"Bill" wrote:
[...]
>Calling useless bytes spam doesn't make it spam.
>
Calling you a "Usenet Elder" does not make you
one, neither. Yet here you are, stalking those
who might endanger that status, eh Bill <bseg>
>Newsadmins follow the spam FAQ and you should too,
>if you expect complaints to have any affect at all.
>
Why? Why "should" anyone?
Who is making complaints to
impotent Admins, you?
Is that what you are reduced to.. the roving
(lost) SPAM reporter?
... news, Bill?
There is absolutely _nobody_ in ABCP
who is even a mite clued on building a BI
log or indeed where to go in submitting it.
... and.
Chris Lewis's work is about as valid today
as your opinion, Bill. Kind of like shredded
banana leaf whistling in a Force 10!
The garbage uploaded and forcing this
topic is SPAM.. IMO, also obviously shared
by others.
I hold my opinion is as valid as that of Lewis
and definitely of more worth than Skirvan's.
However rather than blather on ad infinitum
in SPAM postings on SPAM, I _do_ take
proactive action. Action that gets results.
You are simply trolling, William.
I ignored you, Pixie - gawd bless her sainted 'art -
did not.
Ignore her.
And _you_ get ignored.. comprende?
>What you think of me is irrelevant to the point
>I'm trying to make.
>
It is when you fail to make your point, Bill.
Go preach to those who give a FF[aerial sex]
what it is you carry as messages of faux
righteousness.
Again, _nobody_ here in ABCP gives a
rat's arse for *why* Usenet is how it is.
It just is, here.
--
n0d
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
|
')){kind=link}