On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 00:04:05 -0500,
wrote:

It's a free world and you are entitled to your opinion Dave.
Rarely contribute? Dave, you have been quite a contributor over the
past 3 years. Even before you started replying using "Whilst
undoubtedly under the effects of alcohol" which I note you have now
stopped using.

System crashed, had to reload Agent (paid version) and I haven't
bothered to set it up again with intro's and sig's.

[...snipped...]

Don't forget, some people have to pay to receive Usenet!
Usenet is *not* the internet. If I had to pay additional charges to
receive Usenet, you bet I'd be a pretty peeved off person if I was
having to download advertising!

Posts which are nothing more than advertising yes. Posts which are
directly relevant to what is being discussed and have a URL in a sig
file is a bit extreme though.

FWIW, I did once pay for Usenet, through GigaNews. I go pretty close
to my download limit with my current provider, and have had my
downloads shaped (meaning I have gone over my quota). So I effectively
am still paying for Usenet, if I didn't use it I would not go anywhere
near my quota.

Yet one extra line on the end of a post giving a URL, even if it is a
commercial URL, doesn't worry me, it adds bugger all to my download.

Earlier this year, there was a query about how I became Keeper of the
Charter/FAQ, which I answered publicly on the newsgroup.
I have checked that thread and do not find any objections from you.

I subscribe to 49 newsgroups, ALL of them non-binary (just to assuage
those who would accuse me of being a warez freak or a kiddie porn
addict).

I am very selective about what I read, mainly because it would be
utterly impossible for me to read each and every post in each and
every group that I subscribe to.

I look at the subject and if it appears that the thread will be
something I can contribut to, then I read the thread, otherwise I
ignore the thread.

I can recall another instance earlier this year when you had every
opportunity to voice your opinions against me but you did not bother
to do so.

See above.

You do not realise just the diversity of the email I receive from
people who lurk on this newsgrup. In most cases, I can only guide
them to either watchng the threads, posting to the ng, finding an
archived thread that may be of interest to them or sometimes, I post a
request on their behalf.
I have been [pleasantly] surprised at the number of 'lurker's of this
group.

I would NOT hestitate to do what we did in the above case if a similar
posting appeared again.

And I will not hesitate to accuse you of being totally and utterly
unreasonable.

Frankly I don't give a dam what you think of me, publicly or
privately.
I doubt if you would likely find, in your eyes, anyone would be
appropriate.

Given the nature of Usenet, I doubt ANYONE would be appropriate.

"All advertising is inappropriate and should be directed to the group
rec.travel.marketplace." which is still in force to this day.

And including a URL in a sig at the end of a post which is completely
on topic to what is being discussed and answers the posters question
is NOT advertising.

Again, if you wish to have the wording changed, then you are welcome
to go for it.

Usually, one or two adverts get overlooked however when someone
continues or there is a blantant disregard for Usenet ie:
posted/spammed to several ng's, then it is a different matter.

Believe me, ISP's *do* take Usenet abuse whether it be a posting on
the newsgroup or an email to me, very seriously.
Many have specific reference to Usenet in their TOS.

I know they take it seriously, I use to work for one.

But they also look at what is considered appropriate in the group, and
they don't just look at the Charter, they also look at what is going
on in the group to see if the Charter is outdated and so on.

In this case, given the large amount of dissent as to what is
appropriate and what isn't, they would tend to form the view that it
isn't readily apparent as to what is acceptable, and therefore take no
action.


Dave