From: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 1997 01:02:51 +0800
To: freedom-knights@jetcafe.org
Subject: Re: non-censorous spam control (was Re: Spam is Information?)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.93.970808190349.868C-100000@shirley>
Message-ID: <93e7ae94w165w@bwalk.dm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



? the Platypus {aka David Formosa} <dformosa@st.nepean.uws.edu.au> writes:

>
> On Wed, 6 Aug 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
>
> > Why do people try to flood newsgroups with shit?
>
> I can see a number of resons
>
> 1) For profet (pron4porn ect)
> 2) To prevent discution that thay do not like (Sientology, the poatry
> feastivil.)
> 3) To the amusument of there small minds (trollers ect)
> 4) By accedent (ARRM, other spews)
> 5) Out of shear madness  (Dr Rouger Rabbit)

The good news is that they can't harm a newsgroup by flooding it.
One can identify some of the reasons and try to eliminate them
to reduce floods. The self-appointed "owners" of unmoderated
newsgroups are one such reasn.

> > Examples from the Net.Scum rogue collection: Scott Kellog from Sematech
> > falsely accuses various people of "spamming" his newsgroup, but hasn't
> > been caught forging cancels yet.
>
> <snide>
> But lieing is free speach isn't it?
> </snide>

Is exposing someone as a liar and a crook censorship?

> As long as he is not forging cancels I don't see anything wrong with the
> little troll having some fun.

People who complain to postmasters about the alleged contents of other
people's Usenet articles, especially those who falsely accuse others of
"spamming", complain about "abuse" they haven't witnessed but saw others
allege, etc, are net-abusers and deserve to be exterminated by any means
at our disposal.

> >  On the other hand Bob Curtis has taken
> > over alt.smokers.cigars and forges cancels for articles that merely
> > question his "ownership" of the newsgroup. Do read - it's very enlightening
>
> IRC Bob Curtis was sent away with his tail between his legs.

Have I "censored" Bob Curtis?

By the way, Bob is alive and well, moderating his own little "moderated"
newsgroup, and recently published a piece about his experience with
forging cancels in a paper magazine - full of lies. The last forged
cancel I found is about a month old - for a kibo@thecia.net article.

> > They argue that according to Hardin, Usenet would be
> > used more "efficiently" if every newsgroup had an "owner"
>
> I don't see anywhere that being suggested.  Most peaple suggest that
> Usenet would work better if peaple stopped abuseing it.

I don't believe you haven't seen this said. Perhaps you don't read
news.* or don't understand what's being said there.

> I don't trust the newsgroup care peaple any further then I can kick them.

Years ago I used to occasionally mail posters saying friendly and polite
things like: "I saw your article posted in <forum X>, and it occurred to me
that you might have gotten more interesting responses if you had posted it to
<forum Y> (in addition or instead)". Now people have no manners. Recently
someone I know (call him Y) forwarded me an e-mail from Y. I know both X and
Y on the net; they didn't know one another. X posted a technical question on
a comp.* newsgroup that's been "split" and rmgrouped a few months ago. X's
news master hasn't processed the rmgroup, and X had no idea that the
newsgroup's been split. Y (whom I used to respect somewhat before this
incident) flamed X rather rudely)for having posted in a "bogus" newsgroup.
(Interestingly, the article, not cross-posted, propagated to Y's server,
showing how little effect David C Lawrence's rmgroups have these days.)

Cabal supporters are promoting the view that posting in newsgroups they
describe as "bogus" (i.e., the ones that David C Lawrence has rmgrouped,
or the alt.* ones that they don't want sites to create) is a form of
attack on the Cabal, resulting (at least) in obnoxious flames.

> In fact I have been encourgaing them to stop.

Your encouragement is irrelevant, since they don't give a fuck what you or
anyone else tells them. The technical solution is to render them even more
impotent than they are now - e.g., educate admins about the complaining
Net.Scum, and ignore their forged cancels.

> > The good news is that newsgroup floods don't really hurt anyone except
> > the egos of the assholes who claim to "own' the affected newsgroups.
>
> And the newsevers and the regular readers.

Not if the news servers are adequately equipped for such inevitable and
frequent eventualities, and the regular readers are armed with adequate news
reading software. If you live in a mosquito-infested area and refuse to
install nets on your windows, who's to blame?

> > I like the idea of encouraging news readers to send e-cash (possibly via
> > anon remailers) to the posters whose writings they like and would like to
> > see more of.
>
> A local bank (to me anyway) offers e-cash.  I'll see how I can contrabue
> to makeing the usenet a better place.

Perhaps it's another idea for the son-of-rfc1036 - a header specifying the
e-mail address for donation of e-cash (which could be the original poster
or some 3rd party charity)

A newsreader when it sees this header could ask the reader if he wants
to send e-cash and thow much.

This is a neat idea which I encourage people to adapt.

> > And my response is:
> > why not just killfile the idiots, or why not choose to not select
> > their crap for reading - it's easily identifiable.
>
> Its not realy.  All you get is a war where your spamer becomes more
> sofistercated in there spaming to avoid the filters.

The spammers are becoming more sophisticated in response to forged cancels.

> > Do you remember all the talk about "intelligent internet agents" who were
> > supposed to look for stuff we're interested in
>
> I belave this is the idear behind  Mr Hayes' newsreader.

Doesn't mean someone else can't work on it too. It's a good project for
an M.A.thesis - perhaps even a PhD thesis if they can do A LOT of work
on the subject.

> > > I have attempted to do so in the past,  and will attempt to do so again.
> >
> > There's some interesting discussion going on there in addition to my xposts
>
> I have again requested entery.  No responce yet.

Dave, if you see a subscription request from David Formosa for the f-k
list, could you please process it?  Thanks

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps