Nuxx:1c41cfd9-b997-4b23-b54e-43ad13370ba8@t11g2000vbc.googlegroups.com

Path: num2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!num1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!number.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!t11g2000vbc.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID: <1c41cfd9-b997-4b23-b54e-43ad13370ba8@t11g2000vbc.googlegroups.com> From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: Pre-RFD: uk.rec.cycling.moderated Date: Sat, 30 May 2009 17:42:06 -0700 (PDT) References: <784aj1F1j3r9uU1@mid.individual.net> <57bbb322-a374-4d35-99bd-717a62887981@j9g2000prh.googlegroups.com>  <1df1b7b3-bde8-4429-8103-eb76aed8f91a@j9g2000prh.googlegroups.com>   <789guhF1kjhlpU1@mid.individual.net>  <78a47hF1l5f9aU1@mid.individual.net> <2g90259l7ukcpidvvnthb89rgo3b0e0etr@4ax.com> <78b457F1j1b03U1@mid.individual.net> Lines: 55 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 81.156.251.27 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1243730526 22612 127.0.0.1 (31 May 2009 00:42:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 00:42:06 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: t11g2000vbc.googlegroups.com; posting-host=81.156.251.27; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.10) Gecko/2009042316 Firefox/3.0.10 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Bytes: 3810 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:705674

On May 29, 10:59=A0pm, Matt B  wrote: > jms wrote: > > On Fri, 29 May 2009 13:54:18 +0100, Matt B > >  wrote: > > >> James wrote: > >>> On May 29, 4:25 pm, Matt B  wrote: > >>>> Tom Crispin wrote: > >>>>> On Thu, 28 May 2009 16:07:19 +0100, jms  > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> For what sort of action are people banned? > >>>>> I would expect people to be banned, or receive a warning, for a fix= ed > >>>>> term, not exceeding a year, for the following: > >>>>> =A0- spam > >>>>> =A0- offensive language > >>>>> =A0- personal abuse > >>>>> =A0- persistent off-topic posts > >>>>> =A0- harassment > >>>>> =A0- persistent name changing > >>>> And thinking more about this, and the reasons behind it, there are t= hree > >>>> behaviours which, more than any other, lead to confrontation and ang= er, > >>>> these should be considered as seriously disruptive to the well being= of > >>>> the group and added to the list. > > >>>> [...] > >>>> =A0 2. Incitement to "kill-file" someone (publicly or privately) sho= uld be > >>>> considered as a serious offence too. > >>> If you mean, deliberately acting in such a way as to provoke it, that > >>> would probably be covered under general considerations of politeness, > >>> relevance. > >> No, that is obviously _not_ what I meant. =A0I meant incitement to > >> "kill-file" someone else. =A0The type of bulling and coercion as witne= ssed > >> here. > > >>>> [...] > > > I have been informed by e-mail that other parties have been approached > > and told to kill file me and not to get in to any discussion with me > > (and named others) =A0whatsoever. > > Disgraceful behaviour. > > I wonder what they are frightened of? =A0It's not as if they will be > physically forced to read anything that others write. =A0Perhaps they fea= r > losing their place as alpha male, or having weaknesses exposed.

Or it being made obvious that the "trolls'" arguments can't be refuted. "Must...censor...the truth...."