it's so pathetic the way you let Katy and Gaynz get to you. I thought
better of you......before.

Scotty

"Scotty" wrote:
it's so pathetic the way you let Katy and Gaynz get to you. I thought
better of you......before.

katysails and Ganz didn't get to anyone, much less Capt. Neal.

At least Ganz is a tad smarter not saying much than katysails because he
didn't brag in several posts claiming he got Capt. Neal tossed from his NSP.

What brought these posters over here is me cross-posting KATY's posts to
people who believe in freedom of speech. So in fact, I can't say that I
brought those people here, KATY's own words brought those people here!
Nothing more, nothing less.

I think it's pathetic how katysails and ganz let Capt. Neal and I get under
their skin.

LP

Lady Pilot wrote:

What brought these posters over here is me cross-posting KATY's posts
to people who believe in freedom of speech. So in fact, I can't say
that I brought those people here, KATY's own words brought those
people here!

You cross-posted *knowing* that they'd come in here and bomb the place. When
attempting to claim the moral high ground, it's usually a good idea not to
bull**** in the process.


--
Wally
www.artbywally.com/FiatPandaRally/index.htm
www.wally.myby.co.uk

"Wally" wrote:
Lady Pilot wrote:

What brought these posters over here is me cross-posting KATY's posts
to people who believe in freedom of speech. So in fact, I can't say
that I brought those people here, KATY's own words brought those
people here!

You cross-posted *knowing* that they'd come in here and bomb the place.
When
attempting to claim the moral high ground, it's usually a good idea not to
bull**** in the process.

I've can honestly say that I've *never* sent an abuse complaint to anyone's
NSP or ISP. If that's the "moral high ground" you speak of, then I guess
you are right.

Regarding bull****, I can't hold a candle to this newsgroup.

LP

Lady Pilot wrote:

I've can honestly say that I've *never* sent an abuse complaint to
anyone's NSP or ISP.

Ignoratio Elenchi. What are you talking about?


If that's the "moral high ground" you speak of,
then I guess you are right.

It isn't. You said that Katy mouthing off about being a netcop was what
brought the horde of locusts in here, but it wasn't. It was you running to a
gang of playground bullies, shouting, "Look what she said! Look what she
said!", knowing that it would mess up the group for everyone . She didn't do
it, you did.

FWIW, if Katy wants to netcop someone, she should keep her trap shut and get
on with it - the fact that the lot of you have to make such a song and dance
of of it in here is, frankly, pathetic.

While I support the principle of free speech in usenet, we are all
ultimately bound by the dictat of our service providers (and service
providers themselves are bound by the conditions of their peering
arrangements with other service providers). Those who choose to step outside
of that dictat are fair game to those who choose to netcop. You can wave a
banner claiming that you can do whatever you like all you want, but the
truth of the matter is that that isn't really the case. Like it or not,
there *are* rules.

What I don't support is flooding a group with a load of worthless crap -
punishing everyone - because of the actions of one person. If Neal stepped
outside his provider's TOS, and Katy netcopped him, then that's just tough
**** - tough **** that I couldn't give a damn about becuase there isn't
enough of it getting in the way of the fun that's to be had in here. You and
Neal claim you're teaching Katy a lesson, but all you're doing is ****ing
everybody off - Katy isn't the source of disrupton to the normal business of
this group, you two are. The fact that Neal deliberately stepped outside
individual.net's TOS, knowing that his account was about to close anyway, is
telling.

You two are behaving like a pair of sad little trouble makers - why don't
you go sailing with him again? That was *far* more interesting and enjoyable
than this ****.


--
Wally
www.artbywally.com/FiatPandaRally/index.htm
www.wally.myby.co.uk

"Wally" wrote:
Lady Pilot wrote:

I can honestly say that I've *never* sent an abuse complaint to
anyone's NSP or ISP.

Ignoratio Elenchi.

Name calling doesn't suit you, Wally.

What are you talking about?

