Ping Beamends - not

I

Ian Rawlings

Guest

• Oct 9, 2006

• #61

On 2006-10-09, Austin Shackles <[email protected]> wrote:

> You don't have the right to prevent people from posting things which are
> relevant to the group but which you don't happen to like - and you'd have a
> hard time convincing anyone, even if there were anyone to convince, that
> questions about LR parts are off-topic in AFL. Come to that, you can't, in
> any case, prevent people posting etc., as innumerable trolls often prove.

This thread is off-topic and should be taken to email!

Mehehehehe..

Couldn't resist.

--
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

 

W

William Tasso

Guest

• Oct 9, 2006

• #62

On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 09:05:27 +0100, Stephen Hull <[email protected]> wrote:

> In message <[email protected]>
> "William Tasso" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> With the amount of none landrover related stuff here abouts I'm
>>> surprised someone went to the trouble of registering a google groups
>
>> No longer have the o/p here - does the posting ip give any clue?
>
> The start of the thread can be seen here:
>
> http://www.landyzone.co.uk/lz/f31/

ugh - yet another useless[1] web interface to usenet.

doesn't show headers - unless I missed something.

[1] don't have any real objection to a site republishing the content
(although I know some folk do) as a service to their visitors. However
the posting gateways really are an irritation. see:
http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
--
William Tasso

Land Rover - 110 V8
Discovery - V8

 

G

GbH

Guest

• Oct 9, 2006

• #63

Lee_D wrote:
> Srtgray <[email protected]> uttered summat worrerz funny about:
>>
>> Actually, some people's personal shopping lists have been really
>> useful to ME (YMMV), so that I can get an idea of the scale of a task
>> before I consider it.
>>
>> Stuart
>
> I've found it can often end up with a revised list once raised, sort
> of having a guy at the parts desk saying "Nah, you don't want to do
> it like that".
>
> With the amount of none landrover related stuff here abouts I'm
> surprised someone went to the trouble of registering a google groups
> account purely to take a pop on this one subject for which the OP has
> no other posts what so ever listed on google groups.... which leads
> me further to go so far as to suggest that if the OP doesn't actually
> contribute then they should FRO and stop moaning. I guess who ever it
> is that if they are a regular contibutor then they themseleves are
> guiltly of fragrant breaches of Nanny net law otherwise they would
> have had the balls to post under there own name.
> FFS!
>
> Lee D

'esa TROLL!!!

--
Don't say it cannot be done, rather what is needed to do it!

If the answer is offensive maybe the question was inappropriate

The fiend of my fiend is my enema!

 

B

beamendsltd

Guest

• Oct 9, 2006

• #64

In message <[email protected]>
"GbH" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Lee_D wrote:
> > Srtgray <[email protected]> uttered summat worrerz funny about:
> >>
> >> Actually, some people's personal shopping lists have been really
> >> useful to ME (YMMV), so that I can get an idea of the scale of a task
> >> before I consider it.
> >>
> >> Stuart
> >
> > I've found it can often end up with a revised list once raised, sort
> > of having a guy at the parts desk saying "Nah, you don't want to do
> > it like that".
> >
> > With the amount of none landrover related stuff here abouts I'm
> > surprised someone went to the trouble of registering a google groups
> > account purely to take a pop on this one subject for which the OP has
> > no other posts what so ever listed on google groups.... which leads
> > me further to go so far as to suggest that if the OP doesn't actually
> > contribute then they should FRO and stop moaning. I guess who ever it
> > is that if they are a regular contibutor then they themseleves are
> > guiltly of fragrant breaches of Nanny net law otherwise they would
> > have had the balls to post under there own name.
> > FFS!
> >
> > Lee D
>
> 'esa TROLL!!!
>

Quite likely - I rather upset someone (me? surely not!) on
another (non-LR) group who fancies himself as the fountain of
all knowledge on every subject. Since then I've been inundated
with spam (or would have been if I didn't have filetering in
place). As this is the second time this has happened, I'm now
certain who it is. Whether the op is one and the same, I couldn't
say - but be warned, some of the very same people who set out
to be the Net Police don't seem to be over worried about abusing
it for their own ends.

If the op wasn't one and the same, but just someone who's a bit
peed off, then that's fair enough - each unto their own etc, they
are entitled to their opinion.

Richard

--
www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk [email protected]
www.radioparadise.com - Good Music, No Vine
Lib Dems - Townies keeping comedy alive

 

A

Austin Shackles

Guest

• Oct 9, 2006

• #65

On or around Mon, 9 Oct 2006 10:30:26 +0100, Ian Rawlings
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>
>This thread is off-topic and should be taken to email!

thrrrrpt!

why'd yer think it was flagged OT: ?

sump eeple.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
Travel The Galaxy! Meet Fascinating Life Forms...
------------------------------------------------\
>> http://www.schlockmercenary.com/ << \ ...and Kill them.
a webcartoon by Howard Tayler; I like it, maybe you will too!

 

N

Nige

Guest

• Oct 9, 2006

• #66

"beamendsltd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:2d3c15734e%[email protected]...
> In message <[email protected]>
> "GbH" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Lee_D wrote:
>> > Srtgray <[email protected]> uttered summat worrerz funny about:
>> >>
>> >> Actually, some people's personal shopping lists have been really
>> >> useful to ME (YMMV), so that I can get an idea of the scale of a task
>> >> before I consider it.
>> >>
>> >> Stuart
>> >
>> > I've found it can often end up with a revised list once raised, sort
>> > of having a guy at the parts desk saying "Nah, you don't want to do
>> > it like that".
>> >
>> > With the amount of none landrover related stuff here abouts I'm
>> > surprised someone went to the trouble of registering a google groups
>> > account purely to take a pop on this one subject for which the OP has
>> > no other posts what so ever listed on google groups.... which leads
>> > me further to go so far as to suggest that if the OP doesn't actually
>> > contribute then they should FRO and stop moaning. I guess who ever it
>> > is that if they are a regular contibutor then they themseleves are
>> > guiltly of fragrant breaches of Nanny net law otherwise they would
>> > have had the balls to post under there own name.
>> > FFS!
>> >
>> > Lee D
>>
>> 'esa TROLL!!!
>>
>
> Quite likely - I rather upset someone (me? surely not!) on
> another (non-LR) group who fancies himself as the fountain of
> all knowledge on every subject. Since then I've been inundated
> with spam (or would have been if I didn't have filetering in
> place). As this is the second time this has happened, I'm now
> certain who it is. Whether the op is one and the same, I couldn't
> say - but be warned, some of the very same people who set out
> to be the Net Police don't seem to be over worried about abusing
> it for their own ends.
>
> If the op wasn't one and the same, but just someone who's a bit
> peed off, then that's fair enough - each unto their own etc, they
> are entitled to their opinion.
>
> Richard

Well, it's not gonna stop me posting as i feel it's very relevant.

Nige

 

G

GbH

Guest

• Oct 9, 2006

• #67

beamendsltd wrote:
> In message <[email protected]>
> "GbH" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Lee_D wrote:
>>> Srtgray <[email protected]> uttered summat worrerz funny about:
>>>>
>>>> Actually, some people's personal shopping lists have been really
>>>> useful to ME (YMMV), so that I can get an idea of the scale of a
>>>> task before I consider it.
>>>>
>>>> Stuart
>>>
>>> I've found it can often end up with a revised list once raised, sort
>>> of having a guy at the parts desk saying "Nah, you don't want to do
>>> it like that".
>>>
>>> With the amount of none landrover related stuff here abouts I'm
>>> surprised someone went to the trouble of registering a google groups
>>> account purely to take a pop on this one subject for which the OP
>>> has no other posts what so ever listed on google groups.... which
>>> leads me further to go so far as to suggest that if the OP doesn't
>>> actually contribute then they should FRO and stop moaning. I guess
>>> who ever it is that if they are a regular contibutor then they
>>> themseleves are guiltly of fragrant breaches of Nanny net law
>>> otherwise they would have had the balls to post under there own
>>> name.
>>> FFS!
>>>
>>> Lee D
>>
>> 'esa TROLL!!!
>>
>
> Quite likely - I rather upset someone (me? surely not!) on
> another (non-LR) group who fancies himself as the fountain of
> all knowledge on every subject. Since then I've been inundated
> with spam (or would have been if I didn't have filetering in
> place). As this is the second time this has happened, I'm now
> certain who it is. Whether the op is one and the same, I couldn't
> say - but be warned, some of the very same people who set out
> to be the Net Police don't seem to be over worried about abusing
> it for their own ends.
>
> If the op wasn't one and the same, but just someone who's a bit
> peed off, then that's fair enough - each unto their own etc, they
> are entitled to their opinion.

