Hey everyone. I'm new here so just wanted to say hello. Looking
forward to hearing about your grilling and cooking experiences or
other unrelated posts. Talk to you later

On 1/24/2010 12:33 PM, Sosios wrote:
> Hey everyone. I'm new here so just wanted to say hello. Looking
> forward to hearing about your grilling and cooking experiences or
> other unrelated posts. Talk to you later
Hello back, welcome and feel free to participate and ask questions as
needed.

--
piedmont, The Practical BBQ'r

http://sites.google.com/site/thepracticalbbqr/

"piedmont" > wrote in message
...
> On 1/24/2010 12:33 PM, Sosios wrote:
>> Hey everyone. I'm new here so just wanted to say hello. Looking
>> forward to hearing about your grilling and cooking experiences or
>> other unrelated posts. Talk to you later

> Hello back, welcome and feel free to participate and ask questions as
> needed.

and take everything with a grain of salt (and some granulated garlic and
onion).

And, with all forums, ignore the threads that get, well, you know.

What have you grilled or BBQ'd lately? What are you interested in doing?

On Jan 24, 9:33*am, Sosios > wrote:
> Hey everyone. I'm new here so just wanted to say hello. Looking
> forward to hearing about your grilling and cooking experiences or
> other unrelated posts. Talk to you later

Check out the great FAQ, I was amazed at it's depth. It's a wonderful
collection of know how and how-to along with a plethora (yes,
plethora) of recipes.


Copied from the original:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.f...479f177968d e

You can get a copy of the latest BBQ List FAQ
in one of the following ways:


1) Vince Vielhaber has set up an email autoresponder.


Send email to:

and you'll get the ascii text version, zipped up, by return
email.


Send mail to:

and you'll get the ascii text version in a self extracting zip
file
by return email.



and you'll get a straight ascii version, not zipped.



and you will get the MS Word 6.0 version in a self-extracting
zip file
by return mail.


Leave the subject and message body blank.


2) You can also get the BBQ List FAQ by visiting Vince's Web
site:


http://www.eaglequest.com/~bbq/


You can download several different formats of the FAQ here.


You can also view the FAQ in HTML format he


http://www.eaglequest.com/~bbq/faq


3) You can read the FAQ on Dan Gill's Barbecue Survival Guide
Web
page at:


http://members.tripod.com/~DanGill/Survive.HTML


4) Alex Baker has Word 6.0 and Adobe Acrobat versions of the
FAQ available for downloading.


His Web site is http://www.calweb.com/~ambaker/bbqfaq.html


Or you can get them directly via ftp by:


ftp://ftp.calweb.com/users/a/ambaker/faq-word.zip
ftp://ftp.calweb.com/users/a/ambaker/faq-10.doc
ftp://ftp.calweb.com/users/a/ambaker/faq-acro.pdf


Alex also has a link to download the Adobe Acrobat viewer.
The Acrobat version of the FAQ has internal links from the
Table of Contents to the respective sections in the document.


For those of you who do not have MS Word 6.0 or 7.0 or Word 97 who
wish to read
the FAQ in Word format, you can download the MS Word Viewer from
Microsoft for
free. The Word viewer will allow you to view MS Word documents and
print
them, but not edit them or create new documents.


Here's how to get it:


Set your Web browser to:


http://www.microsoft.com/msword/internet/viewer/


and select the version for the Windows operating system you have:


The 97 version for Win95 and the 16-bit version for Win3.1x


Bill

"Tutall" > wrote in message
...
On Jan 24, 9:33 am, Sosios > wrote:
> Hey everyone. I'm new here so just wanted to say hello. Looking
> forward to hearing about your grilling and cooking experiences or
> other unrelated posts. Talk to you later

Check out the great FAQ, I was amazed at it's depth. It's a wonderful
collection of know how and how-to along with a plethora (yes,
plethora) of recipes.

Plethora is best smoked, no?

On Jan 24, 1:23*pm, "Wallace" > wrote:
> "Tutall" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> On Jan 24, 9:33 am, Sosios > wrote:
>
> > Hey everyone. I'm new here so just wanted to say hello. Looking
> > forward to hearing about your grilling and cooking experiences or
> > other unrelated posts. Talk to you later
>
> Check out the great FAQ, I was amazed at it's depth. It's a wonderful
> collection of know how and how-to along with a plethora (yes,
> plethora) of recipes.
>
> Plethora is best smoked, no?

Well, considering that that's illegal in 49 states, I wouldn't suggest
it.
And there's seasonality to consider too, in winter there's a dearth of
plethora. So you won't find any on your winter snipe hunt.

Sosios > wrote:
> Hey everyone. I'm new here so just wanted to say hello. Looking
> forward to hearing about your grilling and cooking experiences or
> other unrelated posts. Talk to you later

Hi Sosios. Welcome. What do you grill or BBQ? What part of the world are
you in?

--
Nick, KI6VAV. Support severely wounded and disabled Veterans and their
families: https://www.woundedwarriorproject.org/ Thank a Veteran!
Support Our Troops: http://anymarine.com/ You are not forgotten.
Thanks ! ! ~Semper Fi~ USMC 1365061

> > On 1/24/2010 12:33 PM, Sosios wrote:
> >> Hey everyone. I'm new here so just wanted to say hello. Looking
> >> forward to hearing about your grilling and cooking experiences or
> >> other unrelated posts. Talk to you later

Also, check out the a.f.b FAQ http://www.eaglequest.com/~bbq/

--
Nick, KI6VAV. Support severely wounded and disabled Veterans and their
families: https://www.woundedwarriorproject.org/ Thank a Veteran!
Support Our Troops: http://anymarine.com/ You are not forgotten.
Thanks ! ! ~Semper Fi~ USMC 1365061

Sosios wrote:
> Hey everyone. I'm new here so just wanted to say hello. Looking
> forward to hearing about your grilling and cooking experiences or
> other unrelated posts. Talk to you later

You will find the folks here to be amazingly talented and extremely
helpful. I have.

--
Janet Wilder
Way-the-heck-south Texas
Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.

On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 19:37:13 -0600, Janet Wilder
> wrote:

>Sosios wrote:
>> Hey everyone. I'm new here so just wanted to say hello. Looking
>> forward to hearing about your grilling and cooking experiences or
>> other unrelated posts. Talk to you later
>
>You will find the folks here to be amazingly talented and extremely
>helpful. I have.


That may be true, but Sosios will never be heard from again. Similar
messages have been posted in a half dozen groups from different emails
in the past few months. The all the same "I'm new here" routine and
gone. I have to wonder if they are trying to harvest email addresses
or just trying to see if the group is active for spam at a later date.

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
<snip>
>> You will find the folks here to be amazingly talented and extremely
>> helpful. I have.
>
>
> That may be true, but Sosios will never be heard from again.

Oh sure "he" will be... in a few days when his spam post appears. Sadly,
people will probably reply to that as well...


--
Steve

On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 09:33:57 -0800 (PST), Sosios wrote:

> Hey everyone. I'm new here so just wanted to say hello. Looking
> forward to hearing about your grilling and cooking experiences or
> other unrelated posts. Talk to you later

Does anybody know for sure the source of all these increasingly
annoying damn posts?

They all pretty much say the same thing, and almost all of them
contain the phrase "looking forward .. hearing/learning about...".

I'm sure they're all from different people (rather then some bored
troll). They're from all over the world and they've been increasing
in numbers/frequency for a couple years across all the groups. They
have no history of postings, nor any future posts.

I figure it's from a Internet or ESL book or a lesson plan that's
been translated into a bunch of languages (unlikely). Or maybe it's
a form of therapy suggested by doctors for some sort of mental
disorder or depression (a condition worse than "Chronic Usenet
Posting").

(Cross-posted to NSR, where its also OT but maybe a little more
clueful).

-sw

Sqwertz > wrote:

> Does anybody know for sure the source of all these increasingly
> annoying damn posts?

Setting a kill file on (the "googlegroups" portion) of the Message-ID:
googlegroups, would put an end to 95% of your annoyances.

--
dee

On Jan 25, 12:50*am, Nick Cramer > wrote:
> Sosios > wrote:
> > Hey everyone. I'm new here so just wanted to say hello. Looking
> > forward to hearing about your grilling and cooking experiences or
> > other unrelated posts. Talk to you later
>
> Hi Sosios. Welcome. What do you grill or BBQ? What part of the world are
> you in?

Hey I grill whatevers available at the given time from Norway

On Jan 25, 3:53*am, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 19:37:13 -0600, Janet Wilder
>
> > wrote:
> >Sosios wrote:
> >> Hey everyone. I'm new here so just wanted to say hello. Looking
> >> forward to hearing about your grilling and cooking experiences or
> >> other unrelated posts. Talk to you later
>
> >You will find the folks here to be amazingly talented and extremely
> >helpful. I have.
>
> That may be true, but Sosios will never be heard from again. *Similar
> messages have been posted in a half dozen groups from different emails
> in the past few months. *The all the same "I'm new here" routine and
> gone. *I have to wonder if they are trying to harvest email addresses
> or just trying to see if the group is active for spam at a later date.

hehe, dont be so sure about that. I'm here to stay

On Jan 25, 4:20*am, Steve Calvin > wrote:
> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >> You will find the folks here to be amazingly talented and extremely
> >> helpful. I have.
>
> > That may be true, but Sosios will never be heard from again. *
>
> Oh sure "he" will be... in a few days when his spam post appears. Sadly,
> people will probably reply to that as well...
>
> --
> Steve

Hehe. You people have no faith in humanity. I'm not here to spam
anything. I dont know why everyone thinks I'm a spammer though

On Jan 24, 8:51*pm, Mike Dee > wrote:
> Sqwertz > wrote:
> > Does anybody know for sure the source of all these increasingly
> > annoying damn posts?
>
> Setting a kill file on (the "googlegroups" portion) of the Message-ID:
> googlegroups, would put an end to 95% of your annoyances.
>
> --
> dee

I resemble that remark!

On 25 Jan 2010 05:51:17 +0100, Mike Dee >
wrote:

>Sqwertz > wrote:
>
>> Does anybody know for sure the source of all these increasingly
>> annoying damn posts?
>
>Setting a kill file on (the "googlegroups" portion) of the Message-ID:
>googlegroups, would put an end to 95% of your annoyances.

It might put and end to your seeing my posts too, if 'Google Groups'
also filters gmail addresses.


Desideria

Tutall > wrote:

> On Jan 24, 8:51*pm, Mike Dee > wrote:
>> Sqwertz > wrote:
>> > Does anybody know for sure the source of all these increasingly
>> > annoying damn posts?
>>
>> Setting a kill file on (the "googlegroups" portion) of the
>> Message-ID: googlegroups, would put an end to 95% of your
>> annoyances.
>
> I resemble that remark!

Perhaps, but the one or two clued up G2 posters don't make up for
the abuse.

Those few that don't abuse googlegroups (I'm assuming like yourself)
can easily be put into "white-list" if using use a half-decent
newsreader.

--
dee

On Jan 24, 10:12*pm, Mike Dee > wrote:
> Tutall > wrote:
> > On Jan 24, 8:51*pm, Mike Dee > wrote:
> >> Sqwertz > wrote:
> >> > Does anybody know for sure the source of all these increasingly
> >> > annoying damn posts?
>
> >> Setting a kill file on (the "googlegroups" portion) of the
> >> Message-ID: googlegroups, would put an end to 95% of your
> >> annoyances.
>
> > I resemble that remark!
>
> Perhaps, but the one or two clued up G2 posters don't make up for
> the abuse.

There are groups where that'd be true. But most of those succumbed to
the spammers long ago.
Here, and even more so in the RFC group, the spam is minimal. No
shotgun type of filter needed.
If and when a group requires that much filtering? Call the priest,
it's dead..

You have to have really low tolerances to use such a blanket filter as
that. I'm not aware of groups that these posters effect at any rate.
Maybe they are bad somewhere, but I've not seen it. Have examples?

Tutall > wrote:

> You have to have really low tolerances to use such a blanket
> filter as that. I'm not aware of groups that these posters effect
> at any rate. Maybe they are bad somewhere, but I've not seen it.
> Have examples?

Go google it ;-)

--
dee

Bada bing Tutall > bada bang:
> On Jan 24, 10:12Â*pm, Mike Dee > wrote:
>> Tutall > wrote:
>> > On Jan 24, 8:51Â*pm, Mike Dee > wrote:
>> >> Sqwertz > wrote:
>> >> > Does anybody know for sure the source of all these increasingly
>> >> > annoying damn posts?
>>
>> >> Setting a kill file on (the "googlegroups" portion) of the
>> >> Message-ID: googlegroups, would put an end to 95% of your
>> >> annoyances.
>>
>> > I resemble that remark!
>>
>> Perhaps, but the one or two clued up G2 posters don't make up for
>> the abuse.
>
> There are groups where that'd be true. But most of those succumbed to
> the spammers long ago.
> Here, and even more so in the RFC group, the spam is minimal. No
> shotgun type of filter needed.
> If and when a group requires that much filtering? Call the priest,
> it's dead..
>

No the group isn't dead, just hidden in the signal to noise
ration.

> You have to have really low tolerances to use such a blanket filter as
> that. I'm not aware of groups that these posters effect at any rate.
> Maybe they are bad somewhere, but I've not seen it. Have examples?
>

Allowing original posts from GG gives a s/n of about -30
decibels. Note that allowing replies from GG gives a much better
ratio.

Mike "and eliminates drive-bys" Yetto
--
In theory, theory and practice are the same.
In practice they are not.

Sqwertz wrote:

> I'm sure they're all from different people (rather then some bored
> troll). They're from all over the world and they've been increasing
> in numbers/frequency for a couple years across all the groups. They
> have no history of postings, nor any future posts.

Figures. The one in 200+ posts I chose to respond to, the guy actually
does come back! Probably just to spite me, no doubt ;-)

-sw

Mike Dee wrote:
> > wrote:
>
>> Does anybody know for sure the source of all these increasingly
>> annoying damn posts?
>
> Setting a kill file on (the "googlegroups" portion) of the Message-ID:
> googlegroups, would put an end to 95% of your annoyances.

I'm a big fan of killfiling Google. For me, the thread is killfiled when
started by a Googleposter. But a followup by a non-Googleposter will
unignore the thread,. This solves 95% of the problem (obvious Googlespam).

But that wasn't the question.

-sw

Mike Dee wrote:
> > wrote:
>
>> On Jan 24, 8:51 pm, Mike > wrote:
>>> > wrote:
>>>> Does anybody know for sure the source of all these increasingly
>>>> annoying damn posts?
>>>
>>> Setting a kill file on (the "googlegroups" portion) of the
>>> Message-ID: googlegroups, would put an end to 95% of your
>>> annoyances.
>>
>> I resemble that remark!
>
> Perhaps, but the one or two clued up G2 posters don't make up for
> the abuse.
>
> Those few that don't abuse googlegroups (I'm assuming like yourself)
> can easily be put into "white-list" if using use a half-decent
> newsreader.

The best solution is something available in Dialog, at least.

Unselect "Watch/Ignore works on subthreads"
Score all googleposts with -1 (or worse)
Select "Ignore posts with negative score"
Set your view to "not ignored" "Show all posts in thread"

What this boils down to is "Ignore all threads consisting of only
Googlposters". Which is a good trade-off between the maintenance of a
white-list and the killfiling of most spam.

-sw

Desideria wrote:
> On 25 Jan 2010 05:51:17 +0100, Mike >
> wrote:
>
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Does anybody know for sure the source of all these increasingly
>>> annoying damn posts?
>>
>> Setting a kill file on (the "googlegroups" portion) of the Message-ID:
>> googlegroups, would put an end to 95% of your annoyances.
>
> It might put and end to your seeing my posts too, if 'Google Groups'
> also filters gmail addresses.

That's a decision you've made. You can easily change that to something
like ".

Some newsreader don't offer a way to killfile Googleposters except by
identifying likely Googleposters by their gmail address.

-sw

Steve Ackman wrote:
> >, on Sun, 24 Jan 2010 21:48:12 -0600,
> Sqwertz, ost wrote:
>> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 09:33:57 -0800 (PST), Sosios wrote:
>>
>>> Hey everyone. I'm new here so just wanted to say hello. Looking
>>> forward to hearing about your grilling and cooking experiences or
>>> other unrelated posts. Talk to you later
>>
>> Does anybody know for sure the source of all these increasingly
>> annoying damn posts?
>
> I haven't seen any. Guess I have better filters
> than you do. ;-)

Bet my filters are better than yours!

As explained in another post, I see Google-initiated threads only if
non-Googlers choose to respond (indicating that they may be genuine posts).

These types of posts almost always get a "Welcome, glad to see you"- from
some clueless do-gooders. So I see these types of threads.

Nevermind that this guy actually did posts followups.

-sw

Steve Calvin wrote:
> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> <snip>
>>> You will find the folks here to be amazingly talented and extremely
>>> helpful. I have.
>>
>>
>> That may be true, but Sosios will never be heard from again.
>
> Oh sure "he" will be... in a few days when his spam post appears. Sadly,
> people will probably reply to that as well...

