MXSMANIC fix and other Trolls

[Terry]

I think I might have an idea that will be good for all in this
newsgroup as it applies to MXSMANIC and other trolls as well.

For those that want to respond to what they think is a legitimate
question and might be valuable to the newsgroup, please post your
reply for all to read and learn.

For those that think the question is stupid, ie: comes from the lack
of experience, confrontational, argumentative or just plain silly,
that most of us in this newsgroup would not care to read your response
but YOU feel you MUST respond anyway please do so. HOWEVER please
reply to sender only and not the newsgroup.

For the rest of US that have had enough of this person and a few other
trolls, lets all get together and send them 10 emails each. Lets fill
up their mail boxes with 100's of replies. Simple thing to do really.
Start your word processor, type in whatever you want and save the
file. Each time you see a silly posting by the Troll just hit "reply
to sender only", open your word file, copy and paste to email and send
over and over until your fingers get tired!

Think it will work??

Happy New Year to all my sister and brother pilots.

Terry N6401F

[Bob Noel]

In article t>,
"Terry" > wrote:

> For the rest of US that have had enough of this person and a few other
> trolls, lets all get together and send them 10 emails each.

bad idea.

It would probably be a violation of your ISP's TOS and/or AUP.

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

[Walt]

"Stupid" is a pretty subjective thing. I'm sure I've posted things here
that people think are stupid. I certainly remember a few late-night
posts of mine that I read the next day and thought, "Oh man, I should
put my beer refrigerator more than an arm's length away from my
computer".

MX asks some good questions. He just seems to enjoy arguing for
arguing's sake, and that vexes a lot of us, including me.

I'll respond to his questions if I feel like it, but ignore him when he
goes into his argument mode. He is a master of circular reasoning, and
the non sequitor.

Anyway, I enjoy reading stuff on this list. If a thread gets out of
control I just ignore it. That's control enough for me.

--Walt
Bozeman, Montana


Terry wrote:
> I think I might have an idea that will be good for all in this
> newsgroup as it applies to MXSMANIC and other trolls as well.
>
> For those that want to respond to what they think is a legitimate
> question and might be valuable to the newsgroup, please post your
> reply for all to read and learn.
>
> For those that think the question is stupid, ie: comes from the lack
> of experience, confrontational, argumentative or just plain silly,
> that most of us in this newsgroup would not care to read your response
> but YOU feel you MUST respond anyway please do so. HOWEVER please
> reply to sender only and not the newsgroup.
>
> For the rest of US that have had enough of this person and a few other
> trolls, lets all get together and send them 10 emails each. Lets fill
> up their mail boxes with 100's of replies. Simple thing to do really.
> Start your word processor, type in whatever you want and save the
> file. Each time you see a silly posting by the Troll just hit "reply
> to sender only", open your word file, copy and paste to email and send
> over and over until your fingers get tired!
>
> Think it will work??
>
> Happy New Year to all my sister and brother pilots.
>
> Terry N6401F

[Peter Dohm]

"Terry" > wrote in message
nk.net...
> I think I might have an idea that will be good for all in this
> newsgroup as it applies to MXSMANIC and other trolls as well.
>
> For those that want to respond to what they think is a legitimate
> question and might be valuable to the newsgroup, please post your
> reply for all to read and learn.

That's generally reasonable for the first itteration of a question...
>
> For those that think the question is stupid, ie: comes from the lack
> of experience, confrontational, argumentative or just plain silly,
> that most of us in this newsgroup would not care to read your response
> but YOU feel you MUST respond anyway please do so. HOWEVER please
> reply to sender only and not the newsgroup.
>
This is not only impractical, but IMHO also a really bad idea when you
believe that you are responding to a troll.

