Asshole Erskine

futureworlds wrote in message worlds.it...

About Alan Erskine

FYI, based on what I've read in sci.space.policy, I have killfiled
you, but not Mr. Erskine. You may want to tone down your rhetoric.

-R

On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 14:13:45 +1300, in a place far, far away, Peter
Lowrie made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:

BTW, would some kind soul please expalin to me what it means to killfile, or
to be killfiled, and also how do you do that?

A killfile is a file that contains subjects, or people, whose posts
are automatically deleted without reading. How you do it depends on
what kind of software you're using to read Usenet. Some Usenet agents
don't have such a facility, but any good one does by definition.

Rand Simberg wrote:

On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 14:13:45 +1300, in a place far, far away, Peter
Lowrie made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:

BTW, would some kind soul please expalin to me what it means to killfile, or
to be killfiled, and also how do you do that?

A killfile is a file that contains subjects, or people, whose posts
are automatically deleted without reading. How you do it depends on
what kind of software you're using to read Usenet. Some Usenet agents
don't have such a facility, but any good one does by definition.

I will note that a killfile doesn't eliminate the message for the rest of
the world, it merely means that if you have someone in the file you
won't even have to see his message come up on your machine.

Basically it protects you from yourself.

Mike Walsh

On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 02:23:51 GMT, in a place far, far away, Michael
Walsh made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:

A killfile is a file that contains subjects, or people, whose posts
are automatically deleted without reading. How you do it depends on
what kind of software you're using to read Usenet. Some Usenet agents
don't have such a facility, but any good one does by definition.

I will note that a killfile doesn't eliminate the message for the rest of
the world, it merely means that if you have someone in the file you
won't even have to see his message come up on your machine.

Basically it protects you from yourself.

No, it protects you from idiots who post on Usenet.

Rand Simberg wrote:

On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 02:23:51 GMT, in a place far, far away, Michael
Walsh made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:

A killfile is a file that contains subjects, or people, whose posts
are automatically deleted without reading. How you do it depends on
what kind of software you're using to read Usenet. Some Usenet agents
don't have such a facility, but any good one does by definition.

I will note that a killfile doesn't eliminate the message for the rest of
the world, it merely means that if you have someone in the file you
won't even have to see his message come up on your machine.

Basically it protects you from yourself.

No, it protects you from idiots who post on Usenet.

These idiots can't get to you unless you get curious and read
their posts.

My point was that "killfiling" someone does not censor another party,
it just keeps the person who set up the killfile from seeing the post.

I have read posts from rather clueless people who got into a rage
about people killfiling them and claimed it was censorship.

Mike Walsh

Michael Walsh wrote in
:


I will note that a killfile doesn't eliminate the message for the rest
of the world, it merely means that if you have someone in the file you
won't even have to see his message come up on your machine.

Basically it protects you from yourself.

Mike Walsh


I used to think that when I used Netscape to visit Planet Newsgroup. Once
I started using Xnews and it's scorefile/killfile system, I realized its
just a way to manage my time.

An effective way...

--
Reed

"Peter Lowrie" wrote in message ...
| a m a z u r e ²°°³ wrote:
|
| Trolls are fun, a gift, especially the dopey ones who are their own worst
| enemy.
| Enjoy them and show up their cluelessness and lack of logic.
| Even the best trolls have a weakness.
| Find it and use it against them when you get bored of the lack of decent
| discussions :-)
|
| I never killfile anyone. I like to see the whole picture, not just a
| distorted (censored) version.
| I even have some filters to Flag & Highlight some trolls who are
| especially amusing.
|
| Amazure, I quite agree. Some trolls are fun, interesting and informative. A
| way to introduce a topic for discussion. I mean, when you're at a gathering
| and somebody introduces a topic to discuss (because all else is quiet) you
| don't hear others say to them; "Aha, you're trolling", now do you? Alas
| commonsense does not prevail.
|
| BTW, would some kind soul please expalin to me what it means to killfile, or
| to be killfiled, and also how do you do that?

It's just the setting up of filters to hide or delete messages you do not wish to see.

Your Newsreader is "KNode/0.7.1" which I am not familiar with, but there are
most likely options to filter incomming messages somewhere within it.
(KNode Docs) http://knode.sourceforge.net/downloa...n-0.3.2.tar.gz

Regards.

| --
| Peter E. Lowrie
| http://www.geocities.com/ledaccelerator
| ----------------------------------------------------------
|

Reed Snellenberger wrote:

Michael Walsh wrote in
:


I will note that a killfile doesn't eliminate the message for the rest
of the world, it merely means that if you have someone in the file you
won't even have to see his message come up on your machine.

Basically it protects you from yourself.

Mike Walsh


I used to think that when I used Netscape to visit Planet Newsgroup. Once
I started using Xnews and it's scorefile/killfile system, I realized its
just a way to manage my time.

An effective way...

--
Reed

Well, yes, you can use it as a sort of "garbage disposal" system and this can
reduce the amount of time reading headers and determining whether or not
you want to actually read the post.

I am not complaining about people using killfiles, merely pointing out that
a killfile does not eliminate posts from newsgroups.

Some people get so much email that they have it sorted with one file
containg all of the mail they recognize as wanted and the rest put into
one or two other files, depending on whether they want to review it
before deleting it. The files can be prioritized with one file for things
that are believed to be truly trash.

Most people still want to be able to scan email, rather than deleting
it because they sometimes get wanted email from unexpected sources.

And, you don't need to be that concerned about Usenet posts.

Mike Walsh