

[Nathan Keel]

I forgot to tell you. The message headers are on your server. The body
of the message is no longer available. Is that something new, sort of
latent body distribution in the Usenet arena? Maybe comes 30 minutes
later?

Let me ask you, why in the world do you think all of the views of this
group care about your whining and complaints about your nntp provider?
Go away.

 

[sln]

Let me ask you, why in the world do you think all of the views of this
group care about your whining and complaints about your nntp provider?
Go away.

Hey, **** OFF ASSHOLE. GOT THAT SCUMBAG ??????????????????????????????????????

-sln

 

[Nathan Keel]

Hey, **** OFF ASSHOLE. GOT THAT SCUMBAG
??????????????????????????????????????

-sln

X-Complaints-To: (e-mail address removed)

 

[sln]

X-Complaints-To: (e-mail address removed)

I am cancelling EasyNews for thier rotten service.

On top of that, I am going to find you scumbag and knock you down and kick the shit out of you !!
Look for it

-sln

 

[rabbits77]

I am cancelling EasyNews for thier rotten service.

On top of that, I am going to find you scumbag and knock you down and kick the shit out of you !!
Look for it

This exchange between "sln" and "Nathan Keel" has me laughing very hard
right
now! Two perl coders kicking the shit out of each other over some stupid
usenet bullshit is something I would pay money to see!

 

[Nathan Keel]

This exchange between "sln" and "Nathan Keel" has me laughing very
hard right
now! Two perl coders kicking the shit out of each other over some
stupid usenet bullshit is something I would pay money to see!

The guy is just an idiot and a low life. He's managed to piss off most
members on this group and a lot of people have blocked his messages
from being seen in their news readers. He made the threats, not me.
He's just an abusive ass clown and you can't take him seriously. And,
believe me, this guy threatening to "kick the shit out of me" is really
not a worry. Not that I don't secretly wish for the day that some
usenet troll actually got enough nerve to track me down and show up at
my home or work, because that would be something I'd also pay money to
see. No threats here, just a great outlet for some online frustration,
so I secretly hope it happens. I'll be sure to video tape it if it
does, but he's just a trash talking, abusive usenet troll.

 

[Nathan Keel]

I hate to break it to you Nathan, but you're doing that too. Feeding a
troll is no better than being one.

sherm--

I don't agree that there's always two to blame (at least not equally),
but that's just my view. The guy really stepped up his abuse the last
day and I've also filtered him out. At this point, I just let the
other poster know what was going on. Of course, it serves no purpose,
but just playing the silence game isn't going to make a different with
this particular troll. Damned if you do, damned if you don't, so I
have blocked him.

 

[Nathan Keel]

Okay, you can join sln in my killfile then. Been nice knowing you.

*plonk*

sherm--

And there is the perfect example of what I mean. People bitch about you
replying to other people, adding to the problem, and are just as
guilty, but feel the need to "killfile" you because you actually say
that thought outloud about not thinking the two are exactly equal.
Thus, you've called me a troll and killed filed me, for calling sln a
troll and killfiling him. Somehow, you doing exactly what I did makes
you the better person? Give me a break. The same rules apply to you,
and you needn't lose your head about it and act like you "need" to
killfile me as if I'm some problem, unless that's your way of saying
you have a problem. Guess what, I don't put up with your arrogant crap
anymore than I do his. If people replying to you is such a big threat
or problem, maybe you should find some other place to go besides
usenet.

 

[Henry Law]

you have a problem. Guess what, I don't put up with your arrogant crap
anymore

Guess what, Mr Keel: Sherm didn't read what you wrote (that's what he
meant by "plonk", by the way) but the rest of us did. And I doubt we're
much better off from the experience.

 

[Tad J McClellan]

killfile me as if I'm some problem,

You _are_ a problem.

Doesn't earning multiple plonks make you wonder if that might
actually be true?

Nah. It's probably a well coordinated conspiracy.

You are fine. It is everybody else that has a problem.

 

[Nathan Keel]

Guess what, Mr Keel: Sherm didn't read what you wrote (that's what he
meant by "plonk", by the way) but the rest of us did. And I doubt
we're much better off from the experience.