A much better system has been developed in other newsgroups. For example,
there was (reportedly) a long running flame war in rec.aviation.homebuilt
regarding a publisher named James Campbell, also referred to as Captain
Zoom. The controversy preceeded by reading of the newsgroup by a *long*
period of time, and there are occasional "flare ups" to this day.
Therefore, a system was devised--and generally remains implemented--that all
posts referencing same shall have a series of at least three Z's in the
subject line, although most posters seem to include six or eight at the end
of the subject line as follows: ZZZZZZZZ

Therefore, it might make sense for those who feel the need to respond; but
feel that the prior post was silly, argumentative, or simply trolling; to
add an identifier to the end of the subject line. Whereas this is not a
cooking or dining forum, I suggest: MMMMMMM

If the group cares to implement such a system in this forum, the next
question would be whether to use the same designator for all presumed
trolls, such as TTTTTTTT, or to assign individually and limit any such
treatment to a most select few--which I would recommend.

That way others can ignore that branch of the thread, or not, either
automatically or based on their own assessment of the contributor's
credibility in such matters....

> For the rest of US that have had enough of this person and a few other
> trolls, lets all get together and send them 10 emails each. Lets fill
> up their mail boxes with 100's of replies. Simple thing to do really.
> Start your word processor, type in whatever you want and save the
> file. Each time you see a silly posting by the Troll just hit "reply
> to sender only", open your word file, copy and paste to email and send
> over and over until your fingers get tired!

This is a REALLY bad idea! Flooding and spamming are both forms of abuse,
and in a practical sense will do little more than fill up a mailbox which
may have been set up for the purpose.

[Jose[_1_]]

> MX asks some good questions. He just seems to enjoy arguing for
> arguing's sake, and that vexes a lot of us, including me.

Yes, but I think there's a hair more to it. The specific misconceptions
he has require careful teasing out, especially since he is so
headstrong. He often miscommunicates (uses words that do not accurately
convey what he means, even though he thinks they do). It takes time and
care to get past that, but it is possible, and one can achieve results
with him. I don't think it's =just= argument for argument's sake.

Jose
--
He who laughs, lasts.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Mxsmanic]

Terry writes:

> For the rest of US that have had enough of this person and a few other
> trolls, lets all get together and send them 10 emails each. Lets fill
> up their mail boxes with 100's of replies. Simple thing to do really.

It's also a felony in the United States, and suggesting it is a
conspiracy to commit a felony.

> Think it will work??

If it does, you may discover from the friendly officer at your door
that the consequences of illegal activity on the Internet extend well
beyond cyberspace.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[d&tm]

"Terry" > wrote in message
nk.net...
> I think I might have an idea that will be good for all in this
> newsgroup as it applies to MXSMANIC and other trolls as well.
>
> For those that want to respond to what they think is a legitimate
> question and might be valuable to the newsgroup, please post your
> reply for all to read and learn.
>
> For those that think the question is stupid, ie: comes from the lack
> of experience, confrontational, argumentative or just plain silly,
> that most of us in this newsgroup would not care to read your response
> but YOU feel you MUST respond anyway please do so. HOWEVER please
> reply to sender only and not the newsgroup.
>
> For the rest of US that have had enough of this person and a few other
> trolls, lets all get together and send them 10 emails each. Lets fill
> up their mail boxes with 100's of replies. Simple thing to do really.
> Start your word processor, type in whatever you want and save the
> file. Each time you see a silly posting by the Troll just hit "reply
> to sender only", open your word file, copy and paste to email and send
> over and over until your fingers get tired!
>
> Think it will work??
>
> Happy New Year to all my sister and brother pilots.
>

Happy New Year to you also , and happy New Year to Every peace loving
person in the world, even if they are not pilots. I think you need to take
a reality check and realise that just because you fly an aeroplane it doesnt
make you any better than anybody else. I have been around this news group
along time, although I only post occaisionally when I have something
relevant to say. I dont know what basis you use for calling MXSMANIC a
troll. Personally I think many of his questions and comments are quite
intelligent coming from someone who doesnt fly for real. Can you quote
some questions he has asked that were stupid in the context of someone who
has not taken flying lessons? He doesnt bombard the group with politics or
other OT crap, it has been purely aviation related.

