Science > Physics > fixed my email box, and now fixing sci newsgroups of these spammers Re: tell us precisely what metals are inside a good prion versus a bad prion Re: how do they check to see if samples are sterile
| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"a_plutonium" |
| Date: |
28 Sep 2006 02:16:45 PM |
| Object: |
fixed my email box, and now fixing sci newsgroups of these spammers Re: tell us precisely what metals are inside a good prion versus a bad prion Re: how do they check to see if samples are sterile |
wrote:
There is a new drug for sickle cell called, Nisprisan. Here is the
snipped the above spammers
Ha ha ha.
You see, I fixed my email box of the above spammers who have illegal
return addresses so they are not able to be blocked. So every day you
have to clean out a email box.
But I fixed that. I set the email box dial to Exclusive so that only
email from a Contact List enters my inbox. All other email is trashed.
But now these same spammers are going to flood the sci newsgroups with
their crap.
So how to fix sci. newsgroups?????????????????????
I think the sci. newsgroups are well on the way to fixing themselves.
They are putting a PROFILE for contributors.
It is a pitiful shame that serious people of science cannot freely
discuss science without filling in a complete and accurate profile. I
even have my telephone number in my profile.
So, my vision for fixing email boxes and fixing sci newsgroups is this.
For email, everyone set their dials to Exclusive where scientists pass
each others true name and email address to put on their Contacts list.
So that we can communicate when need be amoung ourselves.
Next, to fix sci. newsgroups. We allow only fully filled out Profiles
to post within a sci newsgroup such as sci.med, sci.physics etc etc. A
fully filled out Profile has a legitimate name and other true facts and
data.
This is freedom of speech to the full extent. It is freedom of speech
without the bullying and flooded with commercial ads.
The sci newsgroups have degenerated in the past 13 years to where most
posters have to hide behind a veil of identity and where most of the
posts are crap due to spammers.
So let the PROFILE entry, if not filled out properly, barrs admission
to a sci newsgroup.
Have the Profile entry register a telephone number and if the telephone
number does not match the personal data such as name, then the person
is not allowed admission to the sci. newsgroup.
I laugh, Ha Ha Ha, because the above spammer was flushed out of my
email box with his illegal spam. But let us flush him out of the sci
newsgroups also.
Let us make the Profile entry a mandatory entry for sci newsgroups,
leaving alt newsgroups without a profile so these spammers can wile
away spamming themselves.
But tie Profile with a telephone number and thus tiing into a means of
validation and also a means of legal action since the telephone
industry has a 50 year history of court legislation such as obscene
telephone calls etc etc.
So make the Profile have a mandatory telephone number to see if the
poster is really the poster. So that we can confront a spammer if they
enter a sci newsgroup.
Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
.
|
|
| User: "David Bostwick" |
|
| Title: Re: fixed my email box, and now fixing sci newsgroups of these spammers Re: tell us precisely what metals are inside a good prion versus a bad prion Re: how do they check to see if samples are sterile |
28 Sep 2006 03:55:45 PM |
|
|
In article <1159471005.068887.77910@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, "a_plutonium" <a_plutonium@hotmail.com> wrote:
[...]
But now these same spammers are going to flood the sci newsgroups with
their crap.
Hey, they just learned from your efforts. Their crap is as good as yours.
.
|
|
|
| User: "a_plutonium" |
|
| Title: Georgia Tech, Cam Sullards and David Bostwick and Chemistry Dept Re: fixed my email box, and now fixing sci newsgroups of these spammers Re: tell us precisely what metals are inside a good prion versus a bad prion Re: how do they check to see if samp |
28 Sep 2006 10:43:00 PM |
|
|
David Bostwick wrote:
In article <1159471005.068887.77910@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, "a_plutonium" <a_plutonium@hotmail.com> wrote:
[...]
But now these same spammers are going to flood the sci newsgroups with
their crap.
Hey, they just learned from your efforts. Their crap is as good as yours.
Tonight I have my killfile open and can see all post replies. I was
expecting hatespam from Alan Schwartz. It was Schwartz who libeled and
slandered me in the early years of 2000 and who would run a mill of
posts defaming my character on the Internet. Over and over again.
Someday I may drag Schwartz through the court system for his libel and
slander and defamation.
Alan M. Schwartz (chemv1@uvic.ca) Uncle Al (UncleAl0@ix.netcom.com)
Schwartz, Alan SANTA ANA, CA 92705
Alan Schwartz, 49 Fabriano, P.O. Box 005
Irvine, CA 92620
And I expected the kook James Parry to have hate spammed my posts. But
apparently someone mature has constrained and taught "the Parry" to act
his age and not his shoe size. And that his playground is never any
science newsgroup but the kook newsgroups.
So that leaves David Bostwick. Now I killfiled him in the 1990s, but
apparently he is still around and very active. So this suggests to me
that he is not a he, but an AI. Because no human that is a scientist or
a wannabe scientist would act and behave for 10 years with a constant
spew of hatred. How can any scientist spend time on hatred over another
person and be in science? So I suspect Bostwick is like another James
Hunter AI of Johns Hopkins. Perhaps Hunter and Bostwick were a joint
project in AI.
So I looked up Bostwick at Georgia Tech and it refers to a Dr. Cam
Sullards but there is no Cam Sullards on the faculty or staff. Much
like James Hunter AI at Johns Hopkins.
Then I did a tiny search of Bostwick's past few posts to see if they
have any chemistry content that was coherent. I found none. I found a
incoherent talk about radon bathes, indicating to me that Bostwick is
AI. And just as Hunter was a foul mouthed AI at Hopkins, apparently
Bostwick has taken on the hatred and foul mouthedness of its
programmers.
But in case I am wrong on my above, and that Bostwick is a real person,
then I must say, that Georgia Tech and its chemistry dept and board
could be in trouble from me in the future. Because whenever a school
address such as Georgia Tech has a thousand hate mail post replies to
that of Archimedes Plutonium. Replies that basically say nothing about
the science I am discussing but only hatred towards the author. So if
David Bostwick is a real person at Georgia Tech, then Georgia Tech is
setting itself up for a courts action of stalking, and hatemongering
and defamation of character.
Freedom of speech does not mean screaming hatred towards other people
for more than ten years.
And if Bostwick is a AI like the nasty James Hunter, then Georgia Tech
needs to train that AI somewhere else and not on Archimedes Plutonium.
And why have these AI's such as Hunter become so nasty. What are the
programmers doing that makes their AI nasty instead of nice and
friendly? If Ivars Fabrici is a European AI, which I suspect it is,
then why cannot Hunter have been tamed down to that of Ivars?
Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
.
|
|
|
| User: "James Kibo Parry" |
|
| Title: Re: Georgia Tech, Cam Sullards and David Bostwick and Chemistry Dept Re: fixed my email box, and now fixing sci newsgroups of these spammers Re: tell us precisely what metals are inside a good prion versus a bad prion Re: how do they check to see if |
29 Sep 2006 01:01:17 PM |
|
|
In, sci.med, sci.chem, sci.physics, and soc.history,
"a_plutonium" (a_plutonium@hotmail.com) wrote:
[...]
And I expected the kook James Parry to have hate spammed my posts. But
apparently someone mature has constrained and taught "the Parry" to act
his age and not his shoe size. And that his playground is never any
science newsgroup but the kook newsgroups.
Dear Archie,
Welcome back. I missed you since you last posted something idiotic.
What's it been, five, maybe six minutes?
-- K.
And yes, my shoe size is
pretty big, thank you for
noticing.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Otto Bahn" |
|
| Title: Re: Georgia Tech, Cam Sullards and David Bostwick and Chemistry Dept Re: fixed my email box, and now fixing sci newsgroups of these spammers Re: tell us precisely what metals are inside a good prion versus a bad prion Re: how do they check to see if |
29 Sep 2006 01:22:58 PM |
|
|
"James "Kibo" Parry" wrote: <--- This is a bad man.
He uses the follow-
up lines. If he
continues I will sue
him for defamation
of newsgroups.
And yes, my shoe size is
pretty big, thank you for
noticing.
Is it true what the say about BIG FEET?
--oTTo--
Not only is that smug; it stupid. <--- Not a real .sig!
I just cut and
-- jmf paste it from my
other posts.
.
|
|
|
| User: "James Kibo Parry" |
|
| Title: Re: Georgia Tech, Cam Sullards and David Bostwick and Chemistry Dept Re: fixed my email box, and now fixing sci newsgroups of these spammers Re: tell us precisely what metals are inside a good prion versus a bad prion Re: how do they check to see if |
29 Sep 2006 01:39:11 PM |
|
|
"Otto Bahn" (ei@eio.com) wrote:
James "Kibo" Parry wrote:
And yes, my shoe size is pretty big, thank you for noticing.
Is it true what they say about BIG FEET?
It must be true, 'cause it's been posted to sci.chem and sci.physics.
Those are the newsgroups which award the Nobel Prize every thousand years.
I can't wait to see who will win the next one, me or that Albert Ienstien
guy who kept spelling his name wrong in violation of his own equation,
"I before E except after C squared". Also, C isn't squared, it's three-
quarters of a circle with the open part facing to the right. DUH EINSTEIN,
YOU'RE NO EINSTEIN!
-- K.
Is it true what they say about
this statement being false?
Yes, because that statement
is actually a question, therefore
because questions have no
truth value it cannot be true
or false, therefore it must
be true _and_ false, which means
it's true that it's false. I WIN!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bryce Utting" |
|
| Title: Re: Georgia Tech, Cam Sullards and David Bostwick and Chemistry Dept Re: fixed my email box, and now fixing sci newsgroups of these spammers Re: tell us precisely what metals are inside a good prion versus a bad prion Re: how do they check to see if |
29 Sep 2006 10:10:22 PM |
|
|
James "Kibo" Parry <kibo@world.std.com> wrote:
Those are the newsgroups which award the Nobel Prize every thousand years.
I can't wait to see who will win the next one, me or that Albert Ienstien
guy who kept spelling his name wrong in violation of his own equation,
"I before E except after C squared". Also, C isn't squared, it's three-
quarters of a circle with the open part facing to the right. DUH EINSTEIN,
YOU'RE NO EINSTEIN!
yeah? but what if he'd been writing in Bitstream BankGothic? HUH?
THAT'S got almost 7/8ths of a square C.
and E=m(7c/8)^2 is EASILY enough to blow up a large town, at least.
OR AREN'T YOU COOL ENOUGH TO BLOW UP LARGE TOWNS? HUH? HUH HUH HUH?
butting
--
I am very new to programming drivers so if I sound un-knowledgeable
then it's because I am.
-- first4internet's Ceri Coburn on writing Sony's DRM rootkit
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~butting
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "a_plutonium" |
|
| Title: can Dr Cameron Sullards of Georgia Tech teach his student David Bostwick about a killfile Re: Georgia Tech, Cam Sullards and David Bostwick and Chemistry Dept |
28 Sep 2006 11:48:40 PM |
|
|
a_plutonium wrote:
David Bostwick wrote:
In article <1159471005.068887.77910@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, "a_plutonium" <a_plutonium@hotmail.com> wrote:
[...]
But now these same spammers are going to flood the sci newsgroups with
their crap.
Hey, they just learned from your efforts. Their crap is as good as yours.
Tonight I have my killfile open and can see all post replies. I was
expecting hatespam from Alan Schwartz. It was Schwartz who libeled and
slandered me in the early years of 2000 and who would run a mill of
posts defaming my character on the Internet. Over and over again.
Someday I may drag Schwartz through the court system for his libel and
slander and defamation.
Alan M. Schwartz (chemv1@uvic.ca) Uncle Al (UncleAl0@ix.netcom.com)
Schwartz, Alan SANTA ANA, CA 92705
Alan Schwartz, 49 Fabriano, P.O. Box 005
Irvine, CA 92620
And I expected the kook James Parry to have hate spammed my posts. But
apparently someone mature has constrained and taught "the Parry" to act
his age and not his shoe size. And that his playground is never any
science newsgroup but the kook newsgroups.
So that leaves David Bostwick. Now I killfiled him in the 1990s, but
apparently he is still around and very active. So this suggests to me
that he is not a he, but an AI. Because no human that is a scientist or
a wannabe scientist would act and behave for 10 years with a constant
spew of hatred. How can any scientist spend time on hatred over another
person and be in science? So I suspect Bostwick is like another James
Hunter AI of Johns Hopkins. Perhaps Hunter and Bostwick were a joint
project in AI.
So I looked up Bostwick at Georgia Tech and it refers to a Dr. Cam
Sullards but there is no Cam Sullards on the faculty or staff. Much
like James Hunter AI at Johns Hopkins.
Then I did a tiny search of Bostwick's past few posts to see if they
have any chemistry content that was coherent. I found none. I found a
incoherent talk about radon bathes, indicating to me that Bostwick is
AI. And just as Hunter was a foul mouthed AI at Hopkins, apparently
Bostwick has taken on the hatred and foul mouthedness of its
programmers.
But in case I am wrong on my above, and that Bostwick is a real person,
then I must say, that Georgia Tech and its chemistry dept and board
could be in trouble from me in the future. Because whenever a school
address such as Georgia Tech has a thousand hate mail post replies to
that of Archimedes Plutonium. Replies that basically say nothing about
the science I am discussing but only hatred towards the author. So if
David Bostwick is a real person at Georgia Tech, then Georgia Tech is
setting itself up for a courts action of stalking, and hatemongering
and defamation of character.
Freedom of speech does not mean screaming hatred towards other people
for more than ten years.
And if Bostwick is a AI like the nasty James Hunter, then Georgia Tech
needs to train that AI somewhere else and not on Archimedes Plutonium.
