| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Jabriol" |
| Date: |
16 Aug 2004 05:24:08 PM |
| Object: |
TO Moderator admit to Censorship based on content. |
David Iain Greig <greig@ediacara.org> wrote in message
Censorship! CENSORSHIP!!
Any banned poster, if they agree to abide by acceptable posting
behaviour, will be unbanned. As a matter of historical interest,
I can't recall a single banned poster ever taking me up on the
offer. Thus I have no precedent to answer what happens if an
un-banned poster reoffends. I'd probably just reimpose the ban
until they explained why and gave me a reason to let them back in.
If I just wanted to ban assholes, Jabriol wouldn't be allowed to post
here. He is, with limits to control his rescirculalia.
--D.
limiting or targeting an individual or a group of individuals, it
still censorship, more so when others may enjoy full posting anything
they want.
But I wish to thank DIG, in proving once and for all, that I was
targeted and censored from Talk.origins. Which once again demostrate
that indeed, Talk.Origin
practice censorship. A debate group that curtailed any opinion, is not
a balnced nor fair newsgroup...
why participate in a biased group?
can someone define aceptable posting behaviour? LOL!!!!!!
unbelivable that Killfile technology has advanced, maybe TO is behind
the times.
.
|
|
| User: "Steven J." |
|
| Title: Re: TO Moderator admit to Censorship based on content. |
16 Aug 2004 07:03:41 PM |
|
|
"Jabriol" <jabriol1@excite.com> wrote in message
news:9e9431eb.0408161424.db50b87@posting.google.com...
David Iain Greig <greig@ediacara.org> wrote in message
Censorship! CENSORSHIP!!
Any banned poster, if they agree to abide by acceptable posting
behaviour, will be unbanned. As a matter of historical interest,
I can't recall a single banned poster ever taking me up on the
offer. Thus I have no precedent to answer what happens if an
un-banned poster reoffends. I'd probably just reimpose the ban
until they explained why and gave me a reason to let them back in.
If I just wanted to ban assholes, Jabriol wouldn't be allowed to post
here. He is, with limits to control his rescirculalia.
--D.
limiting or targeting an individual or a group of individuals, it
still censorship, more so when others may enjoy full posting anything
they want.
The others are under exactly the same limitations as the banned posters.
They may not crosspost to more than three other groups, or to a handful of
banned newsgroups. They may not change their name over and over to avoid
killfiles. They may not post the exact same content over and over in
response to different posts. Talk.origins is for arguments, not for
spamming, harrassment, or petty annoyance. A certain amount of all of the
foregoing is tolerated, but in the end it will get you banned. And, oddly,
no one will miss you.
But I wish to thank DIG, in proving once and for all, that I was
targeted and censored from Talk.origins. Which once again demostrate
that indeed, Talk.Origin
practice censorship. A debate group that curtailed any opinion, is not
a balnced nor fair newsgroup...
why participate in a biased group?
But DIG does *not* ban posters from talk.origins based on their opinions.
Robomoderation on the newsgroup bans posts which are crossposted to more
than four newsgroups (as well as posts crossposted to certain other
newsgroups that have requested this service). You can say anything you like
on talk.origins, as long as you say it only on talk.origins and on no more
than three other newsgroups (and don't crosspost it to, e.g. rape-support
groups). In addition to this, DIG has on occasion banned posters who keep
changing their posting ID to avoid killfiles.
Excessive crossposting is not content. Excessive sock-puppetry is not
content. Note that, later in the very thread you quote, DIG praised a
particular obnoxious creationist poster because, whatever his other faults,
he never violates any of the actual rules of the group. If *you* never
violated them, you too would be welcome to post all your idiotic and hateful
rantings there.
can someone define aceptable posting behaviour? LOL!!!!!!
DIG did, in the very thread which you quoted in this post. I realize
English is not your first language, but his demands are not difficult to
understand, nor are they unreasonable.
unbelivable that Killfile technology has advanced, maybe TO is behind
the times.
-- Steven J.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: TO Moderator admit to Censorship based on content. |
17 Aug 2004 04:04:12 PM |
|
|
"Steven J." <sjt1957NOSPAM@nts.link.net.INVALID> wrote in message news:<10i2ir8ihksltdb@corp.supernews.com>...
"Jabriol" <jabriol1@excite.com> wrote in message
news:9e9431eb.0408161424.db50b87@posting.google.com...
David Iain Greig <greig@ediacara.org> wrote in message
Censorship! CENSORSHIP!!
Any banned poster, if they agree to abide by acceptable posting
behaviour, will be unbanned. As a matter of historical interest,
I can't recall a single banned poster ever taking me up on the
offer. Thus I have no precedent to answer what happens if an
un-banned poster reoffends. I'd probably just reimpose the ban
until they explained why and gave me a reason to let them back in.
If I just wanted to ban assholes, Jabriol wouldn't be allowed to post
here. He is, with limits to control his rescirculalia.
--D.
limiting or targeting an individual or a group of individuals, it
still censorship, more so when others may enjoy full posting anything
they want.
The others are under exactly the same limitations as the banned posters.
sure...
They may not crosspost to more than three other groups, or to a handful of
banned newsgroups. They may not change their name over and over to avoid
killfiles. They may not post the exact same content over and over in
response to different posts.
it is still censorship.
Talk.origins is for arguments, not for
spamming, harrassment, or petty annoyance.
define spamming, harrasment and petty annoyance
A certain amount of all of the
foregoing is tolerated, but in the end it will get you banned. And, oddly,
no one will miss you.
sure...
But I wish to thank DIG, in proving once and for all, that I was
targeted and censored from Talk.origins. Which once again demostrate
that indeed, Talk.Origin
practice censorship. A debate group that curtailed any opinion, is not
a balnced nor fair newsgroup...
why participate in a biased group?
But DIG does *not* ban posters from talk.origins based on their opinions.
ofcourse he does. Dig, knows that most of my crosspost were on target.
my material, contreversial as it may seems, most complaints from
inside of TO
not from outside.
Robomoderation on the newsgroup bans posts which are crossposted to more
than four newsgroups (as well as posts crossposted to certain other
newsgroups that have requested this service).
yeah sure... the support groups are in majority non moderated groups.
therfore there is no central authority to make the request. Anybody
could, SAP has requested to be one of the banned group for
crossposting.. how come dave did not add it on to the jabfilter?
You can say anything you like
on talk.origins, as long as you say it only on talk.origins and on no more
than three other newsgroups
which is what I have done for years...
(and don't crosspost it to, e.g. rape-support
groups).
and these were moderated by.. who?
In addition to this, DIG has on occasion banned posters who keep
changing their posting ID to avoid killfiles.
why would anybody have the need to change their ID? I never have done
so.
Excessive crossposting is not content. Excessive sock-puppetry is not
content. Note that, later in the very thread you quote, DIG praised a
particular obnoxious creationist poster because, whatever his other faults,
he never violates any of the actual rules of the group. If *you* never
violated them, you too would be welcome to post all your idiotic and hateful
rantings there.
oh please, what rules have I ever violated???
can someone define aceptable posting behaviour? LOL!!!!!!
