How did you guys get all these OT conspiracy $!@$%!! types here?

[Dallas]

Why are they here? I guess trying to disrupt them by all of us posting a
blank reply 5 times a day would only encourage them?

Dallas

[Peter R.]

Dallas > wrote:

> Why are they here? I guess trying to disrupt them by all of us posting a
> blank reply 5 times a day would only encourage them?

What conspiracy types?

Oh, I guess my killfilters are working overtime. Cool.

--
Peter

[Bob Noel]

In article t>,
"Dallas" > wrote:

> Why are they here? I guess trying to disrupt them by all of us posting a
> blank reply 5 times a day would only encourage them?

killfile killfile killfiles

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article t>,
"Dallas" > wrote:

> Why are they here? I guess trying to disrupt them by all of us posting a
> blank reply 5 times a day would only encourage them?
>
> Dallas

They came here seeking answers as to whether or not the hijackers,
trained only in GA planes and simulators, could have flown to their
targets. When the resounding answer was "YES", they stayed and tried to
impress us with their kookbabble, nonsequitors and phony "experts."

They were surprised to find a whole suite of professions and experience
in this newsgroup and were chagrined when nobody agreed with their
notions.

[John Clear]

In article >,
Peter R. > wrote:
>Dallas > wrote:
>
>> Why are they here? I guess trying to disrupt them by all of us posting a
>> blank reply 5 times a day would only encourage them?
>
>What conspiracy types?
>
>Oh, I guess my killfilters are working overtime. Cool.

Same here. I had 250 unread articles when entering this group, but only
35 after my killfile did its thing.

I kill anything crossposted to alt.disasters.aviation and anything
posted to more then five groups. That pretty much takes care of
all the trolls.

John
--
John Clear - http://www.clear-prop.org/

[Morgans]

"Bob Noel" > wrote
>
> killfile killfile killfiles

What are you using for detection, or keywords?
--
Jim in NC

[Morgans]

"John Clear" > wrote
>
> Same here. I had 250 unread articles when entering this group, but only
> 35 after my killfile did its thing.
>
> I kill anything crossposted to alt.disasters.aviation and anything
> posted to more then five groups. That pretty much takes care of
> all the trolls.

I sure wish OE had that kind of option, or that there was an EASY add on to
do it.
--
Jim in NC

[Montblack]

("Dallas" wrote)
> Why are they here? I guess trying to disrupt them by all of us posting a
> blank reply 5 times a day would only encourage them?


I'd been answering some of them - different name. I'd leave out our
newsgroup. That did cut down on a few of them because they'd reply (minus)
RAP. <g>

I haven't done it now for a while. Maybe I'll float a few more out there
tonight. :-)


Montblack-ops

[Bob Noel]

In article >, "Morgans" >
wrote:

> "Bob Noel" > wrote
> >
> > killfile killfile killfiles
>
> What are you using for detection, or keywords?

among my many criteria are kill if subject contains belfort, newgroups or xref
contains rec.travel.air (or alt.disasters.aviation).

I kill a few subject lines - often I use filters that expire.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[Montblack]

"Morgans"
> I sure wish OE had that kind of option, or that there was an EASY add on
> to
> do it.


M$ OE 6.0

Main OE page (Inbox)/Tools/Message Rules/News.../

Do one thing (checked box) for each Message Rule otherwise you get into an
AND... situation, if you try to have too many rules under one, um, ...er,
"rule."

You must click the little blue links, in the bottom (3rd) box, to complete
the Rule you checked (created).

New Message Rule #1
New Message Rule #2
New Message Rule #3
New Message Rule #4
New Message Rule #5 etc.

You can rename them if you'd like.

If you were talking, specifically, about a Message Rule filtering
crossposted threads ...I don't know. Maybe there's an EASY add on to do
that? <g>


Montblack

[John Clear]

In article >, Morgans > wrote:
>
>"John Clear" > wrote
>> I kill anything crossposted to alt.disasters.aviation and anything
>> posted to more then five groups. That pretty much takes care of
>> all the trolls.
>
>I sure wish OE had that kind of option, or that there was an EASY add on to
>do it.

There are other/better newsreaders out there for Winblows then OE. I've
heard people say nice things about Forte, but haven't played with it.

Being a Unix guy, all I need to put in my killfile is:

# kill anything xposted to ada
/alt.disasters.aviation/HXref:j=
# kill anything xposted to more then five groups.
/.*:.*:.*:.*:.*/HXref:j=

John
--
John Clear - http://www.clear-prop.org/

[Morgans]

"John Clear" > wrote

> There are other/better newsreaders out there for Winblows then OE. I've
> heard people say nice things about Forte, but haven't played with it.

All someone's opinion. In MY opinion, none of the other ones are as easy
and as logicaly laid outm, as OE.

> Being a Unix guy, all I need to put in my killfile is:
>
> # kill anything xposted to ada
> /alt.disasters.aviation/HXref:j=
> # kill anything xposted to more then five groups.
> /.*:.*:.*:.*:.*/HXref:j=

And I do wish there was an option to do that, with OE.
--
Jim in NC

[Morgans]

"Montblack" > wrote > M$ OE 6.0
>
> Main OE page (Inbox)/Tools/Message Rules/News.../
>
Yep, I know how to do that, but there never seems to be a good word to go
with, without occasionally killing a thread you want to keep.

I mostly just hit " mark conversation read," and go on.
--
Jim in NC

[Morgans]

"Bob Noel" > wrote
>
> among my many criteria are kill if subject contains belfort, newgroups

****or xref contains rec.travel.air (or alt.disasters.aviation).****

Explain this, for use on OE, if you can, please?
--
Jim in NC

[Bob Noel]

In article >, "Morgans" >
wrote:

> ****or xref contains rec.travel.air (or alt.disasters.aviation).****
>
> Explain this, for use on OE, if you can, please?

I don't use OE.

Can you see the headers with OE?

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[Peter R.]

Morgans > wrote:

> All someone's opinion. In MY opinion, none of the other ones are as easy
> and as logicaly laid outm, as OE.

But, obviously lacking the powerful kill filter feature that would make
reading this group a little more enjoyable. :)

--
Peter

[Peter R.]

Montblack > wrote:

> I'd been answering some of them - different name. I'd leave out our
> newsgroup. That did cut down on a few of them because they'd reply (minus)
> RAP. <g>

Clever, but certainly this requires a lot of your free time.

Thank you for your effort, though. :)

--
Peter

[Matt Barrow]

Schools out for Spring break.

[Montblack]

("Peter R." wrote)
>> I'd been answering some of them - different name. I'd leave out our
>> newsgroup. That did cut down on a few of them because they'd reply
>> (minus) RAP. <g>

> Clever, but certainly this requires a lot of your free time.


Not much really. My answers were designed to continue the discussion - not
make a stand. Short, to the point. Sometimes a question, etc.

Switching my profile takes 30 seconds.

The real trick is remembering to switch identities back. :-)


Montblack

[Peter R.]

Montblack > wrote:

> Not much really. My answers were designed to continue the discussion - not
> make a stand. Short, to the point. Sometimes a question, etc.
>
> Switching my profile takes 30 seconds.
>
> The real trick is remembering to switch identities back. :-)

I am impressed. A troll to the trolls. :)

--
Peter

[Peter Duniho]

"Peter R." > wrote in message
...
>> All someone's opinion. In MY opinion, none of the other ones are as easy
>> and as logicaly laid outm, as OE.
>
> But, obviously lacking the powerful kill filter feature that would make
> reading this group a little more enjoyable. :)

Guess that depends on one's needs. I agree that OE filtering is not as
robust as that found in other newsreaders. However, I find it a trivial
effort to mark undesirable threads as ignored. The message rules also allow
for automatically marking as ignored threads where a particular poster has
posted, or where the subject has a particular word or phrase in it.

I do miss my old rn killfile semantics, but OE is so much cleaner,
friendlier, and easier in other ways that the negligible additional effort
(hit Alt-M-I when I see a thread I don't want) to filter out this crap isn't
a big deal.

In other words, OE has sufficient features to prevent the off-topic spam and
rants from detracting to whatever enjoyment one might derive from this
newsgroup.

Your mileage may vary.

Pete

[Morgans]

"Peter R." > wrote

> But, obviously lacking the powerful kill filter feature that would make
> reading this group a little more enjoyable. :)

No doubt, but I skip quickly over subjects that I don't want to read; it
only takes a second to avoid a whole thread, with the "mark conversation
read" button, I have at quick access. <g>

I tend to keep a quick read on the wanderings of threads, as sometimes the
wander back to an area that I want to see.

There are threads that are of no use to me, and like I said before, I skip
quickly over them.
--
Jim in NC

[Quilljar]

Varmit, you faux troll, you've done it again! Congrats

[Dallas]

"Peter R."
> I am impressed. A troll to the trolls. :)

More like tying a pork chop around his neck and leading the dogs out of
town.

:-)

Dallas

[Dallas]

"Peter Duniho"
> However, I find it a trivial
> effort to mark undesirable threads as ignored.

Actually, I have been picking the messages in OE and selecting "Ignore
Conversation", but it doesn't seem to work. Next time I check in there they
are again.

I'm I missing something?


Dallas

[Peter Duniho]

"Dallas" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> Actually, I have been picking the messages in OE and selecting "Ignore
> Conversation", but it doesn't seem to work. Next time I check in there
> they
> are again.
>
> I'm I missing something?

Are they still marked? The other step you need to do is set up a view that
hides messages that are ignored (this doesn't happen by default).

That's the other deficiency in the OE...the plain old "Ignore" function
doesn't actually mark the messages as read. You need to set up a message
rule for that. I just leave the threads hidden by the view, and then catch
up the newsgroup later.

I readily agree that OE doesn't have the robust message filtering of some
other readers, but it's certainly sufficient for keeping the crap out of
view (which is all I really require of my message filtering :) ).

Pete

[Jim Macklin]

OE View menu has "Hide Read or Ignored Messages"


"Peter Duniho" > wrote in
message ...
| "Dallas" > wrote in
message
|
ink.net...
| > Actually, I have been picking the messages in OE and
selecting "Ignore
| > Conversation", but it doesn't seem to work. Next time I
check in there
| > they
| > are again.
| >
| > I'm I missing something?
|
| Are they still marked? The other step you need to do is
set up a view that
| hides messages that are ignored (this doesn't happen by
default).
|
| That's the other deficiency in the OE...the plain old
"Ignore" function
| doesn't actually mark the messages as read. You need to
set up a message
| rule for that. I just leave the threads hidden by the
view, and then catch
| up the newsgroup later.
|
| I readily agree that OE doesn't have the robust message
filtering of some
| other readers, but it's certainly sufficient for keeping
the crap out of
| view (which is all I really require of my message
filtering :) ).
|
| Pete
|
|