I just don't see any logic at all in this argument. Assuming he didn't
post followups, there is just no sense manually harvesting email addresses
like this when you can have a computer harvest them automatically for free
and obtain 500x as many valid addresses.

You can also harvest the activity of the group using any news service
automatically. There's no reason to post to it to "test the waters".

I emailed him when I thought he wasn't going to return. I asked him why
he posted in the first place just because I was curious. So we;ll see if
*I* get any spam.

-sw

Sosios wrote:

> hehe, dont be so sure about that. I'm here to stay


You are the first person I've seen who had that "signature post" that
included all the key words that send up red flags for some of us.

I emailed you out of genuine curiosity. Wasn't trying to be a dick (or
whatever they call it in Norway ;-)

So, tell us about smoked whale meat.

-sw

Sqwertz wrote:
> Steve Calvin wrote:
>> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> <snip>
>>>> You will find the folks here to be amazingly talented and extremely
>>>> helpful. I have.
>>>
>>>
>>> That may be true, but Sosios will never be heard from again.
>>
>> Oh sure "he" will be... in a few days when his spam post appears. Sadly,
>> people will probably reply to that as well...
>
> I just don't see any logic at all in this argument. Assuming he didn't
> post followups, there is just no sense manually harvesting email
> addresses like this when you can have a computer harvest them
> automatically for free and obtain 500x as many valid addresses.
>
> You can also harvest the activity of the group using any news service
> automatically. There's no reason to post to it to "test the waters".
>
> I emailed him when I thought he wasn't going to return. I asked him why
> he posted in the first place just because I was curious. So we;ll see
> if *I* get any spam.
>
> -sw

huh? what arguement? I was just stating that when the spam post with
link appears that people will reply to it like trained sock puppets.

--
Steve

Sosios > wrote:
> On Jan 25, 12:50=A0am, Nick Cramer > wrote:
> > Sosios > wrote:
> > > Hey everyone. I'm new here so just wanted to say hello. Looking
> > > forward to hearing about your grilling and cooking experiences or
> > > other unrelated posts. Talk to you later
> >
> > Hi Sosios. Welcome. What do you grill or BBQ? What part of the world
> > are you in?
>
> Hey I grill whatevers available at the given time from Norway

Are you one of these? LMAO

http://img5.tinypic.info/files/5dcez1wzlujgkisistm7.jpg

--
Nick, KI6VAV. Support severely wounded and disabled Veterans and their
families: https://www.woundedwarriorproject.org/ Thank a Veteran!
Support Our Troops: http://anymarine.com/ You are not forgotten.
Thanks ! ! ~Semper Fi~ USMC 1365061

In article >,
Sqwertz > wrote:

> Mike Dee wrote:
[...]
> >>> Setting a kill file on (the "googlegroups" portion) of the
> >>> Message-ID: googlegroups, would put an end to 95% of your
> >>> annoyances.
[...]
>
> The best solution is something available in Dialog, at least.
>
> Unselect "Watch/Ignore works on subthreads"
> Score all googleposts with -1 (or worse)
> Select "Ignore posts with negative score"
> Set your view to "not ignored" "Show all posts in thread"
>
> What this boils down to is "Ignore all threads consisting of only
> Googlposters". Which is a good trade-off between the maintenance of a
> white-list and the killfiling of most spam.

Setting a kill file on "Message-ID: googlegroups" does exactly what you
just described. Kills only the messenger. Embellishing this further with
a white-list is only an after-thought ;-)

I do tend to up-score responses to GG posts tho' so that I can be
alerted beforehand that a response is to a GG post. Usually the Subject
header gives a good clue at that point on whether or not to go into the
thread.

That is; I must've been bored to have opened your xposted OP. :-)

--
dee

On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 12:15:22 -0600, Sqwertz >
wrote:

>Desideria wrote:
>> On 25 Jan 2010 05:51:17 +0100, Mike >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Does anybody know for sure the source of all these increasingly
>>>> annoying damn posts?
>>>
>>> Setting a kill file on (the "googlegroups" portion) of the Message-ID:
>>> googlegroups, would put an end to 95% of your annoyances.
>>
>> It might put and end to your seeing my posts too, if 'Google Groups'
>> also filters gmail addresses.
>
>That's a decision you've made. You can easily change that to something
>like ".
>
>Some newsreader don't offer a way to killfile Googleposters except by
>identifying likely Googleposters by their gmail address.
>
>-sw

Sqwertz, maybe it's my low-tech skills but I haven't found any way to
munge my email.


Desideria

Bada bing Steve Ackman > bada bang:
> In >, on Mon, 25 Jan 2010 12:19:57
> -0600, Sqwertz, ost wrote:
>
>> Bet my filters are better than yours!
>
> Guess it depends on whose definition of better. ;-)
>
>> As explained in another post, I see Google-initiated threads only if
>> non-Googlers choose to respond (indicating that they may be genuine posts).
>
> I also ignore google initiated posts, but if someone
> uses google to respond, I see it. I did that because
> there are some groups I follow that consist of as many
> gogglers as not. Sad but true.
>

I thought I was being clever by only filtering GG on the first
post but not replies. Was I deluding myself, or are we (tinw)
all very clever?

Mike "guess which one I choose" Yetto
--
In theory, theory and practice are the same.
In practice they are not.


<PRE>
Scoring posts from Google is nuts.

Here's a <A hRef="http://jeffrelf.f-m.fm/Authors; from Most·to·Least Engaging .PNG">screen·shot</A> of My €œhand rolled€� news·reader €œ<A href="http://jeffrelf.f-m.fm/X.EXE">X.EXE*</A>€�
displaying recent ( Jan 25^th, 2010 ) News.Software.Readers Authors;
from Most·to·Least €œEngaging€� ( i.e. by xRank ).
[ *: X.EXE needs the <A href="http://jeffrelf.f-m.fm/DejaVuSansMono.TTF">DejaVuSansMono.TTF</A> font
and it won't run under Aero; you have to change your €œTheme€�
from €œVista Aero€� to €œWindows Classic€� ( or €œWindows Vista Basic€� )
and uncheck €œEnable Transparency€� at €œWindows Color and Appearance€�.
( right-click your desktop and go to Personalize ) ]

To raise the signal·to·noise ratio,
I €œJoin€�, €œVisit€�, €œLimit€� and €œAvoid€� authors.

First, I read all replies to me, no matter who it is.

Second, I read all replies to the authors I've €œJoined*€�.
[ *: this is similar to how I read all replies to me expect
it doesn't include €œavoided€� authors. ]

For examples, see X.EXE's settings·file: €œ<A href="http://jeffrelf.f-m.fm/X.TXT">X.TXT</A>€�.

Third, I read all posts from authors I'm €œVisiting€�.

Fourth, I €œavoid*€� certain authors by
auotmatically marking nearly all of their posts €œWas·Read€�.
[ *: yet I read replies from them and, at times, I reply back ]

Everyone else is €œLimited*€�.
[ *: all but their last 5 posts are automatically marked ·Was·Read· and
posts older than 24 hours are automatically marked €œWas·Read€� and,
if they haven't posted in the last 9 days, they're 100% dropped.

No author can have more than 30 €œWas·Read€� posts. ]

€œLimited€� authors are sorted by €œxRank*€� (like Google's Page·Rank);
where Message-IDs are the links/votes pointing to €œAuthor·Pages€�.
[ *: i.e. from Most·to·Least €œEngaging€� ]

Traversing all €œthreads€� (i.e. every path in the root/tree), generally,
the higher a author's xRank the more often its posts are encountered;
however, ancestors endow descendants and vise versa (it goes both ways).

The €œweight€� (a.k.a. xRank/vote) each descendant gives its ancestors
diminishes with cross·posting and generational·distance.

On Jan 25, 6:57*pm, Mike Yetto > wrote:

>
> I thought I was being clever by only filtering GG on the first
> post but not replies. *Was I deluding myself, or are we (tinw)
> all very clever?
>
> Mike "guess which one I choose" Yetto

Yes to both?

<eg>

On Jan 25, 5:36*pm, Desideria > wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 12:15:22 -0600, Sqwertz >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >Desideria wrote:
> >> On 25 Jan 2010 05:51:17 +0100, Mike >
> >> wrote:
>
> >>> > *wrote:
>
> >>>> Does anybody know for sure the source of all these increasingly
> >>>> annoying damn posts?
>
> >>> Setting a kill file on (the "googlegroups" portion) of the Message-ID:
> >>> googlegroups, would put an end to 95% of your annoyances.
>
> >> It might put and end to your seeing my posts too, if 'Google Groups'
> >> also filters gmail addresses.
>
> >That's a decision you've made. *You can easily change that to something
> >like ".
>
> >Some newsreader don't offer a way to killfile Googleposters except by
> >identifying likely Googleposters by their gmail address.
>
> >-sw
>
> Sqwertz, maybe it's my low-tech skills but I haven't found any way to
> munge my email.
>
> Desideria- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

You're using Forte Agent, so you can do it, patience. Browsing through
your options will not only show you how to do this, but quite a few
other useful things I expect. Pour yourself your libation of choice
and set aside 10 minutes to go through it. It's fun and rewarding.

