Attn OM

On Sep 30, 4:16*pm, "jonathan" wrote:
Why is it when I try to respond to you I get this error message.

"The message could not be sent because one of the recipients was rejected
by the server. The rejected e-mail address was '.'

Does this make you an officially recognized *'reject'.
What did you do now?

Jonathan

s

OM is very special, and very pro-kosher as well as republican to boot.

~ BG

On Sep 30, 8:09*pm, "jonathan" wrote:
"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" wrote in messagenews:sbqdnfUrHqbIcl7XnZ2dnUVZ_gKdnZ2d@earth link.com...



No, just makes you ignorant of how domain names work.

Since you've decided to become OM's spokesman and defender, then
could you ask him to stop the constant accusations that I'm stalking him?
And stop all the totally unprovoked and undeserved accusations of
trolling, and various other epithets which he constantly levels at me.
From pedophile to nazi to faggot, just to name a few!

And while you're being his apologist, could you ask him to stop
his long running campaign to run me out of this ng?
Having a different opinion doesn't justify any of that.

Or is that kind of boorish, closed-minded and just plain mean spirited
behavior ok with you? *Cause it seems to me that anyone that
tows the company line is excused for even the most offensive behavior.
While those with any other opinions are to be kicked
at every opportunity.

I've always been respectful to everyone here, even OM, but
sometimes one has to call an asshole an asshole.
I've heard OM utter the most vile and racist things in this ng with
no one objecting. Showing the clear approval of the ng for
such conduct. What kind of people are you?

It's no wonder the entire moon program seems like a good idea here.
No one knows the difference between right and wrong.
At least as far as I can see. Few here even seem to grasp the
concept of debating ideas or policies.

But then I've been wrong before. Let's see how the ng responds
to my criticism of it's collective integrity and intelligence.
Such that it is.

Jonathan

s

OM just doesn't want anything to change, at least not for the better.
God forbid you should suggest revising anything towards being more
truth worthy.

~ BG

~ BG

"Damien Valentine" wrote in message
...
On Oct 1, 9:22 pm, "jonathan" wrote:
...Silence is seen by many as approval.
OM and I share that opinion I think.

I can't speak for OM's opinion, but for most of the world silence is
just seen as apathy. Nobody here has the time, authority or interest
to bother with your private little flame wars.

.................

My flame wars? He's been making personal attacks against me
for years without provocation and with hardly a reply by me.

But what is clear from your reply is that any behavior is ok with you.

......................

Are you saying OM is a lost cause? Beyond help?

No, what I'm saying -- quite clearly, really, I'm not sure how you
missed it -- is that nobody can make OM do something he doesn't want
to do. This is Usenet; Robert's Rules of Order don't apply.

..................

No one is talking about making someone change, but convincing
them. That is something entirely different. It requires more thought
and effort. If you're not part of the solution....


Ya know people make a mistake by posting their real names on usenet.
The only benefit to doing that is vanity. But the drawbacks are
severe, as it tends to limit what they do and say to a microcosm of
everyday life. It tends to make them reluctant to try new things, or to
embarrass themselves or be wrong.

You mean, it tends to make them act like civilized human beings? I
consider that a plus.

........................

Then usenet is nothing more than the everyday world. What a waste of
potential. This medium allows us to build a world where things are the
way they....should/could be.



(yes, another rant is coming)

OK, here's another problem. This newsgroup is dedicated to space
science and space history: it's right in the domain name, you can't
miss it. If you want to talk about philosophy, find a philosophy-
related newsgroup. You don't barge into a Superbowl party and give
unsolicited lectures about floral arrangements, right?

........................

The problem is with you, calling something you didn't even read
off topic. If you had read it, or been able to comprehend it's
meaning, you would see the rant was about a new goal for
NASA, which is certainty on topic.

Jonathan

s

J0nathan wrote:
Some woman?