I've been in a flame war that lasted for several years, but I never
netkkkoped anyone. (i.e., sent an abuse complaint)
NSP = News Service Provider
ISP = Internet Service Provider

If that's the "moral high ground" you speak of,
then I guess you are right.

It isn't. You said that Katy mouthing off about being a netcop was what
brought the horde of locusts in here, but it wasn't.

Sure it is, I have personal knowledge of this.

It was you running to a
gang of playground bullies, shouting, "Look what she said! Look what she
said!", knowing that it would mess up the group for everyone .

Nah, they could care less what katywails said, as long as it's not
threatning to report someone and get their account pulled.

She didn't do
it, you did.

Nope, you are wrong. But unlike katywails or Ganz, I won't report you to
your provider just because we have a difference of opinion or I don't like
what you say.


FWIW, if Katy wants to netcop someone, she should keep her trap shut and
get
on with it -

Actually, I'm glad she announced it. Now everyone will know that she can't
be a trusted friend. Gives the group prospective on katy's true character.

While I support the principle of free speech in usenet,

No you don't, it's obvious by your own words.

we are all
ultimately bound by the dictat of our service providers (and service
providers themselves are bound by the conditions of their peering
arrangements with other service providers). Those who choose to step
outside
of that dictat are fair game to those who choose to netcop. You can wave a
banner claiming that you can do whatever you like all you want, but the
truth of the matter is that that isn't really the case. Like it or not,
there *are* rules.

Different news servers have different rules. If individual.net wants to
toss someone for a flame war or calling people names, they won't be around
very long.

Tell me, Wally, what did I do for katywails to netcop me? Hmmm? The fact
of the matter is that katywails got ****ed at Capt. Neal and decided to take
her wrath out on me. That's the facts, whether you want to accept it or
not. That's why I haven't so much as received an e-mail from my ISP. All
other complaints about me will now probably be tossed in the recycle bin.
News admin's have better things to do with their time than listen to some
old menopausal woman whine about losing a flame war.

What I don't support is flooding a group with a load of worthless crap -
punishing everyone - because of the actions of one person.

No one is being punished. Use your kill file, that's what it's there for,
Wally.

You haven't asked for my advice, but I will give it for the sake of the
group. Don't respond to anyone regarding this mess. People like Scotty,
Thom, Cairns, and others defending katy and Ganz is only going to prolong
their visit.

If Neal stepped
outside his provider's TOS, and Katy netcopped him, then that's just tough
**** -

Yes, and the same is true about katysails. If she gets spammed, a trojan or
someone takes control of her computer, that's her fault because she *chose*
to netkkkop someone and then brag about it, which is such a gaynzy way of
life.

tough **** that I couldn't give a damn about becuase there isn't
enough of it getting in the way of the fun that's to be had in here.

So you're saying you want more disruption to the newgroup? whatever

I subscribed to this newsgroup because it *was* a lot of fun. It stopped
being fun when katywails and ganzy went on their professed netkkkopping
spree.

If katy would have just stuck Capt. Neal in her kill file, this wouldn't
have been happening right now. She's incredibly stupid for a woman of her
age. She's been around usenet long enough to know better!

You and
Neal claim you're teaching Katy a lesson, but all you're doing is ****ing
everybody off -

Nope, I've never claimed any such thing. Please post proof of your
accusation. I'm claiming that ***katywails*** brought this upon the
newsgroup by her and ganzy netkkkoping. How many times does that need to be
repeated before people here get that thru their thick skulls?

You two are behaving like a pair of sad little trouble makers - why don't
you go sailing with him again? That was *far* more interesting and
enjoyable
than this ****.

How do you know that we aren't planning to go sailing again soon?
Katysails became enraged the last time we went sailing for 9 days around the
Keys and Gulf Stream.

Has anyone in this newsgroup ever been *sailing* in the Gulf Stream? We all
know that Jax can't even find the Gulf Stream!

LP

Wally wrote:
: Lady Pilot wrote:
:
:: I've can honestly say that I've *never* sent an abuse complaint to
:: anyone's NSP or ISP.
:
: Ignoratio Elenchi. What are you talking about?

she's saying she isn't a netKKKopping scumbag. capiche?
:
:
:: If that's the "moral high ground" you speak of,
:: then I guess you are right.
:
: It isn't. You said that Katy mouthing off about being a netcop was
: what brought the horde of locusts in here, but it wasn't. It was you
: running to a gang of playground bullies, shouting, "Look what she
: said! Look what she said!", knowing that it would mess up the group
: for everyone . She didn't do it, you did.

lol @ playground bullies. all we are doing is posting mere words.
where is the harm in that?
:
: FWIW, if Katy wants to netcop someone, she should keep her trap shut
: and get on with it - the fact that the lot of you have to make such a
: song and dance of of it in here is, frankly, pathetic.

WRONG. she shouldn't netKKKop at all. doing that is the only pathetic thing
here. she didn't like what someone said so got them cut off. that is just
plain ****ing sad.
:
: While I support the principle of free speech in usenet, we are all
: ultimately bound by the dictat of our service providers (and service
: providers themselves are bound by the conditions of their peering
: arrangements with other service providers). Those who choose to step
: outside of that dictat are fair game to those who choose to netcop.
: You can wave a banner claiming that you can do whatever you like all
: you want, but the truth of the matter is that that isn't really the
: case. Like it or not, there *are* rules.

and then there are some like me who challenge these rules.
guess what, I can get away with it too. grin
if need be I hack into newsservers and can post from almost anywhere in the
world, but I only use these tactics as a last resort.
what I'm hoping for here is that the regulars will persuade the KKKops to
desist from their silly behaviour so that your group can return to normal.
:
: What I don't support is flooding a group with a load of worthless
: crap - punishing everyone - because of the actions of one person. If
: Neal stepped outside his provider's TOS, and Katy netcopped him, then
: that's just tough **** - tough **** that I couldn't give a damn about
: becuase there isn't enough of it getting in the way of the fun that's
: to be had in here. You and Neal claim you're teaching Katy a lesson,
: but all you're doing is ****ing everybody off - Katy isn't the source
: of disrupton to the normal business of this group, you two are. The
: fact that Neal deliberately stepped outside individual.net's TOS,
: knowing that his account was about to close anyway, is telling.
:
: You two are behaving like a pair of sad little trouble makers - why
: don't you go sailing with him again? That was *far* more interesting
: and enjoyable than this ****.

then sort it out between yourselves. tell the netKKKops in the group to
desist and apologise then we might just go away (but will still be
watching).
the alternative is not pretty. things really could get much worse in here...


--
Steve Leyland
mhm32x16 Smeeter#24 WSD#41
flower: three 6 four 9 five 8 eight 9
em ess en: my 1st name at purgatory dot org
Alcatroll Labs Inc (bongwater maintenance dept)
http://www.insurgent.org/~alcatroll/
http://www.radioxanadu.tk

=^MEOW MEOW ARMY^=

Does anyone REALLY read these stupid quotes?
================================================== ====================
"Warning to all:
Steve Leyland is a trolling **** of the highest order. Killfile the
muppet now and move on. Even the briefest of searches on his past
UseNet posts will reveal the truth. You have been warned. *plonk*"

bear, uk.rec.motorcycles
================================================== ====================
"This sig is an abomination of all that is good and right about usenet.
Do the entire world a favor and REMOVE YOURSELF FROM USENET ALTOGETHER,
DUMBASS."

miguel, soc.singles
================================================== ====================
"must you include your 75847548574893579345 gigabyte sig file in every
****ing post? You're very annoying."

projectile vomit chick, alt.music.ozzy
================================================== ====================
"I went to the Garden of Love,
And saw what I never had seen;
A Chapel was built in the midst,
Where I used to play on the green.

And the gates of this Chapel were shut
And "Thou shalt not," writ over the door;
So I turned to the Garden of Love
That so many sweet flowers bore.

And I saw it was filled with graves,
And tombstones where flowers should be;
And priests in black gowns were walking their rounds,
And binding with briars my joys and desires."

William Blake.
================================================== ====================
"When the Earth has been ravaged and the animals are dying, a tribe of
people from all races, creeds and colours shall put their faith in
deeds, not words, and make the land green again. They shall be known as
Warriors of the Rainbow, protectors of the environment."

Native American prophecy


|\ _.-'~~""'~`'~)
/, ~-,__,,,.'~ ,-;;--''
|,4) ./ ' ; ;/'
'-~~;'@ ( ; ;
_.--'' _.-_..' .;.'
(,_..----''' (,..--''

Meow

In article , Wally
wrote:

Lady Pilot wrote:

I've can honestly say that I've *never* sent an abuse complaint to
anyone's NSP or ISP.

Ignoratio Elenchi. What are you talking about?


If that's the "moral high ground" you speak of,
then I guess you are right.

It isn't. You said that Katy mouthing off about being a netcop was what
brought the horde of locusts in here, but it wasn't. It was you running to a
gang of playground bullies, shouting, "Look what she said! Look what she
said!", knowing that it would mess up the group for everyone . She didn't do
it, you did.

FWIW, if Katy wants to netcop someone, she should keep her trap shut and get
on with it - the fact that the lot of you have to make such a song and dance
of of it in here is, frankly, pathetic.

What it really says is that they're dead scared of being reported for
violating their TOS.

While I support the principle of free speech in usenet, we are all
ultimately bound by the dictat of our service providers (and service
providers themselves are bound by the conditions of their peering
arrangements with other service providers). Those who choose to step outside
of that dictat are fair game to those who choose to netcop. You can wave a
banner claiming that you can do whatever you like all you want, but the
truth of the matter is that that isn't really the case. Like it or not,
there *are* rules.

What I don't support is flooding a group with a load of worthless crap -
punishing everyone - because of the actions of one person. If Neal stepped
outside his provider's TOS, and Katy netcopped him, then that's just tough
**** - tough **** that I couldn't give a damn about becuase there isn't
enough of it getting in the way of the fun that's to be had in here. You and
Neal claim you're teaching Katy a lesson, but all you're doing is ****ing
everybody off

Maybe, but I just killfiled the lot of them. It wasn't hard. Last time
they were funny but it's a classic example of the saying - first time,
you're a wit. Second time, half-wit. Third time....... you understand.

- Katy isn't the source of disrupton to the normal business of
this group, you two are. The fact that Neal deliberately stepped outside
individual.net's TOS, knowing that his account was about to close anyway, is
telling.

You two are behaving like a pair of sad little trouble makers - why don't
you go sailing with him again?

Once was enough for anyone????????????

PDW

Wally wrote:


What I don't support is flooding a group with a load of worthless crap -
punishing everyone - because of the actions of one person. If Neal stepped
outside his provider's TOS, and Katy netcopped him, then that's just tough
**** - tough **** that I couldn't give a damn about becuase there isn't
enough of it getting in the way of the fun that's to be had in here. You and
Neal claim you're teaching Katy a lesson, but all you're doing is ****ing
everybody off - Katy isn't the source of disrupton to the normal business of
this group, you two are. The fact that Neal deliberately stepped outside
individual.net's TOS, knowing that his account was about to close anyway, is
telling.

You two are behaving like a pair of sad little trouble makers - why don't
you go sailing with him again? That was *far* more interesting and enjoyable
than this ****.

Elegantly stated!
--
Flying Tadpole, catching up

Wally, she believes in freedom of speech, for herself only. Screw
everybody else.

SV

"Wally" wrote
You cross-posted *knowing* that they'd come in here and bomb the
place. When
attempting to claim the moral high ground, it's usually a good idea
not to
bull**** in the process.


--
Wally
www.artbywally.com/FiatPandaRally/index.htm
www.wally.myby.co.uk