What gets up my goat a little with some on this group is that we are
forever bagging the media for every little mistake they make when reporting
aviation issues, yet so many want to jump on a non aviator doing his
darndest to try to undestand everything he can about flying. We cant have it
both ways. Wether we are professional pilots or just weekend warriors like
me, we owe it to our industry to help educate the public, not turn up our
noses with this snobby attitude that you are displaying.
Just my 2 cents worth ( which I realise is only 1.6 cents US .. but its on
the rise !)
Terry
PPL downunder

[Thomas Borchert]

D&tm,

> yet so many want to jump on a non aviator doing his
> darndest to try to undestand everything he can about flying.
>

Uhm, that's not the correct description of the person we're discussing.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[BDS[_2_]]

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...

> If it does, you may discover from the friendly officer at your door
> that the consequences of illegal activity on the Internet extend well
> beyond cyberspace.

Yeah, I can see it now... "Hello, FBI? Yes, I'd like to report someone who
sent me 10 email messages...." click "Hello, hello?"

In an age where identity theft is no longer even considered a high priority
unless the total exceeds $100K I seriously doubt that you could get them to
even talk to you about something like this, let alone send someone out to
investigate it!

BDS

[Mxsmanic]

BDS writes:

> Yeah, I can see it now... "Hello, FBI? Yes, I'd like to report someone who
> sent me 10 email messages...." click "Hello, hello?"

That isn't the way it is done, although you're correct in that one
usually proceeds by out-of-band communication methods, which get a lot
more attention than e-mails to abuse aliases.

> In an age where identity theft is no longer even considered a high priority
> unless the total exceeds $100K I seriously doubt that you could get them to
> even talk to you about something like this, let alone send someone out to
> investigate it!

Well, I've been there and done that, and I wasn't the one who was
surprised. As I've said, if you're doing something illegal, the mere
fact that you do it on the Internet won't necessarily protect you.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Tom Conner]

"Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message
...
> D&tm,
>
> > yet so many want to jump on a non aviator doing his
> > darndest to try to undestand everything he can about
> > flying.
> >
>
> Uhm, that's not the correct description of the person we're
> discussing.
>

Actually, the resident RAP top-poster is more annoying than the maniac. At
least the maniac doesn't use laziness as an excuse to justify his posts.

[Newps]

Who would that be?




Tom Conner wrote:

> "Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>D&tm,
>>
>>
>>>yet so many want to jump on a non aviator doing his
>>>darndest to try to undestand everything he can about
>>>flying.
>>>
>>
>>Uhm, that's not the correct description of the person we're
>>discussing.
>>
>
>
> Actually, the resident RAP top-poster is more annoying than the maniac. At
> least the maniac doesn't use laziness as an excuse to justify his posts.
>
>

[mad8]

DDoS'ing trolls will not really be effective...
especially if they're using googlegroups...

Terry wrote:
> I think I might have an idea that will be good for all in this
> newsgroup as it applies to MXSMANIC and other trolls as well.
>
> For those that want to respond to what they think is a legitimate
> question and might be valuable to the newsgroup, please post your
> reply for all to read and learn.
>
> For those that think the question is stupid, ie: comes from the lack
> of experience, confrontational, argumentative or just plain silly,
> that most of us in this newsgroup would not care to read your response
> but YOU feel you MUST respond anyway please do so. HOWEVER please
> reply to sender only and not the newsgroup.
>
> For the rest of US that have had enough of this person and a few other
> trolls, lets all get together and send them 10 emails each. Lets fill
> up their mail boxes with 100's of replies. Simple thing to do really.
> Start your word processor, type in whatever you want and save the
> file. Each time you see a silly posting by the Troll just hit "reply
> to sender only", open your word file, copy and paste to email and send
> over and over until your fingers get tired!
>
> Think it will work??
>
> Happy New Year to all my sister and brother pilots.
>
> Terry N6401F

[Steve Foley[_2_]]

I dunno. Could be anyone.