DIG did, in the very thread which you quoted in this post. I realize
English is not your first language, but his demands are not difficult to
understand, nor are they unreasonable.
I see, so it is not a matter of nettiquet, it is matter of his
defintion of what is acceptable or not. In the USA when relating to
educational arguments this is called censorship base on content...
live with it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: TO Moderator admit to Censorship based on content. |
17 Aug 2004 05:03:22 PM |
|
|
Jabriol <jabriol1@excite.com> says...
it is still censorship.
No, it's editing. Just like they do over at the New York Times
(another place where you can send your writing and watch as they
choose to not publish it.)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: TO Moderator admit to Censorship based on content. |
18 Aug 2004 05:35:43 AM |
|
|
x@x.x wrote in message news:<10i5056otb9qjfb@news.supernews.com>...
Jabriol <jabriol1@excite.com> says...
it is still censorship.
No, it's editing. Just like they do over at the New York Times
(another place where you can send your writing and watch as they
choose to not publish it.)
yup.. thats ok, but if the editor says, that they must curtail their
writing on
something that is accurate and truthful because they might offend a
minority, that is censorship.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tom McDonald" |
|
| Title: Re: TO Moderator admit to Censorship based on content. |
18 Aug 2004 03:38:02 PM |
|
|
Jabriol wrote:
"Steven J." <sjt1957NOSPAM@nts.link.net.INVALID> wrote in message news:<10i2ir8ihksltdb@corp.supernews.com>...
<snip>
Excessive crossposting is not content. Excessive sock-puppetry is not
content. Note that, later in the very thread you quote, DIG praised a
particular obnoxious creationist poster because, whatever his other faults,
he never violates any of the actual rules of the group. If *you* never
violated them, you too would be welcome to post all your idiotic and hateful
rantings there.
oh please, what rules have I ever violated???
You really don't know, do you!!!
You have been told in detail ad nauseum. Your failure to
comprehend that fact does not make all that effort magically
disappear.
Perhaps it's the same in-group/out-group double-think that lets
you pretend to be a follower of Jesus. Perhaps it's your own
sociopathology. Whatever it is, you appear to be irredeemable,
and willing to treat non-JW's (and JW's you think are not
worthy) in any way you choose.
<snip>
--
Tom McDonald
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Chris Krolczyk" |
|
| Title: Re: TO Moderator admit to Censorship based on content. |
20 Aug 2004 06:21:05 PM |
|
|
(Jabriol) wrote in message news:<9e9431eb.0408161424.db50b87@posting.google.com>...
David Iain Greig <greig@ediacara.org> wrote in message
Censorship! CENSORSHIP!!
Any banned poster, if they agree to abide by acceptable posting
behaviour, will be unbanned. As a matter of historical interest,
I can't recall a single banned poster ever taking me up on the
offer. Thus I have no precedent to answer what happens if an
un-banned poster reoffends. I'd probably just reimpose the ban
until they explained why and gave me a reason to let them back in.
If I just wanted to ban assholes, Jabriol wouldn't be allowed to post
here. He is, with limits to control his rescirculalia.
--D.
limiting or targeting an individual or a group of individuals, it
still censorship, more so when others may enjoy full posting anything
they want.
Still playing this game, I see.
Too bad your own posts contradict your assertions, as usual:
news:<d222de3e.0404280834.5154c9bf@posting.google.com>
news:<20040327181638.3332.qmail@web10808.mail.yahoo.com>
news:<20040329120856.62520.qmail@web10805.mail.yahoo.com>
news:<d222de3e.0401300538.62ee3da0@posting.google.com>
news:<6lCSb.7124237$Of.1142738@news.easynews.com>
news:<d222de3e.0311070404.4c92191@posting.google.com>
news:<d222de3e.0310310514.4829607e@posting.google.com>
news:<d222de3e.0310311141.23206b96@posting.google.com>
news:<oaKcb.4988589$cI2.707219@news.easynews.com>
news:<d222de3e.0309150308.4f32563@posting.google.com>
news:<20030515165221.43965.qmail@web10806.mail.yahoo.com>
news:<20030512100647.45006.qmail@web10805.mail.yahoo.com>
news:<20030511170244.789.qmail@web10802.mail.yahoo.com>
news:<3EBE8013.2090705@netscape.net>
news:<fa5ccbfa.0305020314.7ed1c5bc@posting.google.com>
news:<fa5ccbfa.0304261349.312a07ed@posting.google.com>
....and all of these made it to t.o. after you started
whining about the "ban". It's shocking how easily your
posts can so easily defeat DIG's almighty content filters,
eh?
Try to lie about something less easy to disprove next time,
you sociopathic nutcase.
-Chris Krolczyk
But I wish to thank DIG, in proving once and for all, that I was
targeted and censored from Talk.origins. Which once again demostrate
that indeed, Talk.Origin
practice censorship. A debate group that curtailed any opinion, is not
a balnced nor fair newsgroup...
why participate in a biased group?
can someone define aceptable posting behaviour? LOL!!!!!!
unbelivable that Killfile technology has advanced, maybe TO is behind
the times.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: TO Moderator admit to Censorship based on content. |
22 Aug 2004 06:26:33 AM |
|
|
(Chris Krolczyk) wrote in message news:<c743abb.0408201521.4a913744@posting.google.com>...
jabriol1@excite.com (Jabriol) wrote in message news:<9e9431eb.0408161424.db50b87@posting.google.com>...
David Iain Greig <greig@ediacara.org> wrote in message
Censorship! CENSORSHIP!!
Any banned poster, if they agree to abide by acceptable posting
behaviour, will be unbanned. As a matter of historical interest,
I can't recall a single banned poster ever taking me up on the
offer. Thus I have no precedent to answer what happens if an
un-banned poster reoffends. I'd probably just reimpose the ban
until they explained why and gave me a reason to let them back in.
If I just wanted to ban assholes, Jabriol wouldn't be allowed to post
here. He is, with limits to control his rescirculalia.
--D.
limiting or targeting an individual or a group of individuals, it
still censorship, more so when others may enjoy full posting anything
they want.
Still playing this game, I see.
Too bad your own posts contradict your assertions, as usual:
news:<d222de3e.0404280834.5154c9bf@posting.google.com>
news:<20040327181638.3332.qmail@web10808.mail.yahoo.com>
news:<20040329120856.62520.qmail@web10805.mail.yahoo.com>
news:<d222de3e.0401300538.62ee3da0@posting.google.com>
news:<6lCSb.7124237$Of.1142738@news.easynews.com>
news:<d222de3e.0311070404.4c92191@posting.google.com>
news:<d222de3e.0310310514.4829607e@posting.google.com>
news:<d222de3e.0310311141.23206b96@posting.google.com>
news:<oaKcb.4988589$cI2.707219@news.easynews.com>
news:<d222de3e.0309150308.4f32563@posting.google.com>
news:<20030515165221.43965.qmail@web10806.mail.yahoo.com>
news:<20030512100647.45006.qmail@web10805.mail.yahoo.com>
news:<20030511170244.789.qmail@web10802.mail.yahoo.com>
news:<3EBE8013.2090705@netscape.net>
news:<fa5ccbfa.0305020314.7ed1c5bc@posting.google.com>
news:<fa5ccbfa.0304261349.312a07ed@posting.google.com>
...and all of these made it to t.o. after you started
whining about the "ban". It's shocking how easily your
posts can so easily defeat DIG's almighty content filters,
eh?