I know what he meant, and I know he was acting like a child trying to
get the "last word". The point of the reply was to speak my thoughts
as well, just like he did. Just like I'm doing now. It's sort of
sadly ironic that this is what some people would use for a reason to
block another person. "Let's discuss it and ridicule you and insult
you, but when you reply to my sarcastic post to say you've blocked
someone, too and it's not a bad deal, so we can say "you suck, I'm
blocking you, now *plonk*"". Why even use usenet if it's just about
sarcasm and blocking because people are doing what it's designed for
(being communication with each other). And, no, I'm not going to say
"Now I'm blocking you" because I don't actually feel those people are a
threat, and I can just not read their posts. No reason to go to the
extreme and act like someone's being harassing and they need to block
them because they are so freaking filter-happy and want to get their
last sarcastic comment and tell me how they've "blocked me" (else
they'd not bother). It's just childish.

 

[Nathan Keel]

You _are_ a problem.

Grow up.

Doesn't earning multiple plonks make you wonder if that might
actually be true?

No, because these people have "plonked" me and made a sarcastic or
insulting remark for no reason, yet they think they look wise for
saying such things. Just freaking block someone if you want to block
them, don't get in your little last attempt to "out do" them. The only
thing that earned me a "plonk" was that I replied to someone they
blocked before, and I replied saying it's not a big deal, I've since
blocked the person myself, so they won't *gasp* risk seeing my reply to
that person either. That in itself has "earned me a plonk". That's
pretty stupid.

Nah. It's probably a well coordinated conspiracy.

Oh, and now this reply to your childish and sarcastic comment will have
someone else "plonk" me. So what? I never suggested any "conspiracy",
I know why people are irrationally blocking me. It's funny, because I'm
being blocked for replying to comments like yours. This is a big
threat to people's activity on this group?

You are fine. It is everybody else that has a problem.

I never suggested any such thing. You're just being a jackass because
you think you're more important than other people. I'm the guy that
invited anyone that's so flipped out about me replying to someone that
posted to me, to block me. Does that sound like I really give a rats
ass if you or anyone else blocks my posts or that I care, or that I
think it's some conspiracy? Honestly, you're failed in your attempts
to make a witty sarcastic remark.

 

[Tad J McClellan]

Grow up.

Stop being a problem.

No, because these people have "plonked" me and made a sarcastic or
insulting remark for no reason,

Each plonker most certainly had a reason.

Just because you don't know the reason, or don't agree with the
reason does not mean the a reason does not exist.

 

[Nathan Keel]

Stop being a problem.

If people aren't arrogant jerks and just sarcastic and rude, I will
happily be civil in response. I'm not a problem because I reply to
someone that posted to/about me, else you're more of a problem for
doing it yourself (logically speaking).

Each plonker most certainly had a reason.

That's not always true. At least not a good reason. Speaking of,
didn't you say you also filtered me?

Just because you don't know the reason, or don't agree with the
reason does not mean the a reason does not exist.

Okay, I see where you're going with it. Good or bad reason, in their
mind, they had a reason (even no reason at all, is still a reason). I
never denied the block didn't exist, or they didn't think they had a
reason. Speaking of reasons, there's really no reason to debate about
reasons. I simply made the point that people were blocking me claiming
I was upsetting their filters because they saw other posters that were
blocked when I quoted their message in reply. Even though I had
blocked that person myself, so they'd not see my quoting them again,
just saying so was the reason why someone said they blocked me.
Someone else then said they blocked me for replying to them and saying
that.

I find that silly, but I never suggested they weren't right for it in
their own mind. I'm certain people have been tempted to block me just
for what you and I are replying to each other about discussing it, so
what can you do. I just think it's odd, because I'm certainly no
threat. I "get" that people sometimes prefer to block people that
don't just block known trolls in the group, and I did block him (though
he'll surely be back with his new news server soon enough). Usenet is
a place where if you explain things, that alone might set people off.
I'm sure we can agree to just end this between us now, right?