Moving to new form of usenet ideas?

[Jon Slaughter]

Sorry for all the cross posting but I'm interesting in getting a serious
discussion about how usenet has become lately.

Many people are moving away from usenet because of all the spam and cooks
that have been showing up. The rate of spammer seem to be growing
exponentially(o k, not really but it feels like it).

I think maybe its time to do something about it. What I'd like to see happen
is an "upgrade" to usenet. I do not like th forum based communiations that
has sprung up lately but since it solves many of usenet's shortcommings I
believe that will will take over.

If many people feel the same way then maybe we can move on to something
better and increase the efficiency and productivity that usenet was meant
for.

Some ideas I have are:

1. Cook repellent - Some method to prevent cooks from interrupting normal
flow. Either having a voting scheme or some type of identifying means to
either completely remove them or at least make it easier to avoid them.

2. Spam repellent - Similar to Cooks.

3. Meta data - Have the ability to directly include graphics and things like
TeX into messages. For those that do not want to view it they can disable it
or have some other means to see it.

4. Specific tools for groups - Different groups have different needs for
communication. Mathematics groups need to efficiently communicate
mathematical formulas while electronics need to communicate schematics.

5. Moderation - Potentially give regular users of the group the ability to
"quasi-moderate" or in general just have a wide range of options to have
more control over groups(But not to much).

6. Non-anomality or some way to slow down spammers. Maybe better routing
data and such.

7. Potentially "Backwards compatible" with usenet - have the ability to surf
usenet with the same client to help make a smoother transition.
----

In any case this is extremely preliminary and just some thoughts. It seems
that usenet has started to go down the drain. Hopefully there are those out
there that are interested in keeping it alive. I'm thinking something very
similar to usenet but with just more "features".

If enough people are interested in doing this then maybe we can put
something together. All ideas and suggestions are welcome.

Thanks,
Jon

[John Fields]

On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 11:12:33 -0700, Lester Zick
<do********@now here.netwrote:

>On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 09:18:52 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
<mi**********@ earthlink.netwr ote:

>>Lester Zick wrote:

>>>
Old soldiers never die; they just fade away.

Show up at our next memorial service and you'll hear the names of
200+ read that prove that is a lie.

Or you could just wave the flag at us some more. That'll be
convincing.

---
What is it you find disturbing about Michael's pride in his military
life and why do you find it necessary to try to berate him at every
opportunity?
--
JF

[John Fields]

On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 11:14:36 -0700, Lester Zick
<do********@now here.netwrote:

>On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 09:27:22 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
<mi**********@ earthlink.netwr ote:

>>Lester Zick wrote:

>>>
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 19:59:05 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
<mi********** @earthlink.netw rote:

Sigh. So many idiots, so little time.

Part of your service to the country no doubt.

No, you're just a special case.

So instead of signing the cross, why not just wave the flag at me some
more to show me just how special I really am. That'll make me go away.

---
What is it you find disturbing about Michael's pride in his military
life and why do you find it necessary to try to berate him at every
opportunity?
--
JF

[zzbunker]

On Oct 11, 11:47 am, Jerry Avins <[e-mail] rote:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Lester Zick wrote:

Old soldiers never die; they just fade away.

Show up at our next memorial service and you'll hear the names of
200+ read that prove that is a lie.

MacArthur's singing that song to congress keep him from leaving a corpse
when he died.

No, it was MacAuthur's singing and science
that was one of the main reasons that we
starting making cruise missiles, helicopters, RPGs,
AI, Sattelites, and Robots for the idiot US Army, rather
than more tanks, forts, jeeps, and B-29s.

>
Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

[Lester Zick]

On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 14:53:14 -0500, John Fields
<jf*****@austin instruments.com wrote:

>On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 11:12:33 -0700, Lester Zick
<do********@no where.netwrote:

>>On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 09:18:52 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
<mi********** @earthlink.netw rote:

>>>Lester Zick wrote:

Old soldiers never die; they just fade away.

Show up at our next memorial service and you'll hear the names of
200+ read that prove that is a lie.

Or you could just wave the flag at us some more. That'll be
convincing.

---
What is it you find disturbing about Michael's pride in his military
life

Nothing at all.

and why do you find it necessary to try to berate him at every
opportunity?

Because he insists on draping himself in the flag and acting like he's
the only one who's ever been there or done that and that it somehow
has a bearing on the issues raised here.

~v~~

[Lester Zick]

On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 14:25:18 -0500, John Fields
<jf*****@austin instruments.com wrote:

>On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 17:12:04 -0700, Lester Zick
<do********@no where.netwrote:

>>On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:30:21 -0500, John Fields
<jf*****@aust ininstruments.c omwrote:

>>>>>the contraction of "it is" isn't possessive.

Or you might consider placing carets under the phrase objected to
instead of whatever else strikes your fancy.

---
If you can rouse yourself from your self-admitted drunken stupor you
might try using a non-proportional font like Courier or Courier New.

Usually I prefer truth.

---
No, you don't.

Sure I do.

>You prefer whatever comes along which will allow you to be an
argumentativ e, deceitful troublemaker.

And the difference would be what exactly? That I prefer truth instead
of kissing your ass?