Also to be wrong!


--
Don't say it cannot be done, rather what is needed to do it!

If the answer is offensive maybe the question was inappropriate

The fiend of my fiend is my enema!

 

S

Stephen Hull

Guest

• Oct 9, 2006

• #68

In message <[email protected]>
"William Tasso" <[email protected]> wrote:

>>> No longer have the o/p here - does the posting ip give any clue?
>>
>> The start of the thread can be seen here:
>>
>> http://www.landyzone.co.uk/lz/f31/
>
>ugh - yet another useless[1] web interface to usenet.

That may be so, but you did say you no longer have the OP here.

>doesn't show headers - unless I missed something.

Unless I'm missing something, it does show the headers;

"Ping Beamends - not", it also shows the OP's email address clearly.

>[1] don't have any real objection to a site republishing the content
>(although I know some folk do) as a service to their visitors. However
>the posting gateways really are an irritation. see:
>http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

Thought I was doing you a favour providing a link to the original
posting, the fact it may be irritating is irrelevant, however you'll be
pleased to know I won't bother next time.

Steve.


--
http://www.stephen.hull.btinternet.co.uk
Coach painting tips and techniques + Land Rover colour codes
Using a British RISC Operating System 100% immune to any Windows virus.
"Whatever is rightly done, however humble, is noble". Henry Royce

 

G

GbH

Guest

• Oct 9, 2006

• #69

Stephen Hull wrote:
> In message <[email protected]>
> "William Tasso" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>>> No longer have the o/p here - does the posting ip give any clue?
>>>
>>> The start of the thread can be seen here:
>>>
>>> http://www.landyzone.co.uk/lz/f31/
>>
>> ugh - yet another useless[1] web interface to usenet.
>
> That may be so, but you did say you no longer have the OP here.
>
>> doesn't show headers - unless I missed something.
>
> Unless I'm missing something, it does show the headers;
>
> "Ping Beamends - not", it also shows the OP's email address clearly.
>
>> [1] don't have any real objection to a site republishing the content
>> (although I know some folk do) as a service to their visitors.
>> However the posting gateways really are an irritation. see:
>> http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
>
> Thought I was doing you a favour providing a link to the original
> posting, the fact it may be irritating is irrelevant, however you'll
> be pleased to know I won't bother next time.
>
> Steve.

Methinks AH TrOLL is succeeding, we're bickering among ourselves!

--
Don't say it cannot be done, rather what is needed to do it!

If the answer is offensive maybe the question was inappropriate

The fiend of my fiend is my enema!

 

W

William Tasso

Guest

• Oct 9, 2006

• #70

On Mon, 09 Oct 2006 16:39:26 +0100, Stephen Hull <[email protected]> wrote:

> In message <[email protected]>
> "William Tasso" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>>> No longer have the o/p here - does the posting ip give any clue?
>>>
>>> The start of the thread can be seen here:
>>>
>>> http://www.landyzone.co.uk/lz/f31/
>>
>> ugh - yet another useless[1] web interface to usenet.
>
> That may be so, but you did say you no longer have the OP here.
>
>> doesn't show headers - unless I missed something.
>
> Unless I'm missing something, it does show the headers;
>
> "Ping Beamends - not", it also shows the OP's email address clearly.
>
>> [1] don't have any real objection to a site republishing the content
>> (although I know some folk do) as a service to their visitors. However
>> the posting gateways really are an irritation. see:
>> http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
>
> Thought I was doing you a favour providing a link to the original
> posting, the fact it may be irritating is irrelevant, however you'll be
> pleased to know I won't bother next time.

hey - wasn't having a pop at you (bl**dy joys of text) unless you are
responsible for creating a web posting gateway to usenet

btw: I didn't see the headers on that site - I must have missed the link

/checks

Nope, can't see it.

For my part, I was trying to assist the previous poster (Lee_D IIRC) who
was wondering about the origins of the thread.

For example your headers contain this: NNTP-Posting-Host: [...]65.22

My headers contain: NNTP-Posting-Host: [...]224.156

Point being (assuming fixed Ip) that the o/p may not be able to hide
simply by changing mail address. There are other clues that help in
narrowing down the list of suspects. Of course to actually prove puppetry
can take more work than is worthwhile. MMV.

--
William Tasso

Land Rover - 110 V8
Discovery - V8