Try to lie about something less easy to disprove next time,
you sociopathic nutcase.
-Chris Krolczyk
misdirection noted yet again, dishonesty becomes you, interesting
enogh though, there are no 4 group crosspost to be found,
good try Chris, and ye failed yet again.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chris Krolczyk" |
|
| Title: Re: TO Moderator admit to Censorship based on content. |
23 Aug 2004 07:13:50 PM |
|
|
(Newsgroups changed somewhat as per request; I apologize
to NANAU in advance if I'm making a similar mistake here)
jabriol1@excite.com (Jabriol) wrote in message news:<9e9431eb.0408220326.1030ea1a@posting.google.com>...
chriskrolczyk@hotmail.com (Chris Krolczyk) wrote in message news:<c743abb.0408201521.4a913744@posting.google.com>...
jabriol1@excite.com (Jabriol) wrote in message news:<9e9431eb.0408161424.db50b87@posting.google.com>...
David Iain Greig <greig@ediacara.org> wrote in message
Censorship! CENSORSHIP!!
Any banned poster, if they agree to abide by acceptable posting
behaviour, will be unbanned. As a matter of historical interest,
I can't recall a single banned poster ever taking me up on the
offer. Thus I have no precedent to answer what happens if an
un-banned poster reoffends. I'd probably just reimpose the ban
until they explained why and gave me a reason to let them back in.
If I just wanted to ban assholes, Jabriol wouldn't be allowed to post
here. He is, with limits to control his rescirculalia.
--D.
limiting or targeting an individual or a group of individuals, it
still censorship, more so when others may enjoy full posting anything
they want.
Still playing this game, I see.
Too bad your own posts contradict your assertions, as usual:
news:<d222de3e.0404280834.5154c9bf@posting.google.com>
news:<20040327181638.3332.qmail@web10808.mail.yahoo.com>
news:<20040329120856.62520.qmail@web10805.mail.yahoo.com>
news:<d222de3e.0401300538.62ee3da0@posting.google.com>
news:<6lCSb.7124237$Of.1142738@news.easynews.com>
news:<d222de3e.0311070404.4c92191@posting.google.com>
news:<d222de3e.0310310514.4829607e@posting.google.com>
news:<d222de3e.0310311141.23206b96@posting.google.com>
news:<oaKcb.4988589$cI2.707219@news.easynews.com>
news:<d222de3e.0309150308.4f32563@posting.google.com>
news:<20030515165221.43965.qmail@web10806.mail.yahoo.com>
news:<20030512100647.45006.qmail@web10805.mail.yahoo.com>
news:<20030511170244.789.qmail@web10802.mail.yahoo.com>
news:<3EBE8013.2090705@netscape.net>
news:<fa5ccbfa.0305020314.7ed1c5bc@posting.google.com>
news:<fa5ccbfa.0304261349.312a07ed@posting.google.com>
...and all of these made it to t.o. after you started
whining about the "ban". It's shocking how easily your
posts can so easily defeat DIG's almighty content filters,
eh?
Try to lie about something less easy to disprove next time,
you sociopathic nutcase.
-Chris Krolczyk
misdirection noted yet again,
How is it "misdirection" to note that your "ban" from
t.o is nonexistent, Lying Sack?
Apparently, Jabriol is a graduate of the Joseph Goebbels
school of editorializing in which a lie repeated *ad
nauseum* becomes the truth. It just shows how utterly
clueless and sociopathic he is.
dishonesty becomes you, interesting
enogh though, there are no 4 group crosspost to be found,
Because *you* decided to crosspost to those newsgroups,
you thoroughly clueless *****.
Here, let me spell it out for you again:
When you post to an *unmoderated* newsgroup,
it will automatically go through unless a glitch in
your newsreader configuration or a cancel engine (if
you're a noted spammer) stops it before propagation.
When you post to a *moderated* newsgroup, the moderation
policy in effect will either prevent you from posting to
that newsgroup if you're off topic, not on a group white-
list or - in the case of talk.origins - prevent you from
crossposting to newsgroups that either exceed a certain
number of allowed newsgroups crossposted to, newsgroups
that are on a disallowed list due to the malicious behavior
of certain x-posters we all know about from past behavior or
who've ended up on the moderator's shitlist for other antics
such as excessive multiposting, usage of multiple sockpuppets
or morphing From: lines.
In short, you lied about being "banned" from t.o. for
anything other than violating the 4-newsgroup limit
or crossposting to suicide or depression-support
newsgroups that don't want your sorry ***** in the
first place. And the posts I quoted prove it.
good try Chris, and ye failed yet again.
How is it a "failure" to sucessfully point out what
an idiot you are?
-Chris Krolczyk
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: TO Moderator admit to Censorship based on content. |
24 Aug 2004 05:27:09 AM |
|
|
(Chris Krolczyk) wrote in message news:<c743abb.0408231613.4cd25c5f@posting.google.com>...
(Newsgroups changed somewhat as per request; I apologize
to NANAU in advance if I'm making a similar mistake here)
good try Chris, and ye failed yet again.
How is it a "failure" to sucessfully point out what
an idiot you are?
-Chris Krolczyk
snip...same ole lies..
Chris,
You tried this before, and Dig, corrected you on this subject.
He has a filter. he calls it the Jabfilter; simply put if Jabriol
tries to post to 4 groups, and in the 4 groups, ARJW or SAP, is in the
header, 2 groups will get removed, regardless. Pure and simple, it
censorship and it is targeted againt me for content. The robomoderator
does not care if I am on topic for the remaining two groups. Simple,
he bans me from posting to 4 group if TO is included, that what
banishment is all about. It goes beyond his perview as moderator per
T.O FAQ. This has been established as a FACT, on NG.
Talk.Origins, do practice censorship and banishment based on Content.
Live with it. T.O is not Fair and Balance.. it is completly Biased for
the mere purpose of
bashing anyone who claims: "God did it". Any other alternative is...
censored or ban entirely, that is life on T.O.
EOD
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chris Krolczyk" |
|
| Title: Re: TO Moderator admit to Censorship based on content. |
24 Aug 2004 04:20:29 PM |
|
|
(Jabriol) wrote in message news:<9e9431eb.0408240227.137d6eb@posting.google.com>...
chriskrolczyk@hotmail.com (Chris Krolczyk) wrote in message news:<c743abb.0408231613.4cd25c5f@posting.google.com>...
(Newsgroups changed somewhat as per request; I apologize
to NANAU in advance if I'm making a similar mistake here)
good try Chris, and ye failed yet again.
How is it a "failure" to sucessfully point out what
an idiot you are?
-Chris Krolczyk
snip...same ole lies..
Same old *****, as usual.
It's amazing how stupid you are, apparently. I post
something that catches you in a lie, and you accuse
*me* of lying. I then post an explanation concerning
the robomoderator, and you accuse me of lying *again*.
If you're going to actually accuse me of lying, try
to post some proof. Otherwise, STFU.
Chris,
You tried this before, and Dig, corrected you on this subject.
He has a filter. he calls it the Jabfilter; simply put if Jabriol
tries to post to 4 groups, and in the 4 groups, ARJW or SAP, is in the
header, 2 groups will get removed, regardless.
As stated by Arthur Rubin elsewhere, *everybody*
gets this treatment from the filter. The fact
that he may or may not've named it after you
(a quote would be nice, but it's probably too
much to ask for from you) doesn't mean anything
except that you inspired the policy - unless
your own paranoia is telling you otherwise.
Pure and simple, it
censorship and it is targeted againt me for content.
What part of "everybody" do you not understand?
"Everybody", BTW, includes you, me and Johnny Newbie
who's never posted to t.o. before.
The robomoderator
does not care if I am on topic for the remaining two groups. Simple,
he bans me from posting to 4 group if TO is included, that what
banishment is all about.
Some "banishment"; it APPLIES TO ALL POSTERS TO T.O.
Why can't you get that through your thick head?
It goes beyond his perview as moderator per
T.O FAQ. This has been established as a FACT, on NG.
No, it hasn't. Quit lying. And see a psychiatrist if
you can't.
-Chris Krolczyk
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: TO Moderator admit to Censorship based on content. |
25 Aug 2004 05:42:34 AM |
|
|
(Chris Krolczyk) wrote in message news:<c743abb.0408241320.6fa33dc9@posting.google.com>...
jabriol1@excite.com (Jabriol) wrote in message news:<9e9431eb.0408240227.137d6eb@posting.google.com>...
(Chris Krolczyk) wrote in message news:<c743abb.0408231613.4cd25c5f@posting.google.com>...
(Newsgroups changed somewhat as per request; I apologize
to NANAU in advance if I'm making a similar mistake here)
good try Chris, and ye failed yet again.
How is it a "failure" to sucessfully point out what
an idiot you are?
-Chris Krolczyk
snip...same ole lies..
Same old *****, as usual.
It's amazing how stupid you are, apparently. I post
something that catches you in a lie, and you accuse
*me* of lying. I then post an explanation concerning
the robomoderator, and you accuse me of lying *again*.
If you're going to actually accuse me of lying, try
to post some proof. Otherwise, STFU.
Chris,
You tried this before, and Dig, corrected you on this subject.
He has a filter. he calls it the Jabfilter; simply put if Jabriol
tries to post to 4 groups, and in the 4 groups, ARJW or SAP, is in the
header, 2 groups will get removed, regardless.
As stated by Arthur Rubin elsewhere, *everybody*
gets this treatment from the filter. The fact
that he may or may not've named it after you
(a quote would be nice, but it's probably too
much to ask for from you) doesn't mean anything
except that you inspired the policy - unless
your own paranoia is telling you otherwise.
today you have demostrated how dumb and idiotic you are.
tell oh grand wizard of stupidity...
How many T.O list members cross post to ARJW????
now then when you really settle down on your latrine and employ the
few brain cells you have left, you may actually figure it out.
it like the KKK getting a permit to exercise their freedom of speech.
at 2 am in the morning. now because it is 2 am, they can't use
loudspeakers,
but they can carry all the poster they want... Duh!
I'll bet you still can't figure it out.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chris Krolczyk" |
|
| Title: Re: TO Moderator admit to Censorship based on content. |
25 Aug 2004 03:51:15 PM |
|
|
(Jabriol) wrote in message news:<9e9431eb.0408250242.79c13646@posting.google.com>...
chriskrolczyk@hotmail.com (Chris Krolczyk) wrote in message news:<c743abb.0408241320.6fa33dc9@posting.google.com>...
(Jabriol) wrote in message news:<9e9431eb.0408240227.137d6eb@posting.google.com>...
chriskrolczyk@hotmail.com (Chris Krolczyk) wrote in message news:<c743abb.0408231613.4cd25c5f@posting.google.com>...
(Newsgroups changed somewhat as per request; I apologize
to NANAU in advance if I'm making a similar mistake here)
good try Chris, and ye failed yet again.
How is it a "failure" to sucessfully point out what
an idiot you are?
-Chris Krolczyk
snip...same ole lies..
Same old *****, as usual.
It's amazing how stupid you are, apparently. I post
something that catches you in a lie, and you accuse
*me* of lying. I then post an explanation concerning
the robomoderator, and you accuse me of lying *again*.
If you're going to actually accuse me of lying, try
to post some proof. Otherwise, STFU.
Chris,
You tried this before, and Dig, corrected you on this subject.
He has a filter. he calls it the Jabfilter; simply put if Jabriol
tries to post to 4 groups, and in the 4 groups, ARJW or SAP, is in the
header, 2 groups will get removed, regardless.
As stated by Arthur Rubin elsewhere, *everybody*
gets this treatment from the filter. The fact
that he may or may not've named it after you
(a quote would be nice, but it's probably too
much to ask for from you) doesn't mean anything
except that you inspired the policy - unless
your own paranoia is telling you otherwise.
today you have demostrated how dumb and idiotic you are.
tell oh grand wizard of stupidity...
How many T.O list members cross post to ARJW????
You don't know yourself, do you?
What a surprise.
I'm not here to do your slipshod "research" for
you, Santana. Provide proof of these posts after
DIG changed the moderation policy, if you please -
knowing your penchant for lying, I have my doubts
about practically everything you write.
Oh, and here's a reminder of exactly how accurate you
were concerning the entire robomoderation issue:
From news:<slrncimpot.18s9.greig@darwin.ediacara.org>:
David Iain Greig:
Chris is correct; you are not banned from talk.origins.
There are a number of restrictions places on crossposts between t.o
and other groups; almost all because of one or two posters who refuse
to respect commonly agreed standards of posting ettiquette, as well as
the group 'all other moderated groups'.
These include:
alt.religion.j-w
alt.religion.scientology
alt.support.*
sci.anthropology.paleo
The only filter on a.r.j-w is this:
#!/usr/bin/perl
while(<>) {
if (/^Newsgroups:/){
@groups=split /,/;
if (/jehovah/) {
$_="Newsgroups: talk.origins,alt.religion.jehovahs-witn\n";
}
else{
$_="Newsgroups: talk.origins\n";
}
}
print;
}
This means that crossposts including talk.origins and a.r.j-w are
restricted to those and only those two groups. This seems to be
an effective way to control the widely-crossposted threads that
otherwise arise. Nowhere is any poster singled out here. Everyone
is quite welcome to crosspost between t.o and a.r.j-w. For whatever
reason, you no longer do. I suspect it's childish pique about not
being able to include randomly-selected irrelevant groups, but that's
just my opinion.
I reviewed the procmailrc file. There are no filters on 'jabriol'
at all.
As an aside, I have no disrespect to J-W's. My aunt converted and used
to give us little pink children's bibles to read. There was also this
elderly man who used to hang out on the same corner and distribute
Watchtower, we used to chat from time to time. Very nice people, I think,
on the whole. You on the other hand are one of the more vicious, nasty
pieces of crap to infest the globe. But you're quite free to post.
--D.
now then when you really settle down on your latrine and employ the
few brain cells you have left, you may actually figure it out.
Prove your point, *****. I proved mine.
(Remainder of forgettable bilge snipped)
-Chris Krolczyk
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Brian F. King" |
|
| Title: Re: TO Moderator admit to Censorship based on content. |
24 Aug 2004 03:46:32 PM |
|
|
(Jabriol) wrote:
chriskrolczyk@hotmail.com (Chris Krolczyk) wrote:
(Newsgroups changed somewhat as per request; I apologize
to NANAU in advance if I'm making a similar mistake here)
good try Chris, and ye failed yet again.
How is it a "failure" to sucessfully point out what
an idiot you are?
-Chris Krolczyk
snip...same ole lies..
Chris,
You tried this before, and Dig, corrected you on this subject.
He has a filter. he calls it the Jabfilter; simply put if Jabriol
{.. or anyone else...}
tries to post to 4 groups, and in the 4 groups, ARJW or SAP, is in the
header, 2 groups will get removed, regardless.
Regardless of what? Regardless of *content*.
Which disproves your very next statement.
Pure and simple, it censorship and it is targeted againt me for content.
So what happens if Jabriol tries to post to *one* group?
Apparently, you are bemoaning that the content of your *headers* gets censored?
The robomoderator
does not care if I am on topic for the remaining two groups. Simple,
he bans me from posting to 4 group if TO is included, that what
banishment is all about. It goes beyond his perview as moderator per
T.O FAQ. This has been established as a FACT, on NG.
Talk.Origins, do practice censorship and banishment based on Content.
Live with it. T.O is not Fair and Balance.. it is completly Biased for
the mere purpose of
bashing anyone who claims: "God did it". Any other alternative is...
censored or ban entirely, that is life on T.O.
EOD
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Arthur L. Rubin" |
|
| Title: Re: TO Moderator admit to Censorship based on content. |
24 Aug 2004 07:51:32 AM |
|
|
Jabriol wrote:
chriskrolczyk@hotmail.com (Chris Krolczyk) wrote in message news:<c743abb.0408231613.4cd25c5f@posting.google.com>...
(Newsgroups changed somewhat as per request; I apologize
to NANAU in advance if I'm making a similar mistake here)
good try Chris, and ye failed yet again.
How is it a "failure" to sucessfully point out what
an idiot you are?
-Chris Krolczyk
snip...same ole lies..
Chris,
You tried this before, and Dig, corrected you on this subject.
He has a filter. he calls it the Jabfilter;
That may be accurate.
... simply put if Jabriol ...
If ANYONE.
tries to post to 4 groups, and in the 4 groups, ARJW or SAP, is in the
header, 2 groups will get removed, regardless.
If you want the facts....
Do you want a test post from me?
--
This account is subject to a persistent MS Blaster and SWEN attack.
I think I've got the problem resolved, but, if you E-mail me
and it bounces, a second try might work.
However, please reply in newsgroup.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chris Krolczyk" |
|
| Title: Re: TO Moderator admit to Censorship based on content. |
24 Aug 2004 04:10:57 PM |
|
|
"Arthur L. Rubin" <ronnirubin@sprintmail.com> wrote in message news:<412B3A02.3E7B@sprintmail.com>...
Jabriol wrote:
chriskrolczyk@hotmail.com (Chris Krolczyk) wrote in message news:<c743abb.0408231613.4cd25c5f@posting.google.com>...
Chris,
You tried this before, and Dig, corrected you on this subject.
He has a filter. he calls it the Jabfilter;
That may be accurate.
... simply put if Jabriol ...
If ANYONE.
tries to post to 4 groups, and in the 4 groups, ARJW or SAP, is in the
header, 2 groups will get removed, regardless.
If you want the facts....
Do you want a test post from me?
Go right ahead, if you haven't.
I have to wonder what excuse Jabs will use when it
turns out you're right.
-Chris Krolczyk
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: TO Moderator admit to Censorship based on content. |
24 Aug 2004 01:45:15 PM |
|
|
"Arthur L. Rubin" <ronnirubin@sprintmail.com> wrote in message news:<412B3A02.3E7B@sprintmail.com>...
Jabriol wrote:
chriskrolczyk@hotmail.com (Chris Krolczyk) wrote in message news:<c743abb.0408231613.4cd25c5f@posting.google.com>...
(Newsgroups changed somewhat as per request; I apologize
to NANAU in advance if I'm making a similar mistake here)
good try Chris, and ye failed yet again.
How is it a "failure" to sucessfully point out what
an idiot you are?
-Chris Krolczyk
snip...same ole lies..
Chris,
You tried this before, and Dig, corrected you on this subject.
He has a filter. he calls it the Jabfilter;
That may be accurate.
... simply put if Jabriol ...
If ANYONE.
tries to post to 4 groups, and in the 4 groups, ARJW or SAP, is in the
header, 2 groups will get removed, regardless.
If you want the facts....
Do you want a test post from me?
go ahead, post from talk.origins with TO in the header.
post to 4 groups, 2 of the groups may either contain alt.religion.jehovahs-witn
and/or sci.anthropology.paleo, the other 2 groups at your discretion.
have fun.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Norris" |
|
| Title: Re: TO Moderator admit to Censorship based on content. |
25 Aug 2004 01:35:45 PM |
|
|
(Chris Krolczyk) wrote in message news:<c743abb.0408231613.4cd25c5f@posting.google.com>...
(Newsgroups changed somewhat as per request; I apologize
to NANAU in advance if I'm making a similar mistake here)
jabriol1@excite.com (Jabriol) wrote in message news:<9e9431eb.0408220326.1030ea1a@posting.google.com>...
(Chris Krolczyk) wrote in message news:<c743abb.0408201521.4a913744@posting.google.com>...
jabriol1@excite.com (Jabriol) wrote in message news:<9e9431eb.0408161424.db50b87@posting.google.com>...
good try Chris, and ye failed yet again.
How is it a "failure" to sucessfully point out what
an idiot you are?
Chris, its a failure because you did not use any adjectives to
describe exactly what kind of idiot he is.
JohnN
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: Greig: explain to Chris oce more how the Jabfilter works |
25 Aug 2004 09:13:09 AM |
|
|
And here you have the admision to censorship and reply thus..
proves again how one is banned to post on other groups...
jabriol1@excite.com (Jabriol) wrote in message news:<9e9431eb.0408250253.601c1eab@posting.google.com>...
David Iain Greig <greig@ediacara.org> wrote in message news:<slrncimpot.18s9.greig@darwin.ediacara.org>...
Jabriol <jabriol1@excite.com> wrote:
This way he does not look the fool in front of billions...
Chris is correct; you are not banned from talk.origins.
This means that crossposts including talk.origins and a.r.j-w are
restricted to those and only those two groups.
David, how many posters do you know... honestly every intialized a
crosspost from T.O into arjw?
In the state that I live in, the KKK wanted to exercise their freedom
of speech.
the city were they was to march in, gave them a permit for 2 am. does
anybody knows of any organization that get a marching permit a 2 am in
the morn; where noise restriction are in effect?
in any case it has been a very effective tool for many more states
and cities to follow suit. effectively their "rights" were not blocked.
the mode in which they could exercise their rights were modified to
virtually make them ineffective. They've been Banned, and censored,
while officially they have not been ban and censored, it all wordplay,
the effect is the same.
thanks for admitting to this practice on T.O.
Anybody who wish to post to T.O must by now realize, if fall out the
T.O version of Netiquette banishment and censorship will ensue.
why participate in a group, where you may fear that, because of
content it may get censored or banned?
The people of NG, all recognized, that a moderator, can effectively do
what he wants beyond the charter and the consensus of the group, and
issue to think about when creating a moderated news group.
.
|
|
|
| User: "VoiceOfReason" |
|
| Title: Re: Greig: explain to Chris oce more how the Jabfilter works |
25 Aug 2004 11:25:02 PM |
|
|
(Jabriol) wrote in message news:<9e9431eb.0408250613.4e21e8b0@posting.google.com>...
<...>
Anybody who wish to post to T.O must by now realize, if fall out the
T.O version of Netiquette banishment and censorship will ensue.
That is a lie.
Anyone can post to talk.origins.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: Greig: explain to Chris oce more how the Jabfilter works |
26 Aug 2004 05:30:22 AM |
|
|
(VoiceOfReason) wrote in message news:<78e3ae70.0408252025.2118dbdd@posting.google.com>...
jabriol1@excite.com (Jabriol) wrote in message news:<9e9431eb.0408250613.4e21e8b0@posting.google.com>...
<...>
Anybody who wish to post to T.O must by now realize, if fall out the
T.O version of Netiquette banishment and censorship will ensue.
That is a lie.
Anyone can post to talk.origins.
It seems to me, that you did not read greig's comments.
please inform yourself before looking the fool in front of millions...
.
|
|
|
| User: "VoiceOfReason" |
|
| Title: Re: Greig: explain to Chris oce more how the Jabfilter works |
26 Aug 2004 09:36:59 AM |
|
|
(Jabriol) wrote in message news:<9e9431eb.0408260230.54612878@posting.google.com>...
papa_fox@cybertown.com (VoiceOfReason) wrote in message news:<78e3ae70.0408252025.2118dbdd@posting.google.com>...
(Jabriol) wrote in message news:<9e9431eb.0408250613.4e21e8b0@posting.google.com>...
<...>
Anybody who wish to post to T.O must by now realize, if fall out the
T.O version of Netiquette banishment and censorship will ensue.
That is a lie.
Anyone can post to talk.origins.
It seems to me, that you did not read greig's comments.
please inform yourself before looking the fool in front of millions...
Read them (for comprehension). Suggest you do the same. And change
your story, else reveal your dishonesty in front of millions.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "VoiceOfReason" |
|
| Title: Re: Greig: explain to Chris oce more how the Jabfilter works |
26 Aug 2004 09:36:50 AM |
|
|
(Jabriol) wrote in message news:<9e9431eb.0408260230.54612878@posting.google.com>...
papa_fox@cybertown.com (VoiceOfReason) wrote in message news:<78e3ae70.0408252025.2118dbdd@posting.google.com>...
(Jabriol) wrote in message news:<9e9431eb.0408250613.4e21e8b0@posting.google.com>...
<...>
Anybody who wish to post to T.O must by now realize, if fall out the
T.O version of Netiquette banishment and censorship will ensue.
That is a lie.
Anyone can post to talk.origins.
It seems to me, that you did not read greig's comments.
please inform yourself before looking the fool in front of millions...
Red them (for comprehension). Suggest you do the same. And change
your story, else reveal your dishonesty in front of millions.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Guy Macon http://www.guymacon.com" |
|
| Title: Re: Greig: explain to Chris oce more how the Jabfilter works |
26 Aug 2004 10:19:13 AM |
|
|
VoiceOfReason <papa_fox@cybertown.com> says...
(snip)
Please stop crossposting to news.groups. news.groups is for discussing
thecreation of new Usenet newsgroups only.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Guy Macon http://www.guymacon.com" |
|
| Title: Re: Greig: explain to Chris oce more how the Jabfilter works |
26 Aug 2004 08:26:58 AM |
|
|
Jabriol <jabriol1@excite.com> says...
papa_fox@cybertown.com (VoiceOfReason) wrote in message news:<78e3ae70.0408252025.2118dbdd@posting.google.com>...
jabriol1@excite.com (Jabriol) wrote in message news:<9e9431eb.0408250613.4e21e8b0@posting.google.com>...
<...>
Anybody who wish to post to T.O must by now realize, if fall out the
T.O version of Netiquette banishment and censorship will ensue.
That is a lie.
Anyone can post to talk.origins.
It seems to me, that you did not read greig's comments.
please inform yourself before looking the fool in front of millions...
Please stop crossposting to news.groups unless you are discussing
the creation of new newsgroups. That's what news.groups is for.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tom McDonald" |
|
| Title: Re: Greig: explain to Chris oce more how the Jabfilter works |
26 Aug 2004 04:18:42 PM |
|
|
VoiceOfReason wrote:
jabriol1@excite.com (Jabriol) wrote in message news:<9e9431eb.0408250613.4e21e8b0@posting.google.com>...
<...>
Anybody who wish to post to T.O must by now realize, if fall out the
T.O version of Netiquette banishment and censorship will ensue.
That is a lie.
Anyone can post to talk.origins.
VOR,
That is true, as long as they play by the (very few and
minimally intrusive) rules. Right now, Church of the Painful
Truth (whom you may know now as Atheist Bruiser, Soren K. and
some other nyms) is banned. All he has to do is to promise to
stop changing nyms to avoid kill files, and to stop posting the
same thing many times.
As it happens, CoPT/AB/SK/etc. has tried posting to T.O.
several times under new nyms, which means that he's banned that
much longer. He doesn't seem to care, though, and seems to have
found a home on, at least, a.t.c.
I can only recall a few bannings by DIG. All were lifted,
except this one on CoPT; and that can be lifted any time CoPT
chooses.
Jabs is clearly not banned, as he has just posted there. What
he can't do is the same as what anyone else can't do. He's a
whiny little ***** who thinks he should be able to spread his
vile bile anywhere he chooses. He's wrong.
--
Tom McDonald
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: Greig: explain to Chris oce more how the Jabfilter works |
27 Aug 2004 06:18:30 AM |
|
|
Tom McDonald <tmcdonald2672@nohormelcharter.net> wrote in message news:<10iskvrae9fq3f1@corp.supernews.com>...
VoiceOfReason wrote:
jabriol1@excite.com (Jabriol) wrote in message news:<9e9431eb.0408250613.4e21e8b0@posting.google.com>...
<...>
Anybody who wish to post to T.O must by now realize, if fall out the
T.O version of Netiquette banishment and censorship will ensue.
That is a lie.
Anyone can post to talk.origins.
VOR,
That is true, as long as they play by the (very few and
minimally intrusive) rules. Right now, Church of the Painful
Truth (whom you may know now as Atheist Bruiser, Soren K. and
some other nyms) is banned. All he has to do is to promise to
stop changing nyms to avoid kill files, and to stop posting the
same thing many times.
As it happens, CoPT/AB/SK/etc. has tried posting to T.O.
several times under new nyms, which means that he's banned that
much longer. He doesn't seem to care, though, and seems to have
found a home on, at least, a.t.c.
I can only recall a few bannings by DIG. All were lifted,
except this one on CoPT; and that can be lifted any time CoPT
chooses.
Jabs is clearly not banned, as he has just posted there. What
he can't do is the same as what anyone else can't do. He's a
whiny little ***** who..
your momomy doesnt belive that.. but
thinks he should be able to spread his
vile bile anywhere he chooses. He's wrong.
As I said earlier, it is called censorship...
but for the record please define, the "bile" I choose to spread.
and even if it was bile, then you admit, that the jabfilter is based on content.
.
|
|
|
| User: "VoiceOfReason" |
|
| Title: Re: Greig: explain to Chris oce more how the Jabfilter works |
27 Aug 2004 02:54:04 PM |
|
|
(Jabriol) wrote in message news:<9e9431eb.0408270318.525e9f82@posting.google.com>...
Tom McDonald <tmcdonald2672@nohormelcharter.net> wrote in message news:<10iskvrae9fq3f1@corp.supernews.com>...
VoiceOfReason wrote:
<...>
Anyone can post to talk.origins.
VOR,
That is true, as long as they play by the (very few and
minimally intrusive) rules. Right now, Church of the Painful
Truth (whom you may know now as Atheist Bruiser, Soren K. and
some other nyms) is banned. All he has to do is to promise to
stop changing nyms to avoid kill files, and to stop posting the
same thing many times.
As it happens, CoPT/AB/SK/etc. has tried posting to T.O.
several times under new nyms, which means that he's banned that
much longer. He doesn't seem to care, though, and seems to have
found a home on, at least, a.t.c.
I can only recall a few bannings by DIG. All were lifted,
except this one on CoPT; and that can be lifted any time CoPT
chooses.
Jabs is clearly not banned, as he has just posted there. What
he can't do is the same as what anyone else can't do. He's a
whiny little ***** who..
your momomy doesnt belive that.. but
thinks he should be able to spread his
vile bile anywhere he chooses. He's wrong.
As I said earlier, it is called censorship...
but for the record please define, the "bile" I choose to spread.
and even if it was bile, then you admit, that the jabfilter is based on content.
As explained in this thread and others, Talk.Origins is not filtered
for content. Why do you say otherwise? It's one thing to bear false
witness; it's another to be comically obtuse.
If you want to post a logical argument against science you can do so.
What you can't do is cross-post to a dozen totally unrelated groups in
the hope that the resulting noise from the "Don't post such off-topic
drivel to this newsgroup" complaints will provide enough smoke to
disrupt normal discourse.
So the filter works to keep spiteful little jackasses from interfering
with other people's discussions. Is that what you're so upset about?
T.O halting your attempts to interfere with other people's right to
free speech?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: Greig: explain to Chris once more how the Jabfilter works |
28 Aug 2004 10:37:29 AM |
|
|
(VoiceOfReason) wrote in message news:<78e3ae70.0408271154.d1ec03c@posting.google.com>...
jabriol1@excite.com (Jabriol) wrote in message news:<9e9431eb.0408270318.525e9f82@posting.google.com>...
Tom McDonald <tmcdonald2672@nohormelcharter.net> wrote in message news:<10iskvrae9fq3f1@corp.supernews.com>...
VoiceOfReason wrote:
<...>
Anyone can post to talk.origins.
VOR,
That is true, as long as they play by the (very few and
minimally intrusive) rules. Right now, Church of the Painful
Truth (whom you may know now as Atheist Bruiser, Soren K. and
some other nyms) is banned. All he has to do is to promise to
stop changing nyms to avoid kill files, and to stop posting the
same thing many times.
As it happens, CoPT/AB/SK/etc. has tried posting to T.O.
several times under new nyms, which means that he's banned that
much longer. He doesn't seem to care, though, and seems to have
found a home on, at least, a.t.c.
I can only recall a few bannings by DIG. All were lifted,
except this one on CoPT; and that can be lifted any time CoPT
chooses.
Jabs is clearly not banned, as he has just posted there. What
he can't do is the same as what anyone else can't do. He's a
whiny little ***** who..
your momomy doesnt belive that.. but
thinks he should be able to spread his
vile bile anywhere he chooses. He's wrong.
As I said earlier, it is called censorship...
but for the record please define, the "bile" I choose to spread.
and even if it was bile, then you admit, that the jabfilter is based on content.
As explained in this thread and others, Talk.Origins is not filtered
for content. Why do you say otherwise? It's one thing to bear false
witness; it's another to be comically obtuse.
why is there a ban to crosspost to the support group, subjects that
are related to both?
If you want to post a logical argument against science you can do so.
What you can't do is cross-post to a dozen totally unrelated groups in
the hope that the resulting noise from the "Don't post such off-topic
drivel to this newsgroup" complaints will provide enough smoke to
disrupt normal discourse.
incorrect,
read what a former TO poster has writen related to the subject:
http://tinyurl.com/5p2bp
here an excerpt:
The fact that you cannot crosspost from T.O. to certain other multiple
groups was based on content and the fact that this content caused
multiple
flame wars. But your claiming that you are banned completely from T.O.
which
isn't true.
Others were also responsible for the limitations on crossposting
though
maybe not to the JW group but other groups such as S.A.P. so your
claim of
being singled out does not ring completely true.
You also neglect to point out that rape is not just an act of
reproduction but assault and violence which no modern day society
should
tolerate. Violence may be natural in the animal kingdom but the very
reason
societies form is to prevent these acts from happening to its members.
The fact that you miss such an obvious point in your arguments is
partly
responsible for the flame wars that followed your post.
Lane
---------------------------------------------------------
So the filter works to keep spiteful little jackasses from interfering
with other people's discussions. Is that what you're so upset about?
T.O halting your attempts to interfere with other people's right to
free speech?
.
|
|
|
| User: "VoiceOfReason" |
|
| Title: Re: Greig: explain to Chris once more how the Jabfilter works |
29 Aug 2004 08:56:27 AM |
|
|
(Jabriol) wrote in message news:<9e9431eb.0408280737.51809d8e@posting.google.com>...
papa_fox@cybertown.com (VoiceOfReason) wrote in message news:<78e3ae70.0408271154.d1ec03c@posting.google.com>...
(Jabriol) wrote in message news:<9e9431eb.0408270318.525e9f82@posting.google.com>...
Tom McDonald <tmcdonald2672@nohormelcharter.net> wrote in message news:<10iskvrae9fq3f1@corp.supernews.com>...
VoiceOfReason wrote:
<...>
Anyone can post to talk.origins.
VOR,
That is true, as long as they play by the (very few and
minimally intrusive) rules. Right now, Church of the Painful
Truth (whom you may know now as Atheist Bruiser, Soren K. and
some other nyms) is banned. All he has to do is to promise to
stop changing nyms to avoid kill files, and to stop posting the
same thing many times.
As it happens, CoPT/AB/SK/etc. has tried posting to T.O.
several times under new nyms, which means that he's banned that
much longer. He doesn't seem to care, though, and seems to have
found a home on, at least, a.t.c.
I can only recall a few bannings by DIG. All were lifted,
except this one on CoPT; and that can be lifted any time CoPT
chooses.
Jabs is clearly not banned, as he has just posted there. What
he can't do is the same as what anyone else can't do. He's a
whiny little ***** who..
your momomy doesnt belive that.. but
thinks he should be able to spread his
vile bile anywhere he chooses. He's wrong.
As I said earlier, it is called censorship...
but for the record please define, the "bile" I choose to spread.
and even if it was bile, then you admit, that the jabfilter is based on content.
As explained in this thread and others, Talk.Origins is not filtered
for content. Why do you say otherwise? It's one thing to bear false
witness; it's another to be comically obtuse.
why is there a ban to crosspost to the support group, subjects that
are related to both?
You pasted an excellent example below. Cross-posting inflammatory
messages to a rape support group resulted in a flame war that had
nothing to do with Origins. If you get your rocks off by taunting rape
victims, you can still do so by posting messages into those groups.
If you want to post a logical argument against science you can do so.
What you can't do is cross-post to a dozen totally unrelated groups in
the hope that the resulting noise from the "Don't post such off-topic
drivel to this newsgroup" complaints will provide enough smoke to
disrupt normal discourse.
incorrect,
read what a former TO poster has writen related to the subject:
http://tinyurl.com/5p2bp
here an excerpt:
The fact that you cannot crosspost from T.O. to certain other multiple
groups was based on content and the fact that this content caused
multiple
flame wars. But your claiming that you are banned completely from T.O.
which
isn't true.
Others were also responsible for the limitations on crossposting
though
maybe not to the JW group but other groups such as S.A.P. so your
claim of
being singled out does not ring completely true.
You also neglect to point out that rape is not just an act of
reproduction but assault and violence which no modern day society
should
tolerate. Violence may be natural in the animal kingdom but the very
reason
societies form is to prevent these acts from happening to its members.
The fact that you miss such an obvious point in your arguments is
partly
responsible for the flame wars that followed your post.
Lane
---------------------------------------------------------
So the filter works to keep spiteful little jackasses from interfering
with other people's discussions. Is that what you're so upset about?
T.O halting your attempts to interfere with other people's right to
free speech?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: Greig: explain to Chris once more how the Jabfilter works |
30 Aug 2004 05:40:45 AM |
|
|
(VoiceOfReason) wrote in message news:<78e3ae70.0408290556.2f7f2ad5@posting.google.com>...
jabriol1@excite.com (Jabriol) wrote in message news:<9e9431eb.0408280737.51809d8e@posting.google.com>...
(VoiceOfReason) wrote in message news:<78e3ae70.0408271154.d1ec03c@posting.google.com>...
jabriol1@excite.com (Jabriol) wrote in message news:<9e9431eb.0408270318.525e9f82@posting.google.com>...
Tom McDonald <tmcdonald2672@nohormelcharter.net> wrote in message news:<10iskvrae9fq3f1@corp.supernews.com>...
VoiceOfReason wrote:
---------------------------------------------------------
So the filter works to keep spiteful little jackasses from interfering
with other people's discussions. Is that what you're so upset about?
T.O halting your attempts to interfere with other people's right to
free speech?
how am I attempting to interfere with other people free speech? I did
not put up the filter.
on the reverse. As Lane mentioned, I posted the contreversial topic,
and the flame wars began, from inside of T.O. Greigf took this
measure, when his Buddy Boikat try to get me removed from my ISP..
After Boikat failure, Then Greig instituted the filter. No RFD no CFV
to alter the charter.
and Per N.G. he can do so. As you can see the Filter is in place due
to Content
another Poster has said as much...
and I quote:
From: Roger Schlafly <roger_95073@my-dejanews.com>
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Re: Moderation = Censorship Here
Now you are getting dogmatic. Why don't you ban the Young Earth folks
also?
You deny that banning Jabriol's cross-posting is censorship, but you
defend the ban on the grounds that Jabriol's ideas are dangerous and
wrong!
Your argument makes no sense to me. As a result of the ban, Jabriol is
still free to post his (allegedly false) theories about evolution to
the support groups. And he would do it, if his purpose were to abuse
them, as you say. If cross-posted to t.o, his false theories about
evolution would immediately get shot down. But he cannot cross-post
to t.o, so the poor rape victims are subjected to unrebutted goofy
theories.
So I don't see how you could be helping the rape victims any, if your
analysis of Jabriol is correct.
-----------------------------------------------
another thread:
From: Roger Schlafly <roger_95073@my-dejanews.com>
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Re: Moderation = Censorship Here (I told you so)
Date: 14 Sep 2000 03:03:37 -0400
Vincent Maycock wrote:
Jabriol evidently believes that evolution *does* lead to rape, by decreasing
average morality levels; he sees the t.o regulars as defenders of a theory
which is making peoples' lives into a living hell. From his point of view,
*we* are the hardened criminals, sitting here spouting scientific sounding
words which are hurting people enormously (WARNING TO IDIOTS SCARCELY
SMARTER THAN JABRIOL: I do not support the theory that evolution leads to
rape). So by cross-posting to these support groups, he believed he had
struck a dramatic and rhetorically stunning blow against the establishment:
....
So it is possible that Jabriol is making a legitimate point,
even if it is one that we all disagree with.
What disturbs me is how everyone here so adamantly maintains that
there is no censorship, and Jabriol is unrestricted from saying
whatever he wants to say. If there is a moderation rule that prevents
a discussion between the evolution folks and the rape folks on his
evolution/rape ideas, then it is limiting him from making points
that he wants to make.
Good arguments have been presented to limit cross-posting.
Some of them seem persuasive to me. But let's call a spade a spade.
The limits are there in order to limit certain types of
discussions, and it is a form of censorship.
----------------------
as you can see from thread, greig been practing censorship against
poster for about 4 year.. however the above is the best post writen
about how censorship is practice on Talk.Origins
need I say more?
and i am still waiting for Ronald Mcdonadonald to post any "bile" that
I have written on T.O
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|

|
Related Articles |
|
|