Okay, fun for some anyway, so give it a try. Forte's help function is
pretty robust too if you tire of that.

On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:10:39 -0500, Steve Calvin wrote:

> Sqwertz wrote:
>> Steve Calvin wrote:
>>> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>> <snip>
>>>>> You will find the folks here to be amazingly talented and extremely
>>>>> helpful. I have.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That may be true, but Sosios will never be heard from again.
>>>
>>> Oh sure "he" will be... in a few days when his spam post appears. Sadly,
>>> people will probably reply to that as well...
>>
>> I just don't see any logic at all in this argument. Assuming he didn't
>> post followups, there is just no sense manually harvesting email
>> addresses like this when you can have a computer harvest them
>> automatically for free and obtain 500x as many valid addresses.
>>
>> You can also harvest the activity of the group using any news service
>> automatically. There's no reason to post to it to "test the waters".
>>
>> I emailed him when I thought he wasn't going to return. I asked him why
>> he posted in the first place just because I was curious. So we;ll see
>> if *I* get any spam.
>
> huh? what arguement?

What are *you* talking about. Argument?

> I was just stating that when the spam post with
> link appears that people will reply to it like trained sock puppets.

I was responding to yours and Ed's claim that he is harvesting email
addresses or preparing to spam the group. That's just nonsense.
There's no pattern or any noticeable history of anybody doing what
you claim.

-sw

On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 11:38:32 +1100, Mike Dee wrote:

> In article >,
> Sqwertz > wrote:
>
>> Mike Dee wrote:
> [...]
>>>>> Setting a kill file on (the "googlegroups" portion) of the
>>>>> Message-ID: googlegroups, would put an end to 95% of your
>>>>> annoyances.
> [...]
>>
>> The best solution is something available in Dialog, at least.
>>
>> Unselect "Watch/Ignore works on subthreads"
>> Score all googleposts with -1 (or worse)
>> Select "Ignore posts with negative score"
>> Set your view to "not ignored" "Show all posts in thread"
>>
>> What this boils down to is "Ignore all threads consisting of only
>> Googlposters". Which is a good trade-off between the maintenance of a
>> white-list and the killfiling of most spam.
>
> Setting a kill file on "Message-ID: googlegroups" does exactly what you
> just described.

Not quite.

-sw

Sqwertz wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:10:39 -0500, Steve Calvin wrote:
>
>> Sqwertz wrote:
>>> Steve Calvin wrote:
>>>> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>> <snip>
>>>>>> You will find the folks here to be amazingly talented and extremely
>>>>>> helpful. I have.
>>>>>
>>>>> That may be true, but Sosios will never be heard from again.
>>>> Oh sure "he" will be... in a few days when his spam post appears. Sadly,
>>>> people will probably reply to that as well...
>>> I just don't see any logic at all in this argument. Assuming he didn't
>>> post followups, there is just no sense manually harvesting email
>>> addresses like this when you can have a computer harvest them
>>> automatically for free and obtain 500x as many valid addresses.
>>>
>>> You can also harvest the activity of the group using any news service
>>> automatically. There's no reason to post to it to "test the waters".
>>>
>>> I emailed him when I thought he wasn't going to return. I asked him why
>>> he posted in the first place just because I was curious. So we;ll see
>>> if *I* get any spam.
>> huh? what arguement?
>
> What are *you* talking about. Argument?
>
>> I was just stating that when the spam post with
>> link appears that people will reply to it like trained sock puppets.
>
> I was responding to yours and Ed's claim that he is harvesting email
> addresses or preparing to spam the group. That's just nonsense.
> There's no pattern or any noticeable history of anybody doing what
> you claim.
>
> -sw

I claimed/said absolutely nothing of the sort. I DID say that a spam
post would likely follow and be replied to... thereby perpetuating the
spammers cause... but whatever - let's just move on down the road a
piece and see what happens... ;-)

--
Steve