Vade retro satana. :-D

Pat

On Oct 5, 9:46*pm, "jonathan" wrote:
My flame wars? He's been making personal attacks against me
for years without provocation and with hardly a reply by me.

That was a "you" plural, not a "you" singular. My apologies for not
making the context sufficiently clear. I'm not going to address the
"provocation" and "hardly a reply" issues, since that only feeds the
flames.

No one is talking about making someone change, but convincing
them. That is something entirely different.

Which, again, folks like Mr. Moore are already trying to do. If OM
isn't going to listen, complaining to us isn't going to help you.

Then usenet is nothing more than the everyday world. What a waste of
potential. This medium allows us to build a world where things are the
way they....should/could be.

You're thinking of Second Life, or maybe World of Warcraft. The
purpose of this newsgroup is to discuss "historical manned and
unmanned space flight programs", according to the "About This Group"
link.

The problem is with you, calling something you didn't even read
off topic. If you had read it, or been able to comprehend it's
meaning, you would see the rant was about a new goal for
NASA, which is certainty on topic.

Actually, I did read it. And judging from the amount of space you
give it, your real interest is pushing some kind of pseudo-scientific
mysticism, not "a new goal for NASA". Maybe there's a place for that
kind of thing on a philosophy newsgroup, but it ain't here.

This thread is a great example of why the Usenet is dying. Moderated
forums are popular now. The Usenet is just plain open anarchy....

"OM" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 8 Oct 2009 13:33:20 -0700 (PDT), "Matthew B. Ota"
wrote:

This thread is a great example of why the Usenet is dying. Moderated
forums are popular now. The Usenet is just plain open anarchy....

...Would that it could save .history. Sadly, it appears that it's too
late, and about the only thing that could save it would be a
self-inflicted bullet in the brains of each of the major trolls.

Think about it OM. Suppose by chance some newcomer DOES come along.

They see one of Jonathan's whacky posts and figure, "ok, this guy is out
there but harmless."

Or they see one of your bile-tainted posts and think, "Ok, this guy is a
whack job, I'm not going to get involved."

Do I like 1/2 the people in your killfile, no.
Do I think they provide a positive contribution to the sci.space groups,
generally not.
Do I think they do as much damage as your hate-filled, bile-ridden posts,
hardly.

Until you recognize you're as much of the problem with your technique,
you're going to continue to be a part of the problem.

Actually if anything, you're worse since you DO have so much positive to
contribute. But 9 out of 10 times it's a negative, threatening, hate filled
post; not a positive post that goes into details on the proper orientation
of the direction of the Gemini hatch on the Skylab airlock module. I can
tell you which one I think most people here would rather see.

"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" wrote in message
m...
"OM" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 8 Oct 2009 13:33:20 -0700 (PDT), "Matthew B. Ota"
wrote:

This thread is a great example of why the Usenet is dying. Moderated
forums are popular now. The Usenet is just plain open anarchy....

...Would that it could save .history. Sadly, it appears that it's too
late, and about the only thing that could save it would be a
self-inflicted bullet in the brains of each of the major trolls.

Think about it OM. Suppose by chance some newcomer DOES come along.

They see one of Jonathan's whacky posts and figure, "ok, this guy is out
there but harmless."

Or they see one of your bile-tainted posts and think, "Ok, this guy is a
whack job, I'm not going to get involved."

Do I like 1/2 the people in your killfile, no.
Do I think they provide a positive contribution to the sci.space groups,
generally not.
Do I think they do as much damage as your hate-filled, bile-ridden posts,
hardly.

Until you recognize you're as much of the problem with your technique,
you're going to continue to be a part of the problem.

Actually if anything, you're worse since you DO have so much positive to
contribute. But 9 out of 10 times it's a negative, threatening, hate
filled post; not a positive post that goes into details on the proper
orientation of the direction of the Gemini hatch on the Skylab airlock
module. I can tell you which one I think most people here would rather
see.



Well said.

Cheers Dre