On Wed, 01 Aug 2012 02:14:01 -0400, HughElmwood <nothing@nothing.com>
wrote:
>
>>
>>"HughElmwood" <nothing@nothing.com> wrote in message
>>news:4d0e18lko0olifoq41aaedhgd7h8omr7ln@4ax.com...
>>> On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 09:17:49 -0400, DOOM. wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 30 Jul 2012 00:35:21 -0500, oldguard@groups.net wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Sat, 28 Jul 2012 14:27:39 -0400, HughElmwood <nothing@nothing.com>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Time for another poster or two to pick up the torch as I am done. I
>>>>>>just received a nasty little terms of service violation warning from
>>>>>>my newgroup provider for posting copyrighted material. Now I'm sure I
>>>>>>could continue and maybe nothing would happen, but sadly the anonimity
>>>>>>ends with the billing and if someone really wanted to come after
>>>>>>someone they could. Supposedly, I was flagged by the copyright holder
>>>>>>for one post, but I tend to think one of the trolls in here was the
>>>>>>one who managed to ruin the fun for the rest.
>>>>>
>>>>> The trolls have always been the death of Usenet (see "Joe Blob" at
>>>>>the seniors/older women groups). But, in truth, Usenet is dead anyway.
>>>>>The vast majority of posts are from spammers and very few groups exist
>>>>>that are worth a look.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't blame you one bit for making this decision. What's the point,
>>>>>anymore? Remember Usenet 20 years ago? Nospam groups that actually
>>>>>were. That was the "good times". Now it's all pretty much a wasteland.
>>>>>I wonder how long the spammers and dickheads will continue on
>>>>>Usenet...after we are all gone?? That is the only redeeming factor for
>>>>>me...spammers and trolls posting to NOBODY! LOL!
>>>>>
>>>>> Be well, Buddy.
>>>
>>>
>>> Not on vacation, wish it was bullshit, but alas it is not believe what
>>> you will I really don't care at this point. The facts are that I was
>>> notified by the newserver that I use to post (as all can see without
>>> too much trouble, Astraweb) that a complaint was received for one of
>>> the sets I posted. Now I'm pretty sure it wasn't the model or one of
>>> her representatives because, it was not the first time her stuff was
>>> posted here by a long shot. If I did think that I just wouldn't post
>>> her stuff and take my chances, but when other posts from the same
>>> Charm weren't flagged that went up a day or two prior, well it looks
>>> like it was someone here who was the rat. For anyone who has Astraweb,
>>> if you try to download Vanilla Cream #222, instead of the pics what
>>> you'll now get is a text message that states "Content removed due to
>>> DMCA."
>>> For anyone who gets their content from another server, the pics are
>>> probably still there untouched.
>>
>>Okay - there are lots of other news servers.... - I say we should all
>>pitch-in, and send Hugh some $$$ to switch providers...
>>... say a years' subscription to Gigganews (or any other) - I know that I'd
>>pay for a month of it... only 12 of us could keep Hugh going for another
>>year...
>>
>>Hugh! - what's your address for sending bucks via Paypal???
>>
>>
>While a nice offer, I don't really think ill solve anything as I could
>try numerous servers to post from and still have the same problem.
>That is I don't think this DMCA report had anything to do with SC, but
>rather was some asshat that wants to wreck the group, as it seems
>Blueman was reported as well. Thus, no matter what server I decided to
>post from that party would probably decide to file a complaint and it
>is not worth the hassle.
|
|