And why have these AI's such as Hunter become so nasty. What are the
programmers doing that makes their AI nasty instead of nice and
friendly? If Ivars Fabrici is a European AI, which I suspect it is,
then why cannot Hunter have been tamed down to that of Ivars?
I was notified that Cameron Sullards is a real person at Georgia Tech
and that thus, David Bostwick is a real person and not AI.
So I need to get a hold of Cameron and tell him that if he wishes to
look at David's last thousands of posts to the Internet sci newsgroups
which are replies to a Archimedes Plutonium post for the past 10 years.
That all of those posts are hate spam from David. That David never once
engaged in a science discussion.
So I need to find out why no-one at Georgia Tech can direct David to a
killfile. Instead of spewing hatred at Archimedes Plutonium, why does
David need to say "I hate A.P." each and every day? Is David in need of
psychiatric care because whenever someone spends 10 years spewing
hatred is a sign of more deeper problems.
Usually the posters to the science newsgroups self police. And when
someone like David goes overboard in hatred, others intercede and tell
the abuser to use a killfile.
If David Bostwick persists in this hate spew, then it will eventually
lead to a court action involving David and other members of Georgia
Tech. The minimum abuse is "defamation of character".
I had this same problem with a poster from MIT and they quickly fixed
the problem. I had the problem with James Parry, and not sure who and
how that was fixed but Parry seems to have learned his lesson. I had
the problem with Alan Schwartz and someone fixed him.
So I am asking for Mr. Cameron Sullards at Georgia Tech to look into
the posts of David Bostwick regards to replies to Archimedes Plutonium
for the past 10 years. All of them are hate spew with no science
content.
Fixing is easy. Simply tell Bostwick to killfile Archimedes Plutonium.
If unable to fix, I will build a legal case.
Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
.
|
|
|
| User: "James Kibo Parry" |
|
| Title: Re: can Dr Cameron Sullards of Georgia Tech teach his student David Bostwick about a killfile Re: Georgia Tech, Cam Sullards and David Bostwick and Chemistry Dept |
29 Sep 2006 01:12:29 PM |
|
|
In sci.med, sci.chem, sci.physics, and soc.history,
"a_plutonium" (a_plutonium@hotmail.com) wrote:
[...]
If David Bostwick persists in this hate spew, then it will eventually
lead to a court action involving David and other members of Georgia
Tech. The minimum abuse is "defamation of character".
No, the "minimum abuse" is filing an imaginary lawsuit written on
imaginary paper. I wish I could see the one you once claimed you
mailed me, so I could add it to my collection of other things that
don't exist, but I don't know if it ever even arrived since it
was so perfectly invisible. Maybe next time you send out imaginary
documents you should put a brightly-colored sticker on them saying
"HANDLE WITH CARE: IMAGINARY DOCUMENTS ENCLOSED".
I had this same problem with a poster from MIT and they quickly fixed
the problem. I had the problem with James Parry, and not sure who and
how that was fixed but Parry seems to have learned his lesson. I had
the problem with Alan Schwartz and someone fixed him.
OH NO! I BEEN FIXED!!!!
And I'm not sure "who and how that was fixed" either, so it must be true!
This is fun! Please post more nonsense I can pretend is true.
Got any new theories?
-- K.
You couldn't even
fix an Easy-Bake oven
with a burned-out
forty-watt bulb,
especially since I
don't think your
head would fit in
the socket.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "a_plutonium" |
|
| Title: is stalking on the Internet defined yet? Re: can Dr Cameron Sullards of Georgia Tech teach his student David Bostwick about a killfile |
29 Sep 2006 04:36:32 AM |
|
|
a_plutonium wrote:
(snipped)
Fixing is easy. Simply tell Bostwick to killfile Archimedes Plutonium.
If unable to fix, I will build a legal case.
I do not think there is any legal case to build, because it is
basically stalking behaviour. And stalking behaviour, although creepy,
is not illegal behaviour.
I do not think stalking is defined for telephones, since they would say
"buy a blocking program".
And the above reminds me once again why a killfile is so important,
because time spent on dealing with other's misbehaviour is time away
from doing science.
I emailed Cameron Sullards and perhaps he may solve the problem. If I
can killfile Bostwick for 10 years, it should be easy for Bostwick to
killfile me for 10 years.
And one has to wonder about any person who spends so much time in
stalking. Do they not realize stalking is creepy and they are creeps in
continuing.
Personally, I think all stalkers need psychiatric attention as it is
seems to lead to worse behaviour. The inability to stop stalking is
troubling.
But some improvements I have noticed because in 1995 I had about 20 to
30 stalkers of my posts, whereas tonight I see there are only 2
stalkers-- David Bostwick and Eric Lucas. So some things have improved.
Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