~v~~

[Lester Zick]

On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 14:49:54 -0500, John Fields
<jf*****@austin instruments.com wrote:

>On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 11:10:30 -0700, Lester Zick
<do********@no where.netwrote:

>>On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 18:34:13 -0700, JosephKK
<jo********** **@sbcglobal.ne twrote:

>>>Lester Zick do********@nowh ere.net posted to sci.electronics .design:

On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 15:03:09 -0500, John Fields
<jf*****@aus tininstruments. comwrote:

>On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 11:46:35 -0700, Lester Zick
><do******* *@nowhere.netwr ote:
>
>>On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 19:59:05 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
>><mi****** ****@earthlink. netwrote:
>>
>>>Lester Zick wrote:
>>>>
>>>On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 14:50:12 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
>>><mi***** *****@earthlink .netwrote:
>>>>
>>>Servic e to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my
>>>DD214 to prove it.
>>>>
>>>Never happened to me or anyone else of course.
>>>
>>>
>> Sigh. So many idiots, so little time.
>>
>>Part of your service to the country no doubt.
>>
>> The sig
>> file is
>> used to
>>>remind an online stalker that he hasn't managed to interfere with
>>>my
>>>voluntee r work to help other disabled veterans. Take it any way
>>>you want to.
>>
>>A lot of us have been there. That doesn't qualify us as idiots.
>>Fortunate ly relatively few were disabled. I was just trying to
>>understan d how you think that bears on issues raised here.
>
>---
>It doesn't bear on any issues raised here. He uses it as his .sig,
>and the only time he elaborates on it is when someone asks him about
>what's up with that.
>
>you seem to take it as a personal affrontery; what's up with _that_?

Usually I only take effrontery with bad spelling. But in your case
I'll make an acception.

~v~~

He typed boldly when the correct word is affront.

So why don't you take the matter up with the one who didn't use the
correct word? I had to make a choice. If he had the effrontery to use
poor composition the least I could do was to take affront or possibly
umbrage.

---
No, the least you could have done was nothing at all.

In which case I'd be fully on a par with you.

>In neither case would I have taken affrontery.
---
???

affrontery - to insult to the face by behavior or language

Used: "And you, Scarecrow, have the affrontery
to ask for a brain..."
(The Wizard speaking to the Scarecrow as the
foursome first meet him)

My dictionary disagrees. But then I expect it would with most movie
citations.

~v~~

[John Fields]

On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 11:33:53 -0700, Lester Zick
<do********@now here.netwrote:

>On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 17:00:10 -0700, ChairmanOfTheBo red
<RU*****@crack asmile.orgwrote :

>>On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 10:05:34 -0700, Lester Zick <do********@now here.net>
wrote:

>>>Or you might consider placing carets under the phrase objected to
instead of whatever else strikes your fancy.

He did, dumbshit.

Then he's a worse grammarian than I realized.

---
Hmm... Let's take a look at that:

First, it's my fault because you were using a proportional font and
weren't smart enough to realize that if you'd have used a
fixed-pitch font you wouldn't have had to complain about the
location of the carrots? Orange you being a little disingenius?

Second, my suggestion that you use a fixed-pitch font to read my
posts seems to either have fallen on deaf ears or ears which can't
gracefully accept correction. I'll vote for the ladder, since from
your post, above, you seem to have finally gotten the location
right, have climbed high enough to grasp the meaning, and are now
trying to refute what you once said by trying to impugn my Gramma.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

God knows your parents must be...
--
JF

[John Fields]

On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 11:35:11 -0700, Lester Zick
<do********@now here.netwrote:

>On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 17:00:58 -0700, ChairmanOfTheBo red
<RU*****@crack asmile.orgwrote :

>>On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 10:05:34 -0700, Lester Zick <do********@now here.net>
wrote:

>>>Oh gee, professor, not really? And what about usenet postings where
servers have some difficulty with proportional spacing, where a choice
has to be made between ragged paragraphs and colloquial punctuation?
Next time your skirts get in a tizzy, complain to the servers not moi.

Utter bullshit.

I know. But it's the best I could do at your level.

---
LOL, it's about the best you could do at any level.

--
JF

[Michael A. Terrell]

Lester Zick wrote:

>
On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 09:18:52 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
<mi**********@e arthlink.netwro te:

Lester Zick wrote:

>
Old soldiers never die; they just fade away.

Show up at our next memorial service and you'll hear the names of
200+ read that prove that is a lie.

Or you could just wave the flag at us some more. That'll be
convincing.

Or you could keep showing your ignorant ass to everyone on comp.dsp,
comp.lang.c++, microsoft.publi c.dotnet.langua ges.csharp,
sci.electronics .basics, sci.electronics .design, and sci.math. That will
definately convince everyone that you're too stupid to live.

As far as the US flag? I posted some pictures that I took on
Memorial Day at our Veteran's Park. It brought out a horde of idiots
like you to bitch, and make lewd comments.

<465C7552.DFCAE 84C%40earthlink .netif your news server is any good.

--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

[Michael A. Terrell]

Lester Zick wrote:

>
On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 14:53:14 -0500, John Fields
<jf*****@austin instruments.com wrote:

On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 11:12:33 -0700, Lester Zick
<do********@now here.netwrote:

>On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 09:18:52 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
<mi**********@ earthlink.netwr ote:

Lester Zick wrote:

Old soldiers never die; they just fade away.

Show up at our next memorial service and you'll hear the names of
200+ read that prove that is a lie.

Or you could just wave the flag at us some more. That'll be
convincing.

---
What is it you find disturbing about Michael's pride in his military
life

Nothing at all.

and why do you find it necessary to try to berate him at every
opportunity?

Because he insists on draping himself in the flag and acting like he's
the only one who's ever been there or done that and that it somehow
has a bearing on the issues raised here.

I use that sig file for all the newsgroups I use, and a lot of my
E-mail. I am tired of the anti-American and anti Veteran jackasses, so I
will continue to be posted to set you little idiots into a hissy fit.
It really burns your sorry ass that some veterans aren't ashamed of
having served, or continue to serve their community after they receive
their honorable discharge.
BTW: A sig file is a statment. Yours says that you aren't worth the
time to create a real sig file.

~v~~

--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida