I wish some of you damn people would grow up! <OT>

This group may indeed have been clean once.

But it was RAMJ+W's very own Llewellen Williams Hughes III that did exactly what you are seeing here in your group to ABPA, to the tune of

300+ spams per day. Every day. And we get far, far more transient traffic than you do.

He came in uninvited just after he single-handedly destroyed another auto group.

So, you can blame the symptoms as you are doing now, or you can blame the cause.

It really doesn't matter, I suppose, the easiest way out is usually taken, i.e., none.

Most of us agree Jeff. It is amazing that these people have such shallow lives that they have nothing better to do. One person pissed these trolls off, and continues to do so because he is on some kind of self-justified, retard mission. This newsgroup has more filters in it than all the others I am subscribes to combined.

Chris

Jeff DeWitt wrote:

who

This is hilarious! An illiterate madman lecturing a professional writer on grammar!

Wheeee-ooooo!

First off, you don't know what a relative clause even is.

Secondly, you only get the version of who/whom correctly by accident when you do, which isn't often.

A relative clause follows the noun it modifies; that did not.

A relative pronoun is almost always at the start of the clause; that did not.

OK, Billie, which is correct, and why?:

Ask whoever/whomever comes this way for directions.

C'mon, stupido-kiddo, give it a whirl. After all, you can't embarrass yourself any more than you already have!

OK, C&P time !!

Jeff DeWitt pinched out a steaming pile of:

The alt heirarchy isnt moderated. If you want rec.autos.willys-jeep.moderated, then you should go to news.groups and ask one of the big 8 cabal to make it for you. Or get the software, make it yourself and find a friendly newsserver to host the group. Or...set up your own server with passwords and auth info. Or, migrate to the web and create a yahoo type group. The options are endless.

contributed.

If if "your" group is only used by "adults", only has 100% on topic posts and such many people dont see what they're looking for and "move on". I use search engines to find specific ansers to specific questions. Newsgroups are fun but they're really hit & miss for solid info.

So this is about controlling who has a voice. Hmmm...since you're all about censorship you're better off with a moderated NG or a yahoo type web forum where you can control everything.

Thats human nature. People do that.

Filter and set a good example? Or create yer own little utopia...aka web forum.

bob pinched out a steaming pile of:

disregard of

Sounds like a Chevy guy ;)

The simplest way to keep a group noise free is to have the discipline to not x-post, not follow up trolls and use a filter. Btw, I'm a troll and I know what works. FYI HTH HAND And of course, FOrDs are always better.

"L.W. \(Bill\) Hughes III" wrote in news:46bb888a $0$16271$ snipped-for-privacy@free.teranews.com:

So, Bizarro, are you a Dittohead? Or do you prefer even more conspiratorial AM radio fare?

[alt.fan.rush-limbaugh and alt.fan.art-bell added.]

I've been using Usenet newsgroups for well over 10 years, I know how they work. When they work like they are supposed to it's a kind of cheerful anarchy. People got off topic, sometimes they get pissed and fuss at each other, and there are the damn spammers... all of those things are facts of life in Usenet.

This childish, stupid idiocy that we see here, with a small handful of people going off on each other and with 10's or more posts, usually with the exactly the same copied and pasted garbage is something else again... at least the damn spammers are trying to make a dishonest buck, these guys haven't even risen to that level.

Jeff DeWitt

§ñühw¤£f wrote:

Jeff DeWitt pinched out a steaming pile of:

Funny stuff from a guy whos been using usenet for 10 years yet still top posts a response.

§ñühw¤£f wrote: n > Jeff DeWitt pinched out a steaming pile os> of: i>

md>> I've been using Usenet newsgroups for well over 10 years, I know how oe>> they work. When they work like they are supposed to it's a kind of rp>> cheerful anarchy. People got off topic, sometimes they get pissed eo>> and fuss at each other, and there are the damn spammers... all of s>> those things are facts of life in Usenet. dt>>

ii>> This childish, stupid idiocy that we see here, with a small handful fn>> of people going off on each other and with 10's or more posts, fg>> usually with the exactly the same copied and pasted garbage is e >> something else again... at least the damn spammers are trying to rI>> make a dishonest buck, these guys haven't even risen to that level. e >>

ng>> Jeff DeWitt tu>>

e>

ts> Funny stuff from a guy whos been using usenet for 10 years yet still hs> top posts a response. a.> n

Yup. Just like every Real American, we don't cut and run! God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O mailto: snipped-for-privacy@aol.com

Some people get all bent out of shape if you top post, some get all bent out of shape if you bottom posts.... deal with it, it's not worth getting bent out of shape over.

If a thread really gets going the people participating have been following it and why do they want to see the same stuff over and over again before getting to the content of the new post?

.... at least discussing top posting and bottom posting is better than discussing peoples alleged personal relationships with farm animals!

Jeff DeWitt

Jeff DeWitt wrote: