Found Collection

> [start quote]

> Hi Jerry (and others)

> Is there still a large amount of spam in this NG? My ISP filters it so I
> don't get any, that's one of the reasons I stopped adding the (RCSD) prefix.
> But if there is either a) a very low signal/noise ration and/or b) a large
> number of readers who would appreciate it, I'm willing to go into rehab and
> train myself ;-)

> Jan

> --
> ===========================================================================-=============http://www.jandoggen.org? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?http://www.beautyofpeople.comhttp://www.puddingclub.nl

> >Greetings all. ?At the moment I am seeing very little, if any, ?of the
> >spam that infiltrated the newsgroup.
> >I like the concept of using the RCSD as a way around the spam. I never
> >did figured out to use that filter but continued to look closely at
> >the subject before opening.

> >Ralphael, the OLD one

> It's like reading a magazine, check the TOC (headers) and turn to the pages
> (download) the articles (messages) that interest you!

> It's called being 'grown up' and 'able to make decisions' !

> Thankfully you're one of those able to accept personal responsibility and
> not whine that the should be 'protected' ... cradle to coffin!

>> >Greetings all. ?At the moment I am seeing very little, if any, ?of the
>> >spam that infiltrated the newsgroup.
>> >I like the concept of using the RCSD as a way around the spam. I never
>> >did figured out to use that filter but continued to look closely at
>> >the subject before opening.

>> >Ralphael, the OLD one

>> It's like reading a magazine, check the TOC (headers) and turn to the pages
>> (download) the articles (messages) that interest you!

>> It's called being 'grown up' and 'able to make decisions' !

>> Thankfully you're one of those able to accept personal responsibility and
>> not whine that the should be 'protected' ... cradle to coffin!

>Hi
>      As one of the original signers when the group was split into
>market and discussion, I might forget to place the 6 characters in
>front. I think there was more spam before the split than after. Some
>of the other groups seem to have more than this one. This is also true
>in some of the Yahoo groups.

> Is there still a large amount of spam in this NG? My ISP filters it so I
> don't get any, that's one of the reasons I stopped adding the (RCSD)
> prefix. But if there is either a) a very low signal/noise ration and/or b)
> a large number of readers who would appreciate it, I'm willing to go into
> rehab and train myself ;-)

> Jan

>[start quote]

>> Hi Jerry (and others)

>> Is there still a large amount of spam in this NG? My ISP filters it so I
>> don't get any, that's one of the reasons I stopped adding the (RCSD)
>> prefix. But if there is either a) a very low signal/noise ration and/or b)
>> a large number of readers who would appreciate it, I'm willing to go into
>> rehab and train myself ;-)

>> Jan

>I see no need for the RCSD prefix anymore because I see practically no spam.
>That should be the reason why the prefix was progressively abandoned.

>As for switching to a moderated NG, I see no need for this either. I doubt
>that the majority of participants would agree with this idea after so many
>years of freedom (even if moderation is not censorship but in our case just
>an unnecessary limitation). The NG has demonstrated in the many years of its
>existence that the participants can manage it without big problems.

>>I see no need for the RCSD prefix anymore because I see practically no
>>spam.
>>That should be the reason why the prefix was progressively abandoned.

>>As for switching to a moderated NG, I see no need for this either. I doubt
>>that the majority of participants would agree with this idea after so many
>>years of freedom (even if moderation is not censorship but in our case
>>just
>>an unnecessary limitation). The NG has demonstrated in the many years of
>>its
>>existence that the participants can manage it without big problems. (VM)

> Censorship, supervision and control of the information and ideas that
> are circulated among the people within a society. In modern times,
> censorship refers to the examination of books, periodicals, plays,
> films, television and radio programs, news reports, and other
> communication media for the purpose of altering or suppressing parts
> thought to be objectionable or offensive.

>>>I see no need for the RCSD prefix anymore because I see practically no
>>>spam.
>>>That should be the reason why the prefix was progressively abandoned.

>>>As for switching to a moderated NG, I see no need for this either. I doubt
>>>that the majority of participants would agree with this idea after so many
>>>years of freedom (even if moderation is not censorship but in our case
>>>just
>>>an unnecessary limitation). The NG has demonstrated in the many years of
>>>its
>>>existence that the participants can manage it without big problems. (VM)

>> Censorship, supervision and control of the information and ideas that
>> are circulated among the people within a society. In modern times,
>> censorship refers to the examination of books, periodicals, plays,
>> films, television and radio programs, news reports, and other
>> communication media for the purpose of altering or suppressing parts
>> thought to be objectionable or offensive.

>Well, yes, it's an enumeration of the consequences of censorship. I just
>wonder who can enforce censorship, excepting for governments?

>For example can you, Tracy, hinder me posting anything I want against the
>moderation of this NG? Actually, you cannot, only government could, by
>imprisoning me if I continue asserting that this NG needs no moderation. So
>catch me if you can but moderately :-)

>>> On Sun, 1 Jun 2008 21:31:31 +0200, "Victor Manta"

>>>>I see no need for the RCSD prefix anymore because I see practically no
>>>>spam.
>>>>That should be the reason why the prefix was progressively abandoned.

>>>>As for switching to a moderated NG, I see no need for this either. I
>>>>doubt
>>>>that the majority of participants would agree with this idea after so
>>>>many
>>>>years of freedom (even if moderation is not censorship but in our case
>>>>just
>>>>an unnecessary limitation). The NG has demonstrated in the many years of
>>>>its
>>>>existence that the participants can manage it without big problems. (VM)

>>> Censorship, supervision and control of the information and ideas that
>>> are circulated among the people within a society. In modern times,
>>> censorship refers to the examination of books, periodicals, plays,
>>> films, television and radio programs, news reports, and other
>>> communication media for the purpose of altering or suppressing parts
>>> thought to be objectionable or offensive.

>>Well, yes, it's an enumeration of the consequences of censorship. I just
>>wonder who can enforce censorship, excepting for governments?

>>For example can you, Tracy, hinder me posting anything I want against the
>>moderation of this NG? Actually, you cannot, only government could, by
>>imprisoning me if I continue asserting that this NG needs no moderation.
>>So
>>catch me if you can but moderately :-)

> Ahhh, but since there's no mechanism in place to moderately moderate
> you, we'll all have to take it in moderation.  Obfuscation squared!

> If, however, there was a moderator in place, and all Usenet messages
> went through that screening, that person could limit what others see
> of your posts irregardless of hospitals, institutions or other sordid
> places where the government is keeping you.  ;^)

> The "Where's Wally?" mousehttp://cjoint.com/data/gecAY8aRXC.htm

>The "Where's Wally?" mouse
>http://cjoint.com/data/gecAY8aRXC.htm

>"Blair (TC)" > And a famous mouse here....
>> http://www.cricketstamp.net/084a.jpg