Dear Group,

I thank the belowmentioned for all for the accolades! I appreciate your
fear and awe of me. You are correct to recognize the power and
influence I command.

According to Thom Stewart, I , Capt. Neal, destroyed alt.sailing.asa.

Wally says I called in the troops and trashed the bar (group).
He says I'm a blatant rule-breaker. Heaven forbid!

John Cairns says Old Thom gives me way too much credit but
whines incessantly about my horrible disruptions to the group.

Scout claims I "brought these assholes here,", and am an "abusive controller."

Peter Wiley says I, Capt. Neal, '"Fractured the newsgroup," but he thinks
killfiling 60% of the group doesn't fracture it. Duh!

Red Cloud aka Binary Bill is claiming I'm responsible for the high cost of
his tampons.

Scotty says I'm pathetic but he's still obsessed with my posts.

Horvath covets my motorcycle and his woman covets me.

Maxprop says my "sort of BS is what turns Usenet into Uselessnet."
And he also says I'm "not worth a good, resounding fart, much less
consternation by others." But then, one must wonder why his constant
consternation?

Maxprop also wrote: that I found "it necessary to bombard the NG
with several hundred bull**** posts?" Boy, am I ever everywhere at once . . .

Yours truly wrote (and not a single netKKKop supporter could refute him)
that I'm a netKKKop poacher.

Lonny B, started his own discussion group to seek shelter from my
omnipresence, destruction, fracturing, bar trashing, disruption,
calling in the troops, etc.

Haight and Ganz are shaking in their pumps, getting bitch-slapped
for their netKKKopping and it's ALL MY DOING. I even coerced
LP into doing my bidding.

Yes, sir. This all makes me the most powerful man on the newsgroup,
if not the planet.

Respectfully,
Capt. Neal
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"It is my opinion that a man should not mince words
just to spare the sensibilities of the thin-skinned or
the ignorant." -- Capt. Neal

"Capt. Neal®" wrote
[admitted to various character flaws but kept it all very positive]
[snip]

Well done old chap!
You've passed step 1; don't give up now!
Scout

FAREWELL OLD FRIEND I'll miss you.

You truly were one of a kind but you've changed into something that is
unacceptable to others.

Watch out for yourself, your companion does have a lot of questions in
her past on this Coast.

Ole Thom

"Thom Stewart" wrote in message

FAREWELL OLD FRIEND I'll miss you.

Seems to be a plotted course for you to date Thom.

You truly were one of a kind but you've changed into something that is
unacceptable to others.

Seems to me you are being overly dramatical.... derogatory references to
Afro Canadains and bar sluts certainly being a defining characteristic of
your current myopia


Watch out for yourself, your companion does have a lot of questions in
her past on this Coast.

Ah yes ever the wise and balanced... you feel obligated to condesendingly
promote your opinions on matters that do not involve you.

CM

Capt. Neal® wrote:
Dear Group,

I thank the belowmentioned for all for the accolades! I appreciate
your fear and awe of me. You are correct to recognize the power
and influence I command.

Bluff and bluster noted, Neal.


Capt. Neal® wrote:

Some information you do not have that is skewing your thoughts is
Haight and Ganz have been netKKKoping me for over five years.
Both have a history of complaining to my ISPs and attempting to
get me tossed. Both brag about doing so.

The other side of this coin is that if you use ISPs that have a specific
TOS, then you either conduct yourself within those TOS or risk the
consequences of stepping outwith them. I'm sure you'd agree that there is
something to be said for making an informed choice, and taking responsiblity
for one's choices. In short, if you're going to push the envelope with
people you believe will netcop you, while using an ISP that may be
sympathetic to their netcopping, then it's your own lookout. You're blaming
them for your own errors.

Like I said to LP, there *are* rules, whether we like it or not. The
Databasix people evidently have a TOS that is rather different from the
typical commercial ISP, but even they must place limits on what their users
can do, to the extent that offenders will get booted if they place the
service at risk. A couple of years ago, my own ISP was doing too little
about open relays connected to its servers - it was becoming a serious spam
source and notice was served that it had to clean up its act wthin a given
period of time or it would get booted off the net by means of its peering
partners withdrawing their connections (I believe other interested parties
who might otherwise become peering partners were also involved).

I'm sure Databasix aren't into so much 'freedom' that they'll risk getting
themselves isolated from the net. I'm willing to bet that they don't
include, for instance, mass spam mailings of kiddie porn or snuff movies in
their definition of 'freedom of speech'. If the usenet server-providing
community is willing to serve notice of a death sentence on one of the UK's
biggest ISPs, then I don't think they'd have much compunction about
disconnecting what, I assume, is comparatively small fry.

There are always rules, Neal. They might not be clear-cut, or consistent in
all environments, but they're always there in one form or another. The trick
is know what they are and to play your game within them. If you don't, you
get shafted sooner or later.


I'm a patient man. I waited and bided my time hoping they would
get bored and go away.

You kept running risks vis-a-vis your conduct and that allowed by your
ISP(s). You were responsible for that conduct, and you therefore took the
risk.


"They" did not cross post to get the flonkers involved. Show
me the post where I cross posted to do so, please.

If I'm in error regarding this, then I apologise. I confess that I've found
this episode insufficiently interesting to read everything in detail,
certainly not to the extent of doing research into who cross-posted
precisely what, and when.

To be frank, this episode has been annoying and disruptive. I don't come in
here to wade through piles of **** just because you keep treading on the
wrong side of the line when there are people willing to grass you up for
doing so - that's not my concern, and it's not my problem. As a general
rule, I don't killfile. I object to being admonished to waste my time
engaging in unneccessary computer admin, killfiling disruptor after
disruptor, just because a few people can't behave themselves, or can't play
the game by the (ISP) rules they choose and accept when they take on a
connection service. I've done mass killfiling before, but I'm very
disinclined to do it again. I have better things to do with my life than
clean other people's **** out of my face. My objection to people who
deliberately disrupt, and then tell me to remove some of whatever amount of
life I have left to get rid of them, is complete and absolute.

Your ISP's rules, your behaviour, your ****-up. You can sit and justify your
latest reaction to yourself all you like, but you'll never convince me.
Having given the foregoing your most careful consideration, would you care
to elucidate your position on personal responsiblity as it applies to you in
this context? How would that elucidation sit with your views on the matter
in the context of good seamanship? And what about within the context of your
general philosophy of life? I ask that last question because I gather that
you see good seamanship, and the attitudes it enshrines, as inextricably
linked to one's philosophy on life itself.


Those monitoring my
posts were aware of the netcops and LP crossposting
was an after-the-fact situation.

You better tell LP that the ego-feed isn't all hers, then: "What brought
these posters over here is me cross-posting KATY's posts to people who
believe in freedom of speech."


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

On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 15:31:01 -0400, Capt. Neal®
wrote this crap:

Horvath covets my motorcycle and his woman covets me.


That's bull****. If I owned your motorcycle, I'd pay someone to haul
it away. And my future bride doesn't even know you. You got both
statements backwards. You covet my Harley, and my girlfriend, AND MY
BOAT.





This post is 100% free of steroids

Neal is unable to do this... Sad fellow isn't he?

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Wally" wrote in message
. ..
Capt. Neal® wrote:
Dear Group,

I thank the belowmentioned for all for the accolades! I appreciate
your fear and awe of me. You are correct to recognize the power
and influence I command.

Bluff and bluster noted, Neal.


Capt. Neal® wrote:

Some information you do not have that is skewing your thoughts is
Haight and Ganz have been netKKKoping me for over five years.
Both have a history of complaining to my ISPs and attempting to
get me tossed. Both brag about doing so.

The other side of this coin is that if you use ISPs that have a specific
TOS, then you either conduct yourself within those TOS or risk the
consequences of stepping outwith them. I'm sure you'd agree that there is
something to be said for making an informed choice, and taking
responsiblity
for one's choices. In short, if you're going to push the envelope with
people you believe will netcop you, while using an ISP that may be
sympathetic to their netcopping, then it's your own lookout. You're
blaming
them for your own errors.

Like I said to LP, there *are* rules, whether we like it or not. The
Databasix people evidently have a TOS that is rather different from the
typical commercial ISP, but even they must place limits on what their
users
can do, to the extent that offenders will get booted if they place the
service at risk. A couple of years ago, my own ISP was doing too little
about open relays connected to its servers - it was becoming a serious
spam
source and notice was served that it had to clean up its act wthin a given
period of time or it would get booted off the net by means of its peering
partners withdrawing their connections (I believe other interested parties
who might otherwise become peering partners were also involved).

I'm sure Databasix aren't into so much 'freedom' that they'll risk getting
themselves isolated from the net. I'm willing to bet that they don't
include, for instance, mass spam mailings of kiddie porn or snuff movies
in
their definition of 'freedom of speech'. If the usenet server-providing
community is willing to serve notice of a death sentence on one of the
UK's
biggest ISPs, then I don't think they'd have much compunction about
disconnecting what, I assume, is comparatively small fry.

There are always rules, Neal. They might not be clear-cut, or consistent
in
all environments, but they're always there in one form or another. The
trick
is know what they are and to play your game within them. If you don't, you
get shafted sooner or later.


I'm a patient man. I waited and bided my time hoping they would
get bored and go away.

You kept running risks vis-a-vis your conduct and that allowed by your
ISP(s). You were responsible for that conduct, and you therefore took the
risk.


"They" did not cross post to get the flonkers involved. Show
me the post where I cross posted to do so, please.

If I'm in error regarding this, then I apologise. I confess that I've
found
this episode insufficiently interesting to read everything in detail,
certainly not to the extent of doing research into who cross-posted
precisely what, and when.

To be frank, this episode has been annoying and disruptive. I don't come
in
here to wade through piles of **** just because you keep treading on the
wrong side of the line when there are people willing to grass you up for
doing so - that's not my concern, and it's not my problem. As a general
rule, I don't killfile. I object to being admonished to waste my time
engaging in unneccessary computer admin, killfiling disruptor after
disruptor, just because a few people can't behave themselves, or can't
play
the game by the (ISP) rules they choose and accept when they take on a
connection service. I've done mass killfiling before, but I'm very
disinclined to do it again. I have better things to do with my life than
clean other people's **** out of my face. My objection to people who
deliberately disrupt, and then tell me to remove some of whatever amount
of
life I have left to get rid of them, is complete and absolute.

Your ISP's rules, your behaviour, your ****-up. You can sit and justify
your
latest reaction to yourself all you like, but you'll never convince me.
Having given the foregoing your most careful consideration, would you care
to elucidate your position on personal responsiblity as it applies to you
in
this context? How would that elucidation sit with your views on the matter
in the context of good seamanship? And what about within the context of
your
general philosophy of life? I ask that last question because I gather that
you see good seamanship, and the attitudes it enshrines, as inextricably
linked to one's philosophy on life itself.


Those monitoring my
posts were aware of the netcops and LP crossposting
was an after-the-fact situation.

You better tell LP that the ego-feed isn't all hers, then: "What brought
these posters over here is me cross-posting KATY's posts to people who
believe in freedom of speech."


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

"Horvath" wrote in message ...
On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 15:31:01 -0400, Capt. Neal®
wrote this crap:

Horvath covets my motorcycle and his woman covets me.


That's bull****. If I owned your motorcycle, I'd pay someone to haul
it away. And my future bride doesn't even know you. You got both
statements backwards. You covet my Harley, and my girlfriend, AND MY
BOAT.


Well, definitely your babe, maybe your bike but ixnay on that ugly Hunter.

CN

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message

Dear Group,

I thank the belowmentioned for all for the accolades! I appreciate your
fear and awe of me. You are correct to recognize the power and influence I
command.

According to Thom Stewart, I , Capt. Neal, destroyed alt.sailing.asa.

Wally says I called in the troops and trashed the bar (group). He says I'm
a blatant rule-breaker. Heaven forbid!

John Cairns says Old Thom gives me way too much credit but
whines incessantly about my horrible disruptions to the group.

Scout claims I "brought these assholes here,", and am an "abusive
controller."

Peter Wiley says I, Capt. Neal, '"Fractured the newsgroup," but he thinks
killfiling 60% of the group doesn't fracture it. Duh!

Red Cloud aka Binary Bill is claiming I'm responsible for the high cost of
his tampons.

Scotty says I'm pathetic but he's still obsessed with my posts.

Horvath covets my motorcycle and his woman covets me.

Maxprop says my "sort of BS is what turns Usenet into Uselessnet."
And he also says I'm "not worth a good, resounding fart, much less
consternation by others." But then, one must wonder why his constant
consternation?

Maxprop also wrote: that I found "it necessary to bombard the NG with
several hundred bull**** posts?" Boy, am I ever everywhere at once . . .

Yours truly wrote (and not a single netKKKop supporter could refute him)
that I'm a netKKKop poacher.

Lonny B, started his own discussion group to seek shelter from my
omnipresence, destruction, fracturing, bar trashing, disruption, calling
in the troops, etc.

Haight and Ganz are shaking in their pumps, getting bitch-slapped
for their netKKKopping and it's ALL MY DOING. I even coerced
LP into doing my bidding.

Yes, sir. This all makes me the most powerful man on the newsgroup,
if not the planet.

Respectfully,
Capt. Neal

What this makes you is another Bobsprit, and sadly lacking even his ability
to be remotely funny.

Max

"Scout" wrote in message

"Capt. Neal®" wrote
[admitted to various character flaws but kept it all very positive]
[snip]

Well done old chap!
You've passed step 1; don't give up now!
Scout

There are 11 more, no?

Max