Nuxx:830b942b-10a2-4449-a079-57648d71730d@3g2000yqk.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!3g2000yqk.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID: <830b942b-10a2-4449-a079-57648d71730d@3g2000yqk.googlegroups.com> From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.net.news.config,uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: RFD: create moderated newsgroup uk.rec.cycling.moderated Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 11:34:10 -0700 (PDT) References:  <6nlf25pf38aa0tqdp123sutkm40u6mdptn@4ax.com>  <94089753-2475-432f-8bc6-a90cfb96f421@o30g2000vbc.googlegroups.com> <6oF*L9FIs@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>   <06mg259pe2n1532g6sl5h4jg2m4l8bhi3r@4ax.com> Lines: 30 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 1244226850 17247 127.0.0.1 (5 Jun 2009 18:34:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 18:34:10 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: 3g2000yqk.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: 2818 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.net.news.config:53145 uk.rec.cycling:5002

On Jun 5, 12:29=A0am, for_chapp...@null.null wrote: > On Thu, 4 Jun 2009 23:20:11 +0100, "Wm..." > > > >  wrote: > >Thu, 4 Jun 2009 21:40:10  > >uk.net.news.config Alan Braggins  > > >>If rejected posts are visible somewhere else, and someone who habituall= y > >>posts rubbish makes a test on-topic post for a change in order to bleat > >>about censorship when it get rejected, then the difference will be visi= ble > >>to readers of the rejected posts. (Including if the only rejected posts > >>visible are those multi-posted to the unmoderated group.) > > >Where you deliberately making that as convoluted as possible? > > >>I don't consider this an adequate reason to encourage denial of service > >>attacks by disallowing blocking by poster altogether. > > >Denial of service attacks are significantly more important than any > >moderation issue. =A0Don't go there as serious net-copping may result. > > Yawn, another netcop threat. Do excuse the rest of us while we snore, > wont you?

It's "yawn" all round with him/her. I think he/she may well be on the autistic spectrum or similar.