"Newps" > wrote in message
. ..
> Who would that be?
>
>
>
>
> Tom Conner wrote:
>
>> "Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>>D&tm,
>>>
>>>
>>>>yet so many want to jump on a non aviator doing his
>>>>darndest to try to undestand everything he can about
>>>>flying.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Uhm, that's not the correct description of the person we're
>>>discussing.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Actually, the resident RAP top-poster is more annoying than the maniac.
>> At
>> least the maniac doesn't use laziness as an excuse to justify his posts.
>>

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
"Steve Foley" > wrote:

lawyers will hate
Looking for a sig the
Bob Noel

I don't follow

> I dunno. Could be anyone.
>
> "Newps" > wrote in message
> . ..
> > Who would that be?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Tom Conner wrote:
> >
> >> "Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >>
> >>>D&tm,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>yet so many want to jump on a non aviator doing his
> >>>>darndest to try to undestand everything he can about
> >>>>flying.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>Uhm, that's not the correct description of the person we're
> >>>discussing.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> Actually, the resident RAP top-poster is more annoying than the maniac.
> >> At
> >> least the maniac doesn't use laziness as an excuse to justify his posts.
> >>

--

[James]

Bob Noel wrote:
> In article t>,
> "Terry" > wrote:
>
>
>>For the rest of US that have had enough of this person and a few other
>>trolls, lets all get together and send them 10 emails each.
>
>
> bad idea.
>
> It would probably be a violation of your ISP's TOS and/or AUP.
>
It could be construed in the State of NY as aggravated harassment, a
class 3 misdemenour.

James.

[gpsman]

Terry wrote: <brevity snip>
> I think I might have an idea that will be good for all in this
> newsgroup as it applies to MXSMANIC and other trolls as well.
>
> Think it will work??

The only way to stop a real troll is for the fish to stop biting. My
experience is limited, but I've never seen it happen.

IMO, the maniac is not a troll, just a lonely antisocial person who is
willing to settle for life and flight of the virtual reality varieties.

His proclivity to annoy brings him the reward of the additional
attention he could not enjoy face-to-face, in non-virtual reality.
-----

- gpsman

[Peter Dohm]

> >IMO, the maniac is not a troll, just a lonely antisocial person who is
> >willing to settle for life and flight of the virtual reality varieties.
>
> I tend to agree that he's not a troll. That term gets thrown around
> way to much on Usenet. I tend to think that mx really believes he a pilot.
> He's constructed a comfortable little bubble around himself and will
> not allow that bubble to be burst by reality. The problem I have with him
> is that he posts like he's "real". There are probably 100 people who read
> this group for every one that posts. Like others have mentioned, he
> spouts some "facts" that would be very dangerous if put into practice.
>
> Maybe the best solution would be for ONE person to just post a
"disclaimer"
> to his posts. Something like:
> "Warning: Mxsmanic is a delusional individual who has NO flight experience
> and believes that a computer flight simulation GAME is real. All
information
> posted by said individual should be assumed to be applicable to Microsoft
> Flight Simulator only and does not necessarily represent events that have,
> would, should, or could, occur with REAL aircraft being flown by REAL
pilots
> in the REAL world".
>
Ok, the guy is irritating.

I really think the concern about someone trying the wrong advice is
overstated, and I have heard plenty of bad advice at airports--including a
few "old chestnuts" that just won't die--from people I could have sworn
would have known better.

If you feel that a rebuttal, in the form of a third party disclaimer is
needed, that is anyone's privelege on usenet; but a much less emotional
disclaimer will probably result in much shorter threads.

Peter

[Kev]

Nomen Nescio wrote:
> I tend to agree that he's not a troll. That term gets thrown around [...]

Of course he's not a troll. Those who use that term simply point
themselves out as inexperienced users.

> The problem I have with him is that he posts like he's "real". [...]

Actually, he almost always prefaces the start of a thread with "in my
sim" or "I fly a sim aircraft". Anyone who starts reading any thread
in the middle, in any group, anywhere, is not getting context... and
should know it.

> Maybe the best solution would be for ONE person to just post a "disclaimer"

Perhaps we really need a long FAQ with almost everyone here listed, so
you'd know all the players :-) For example, there are people here who
post about the military or engineering, when they clearly know nothing
about the topics. Should we point them out as well? Where would it
stop?

In the end, if all those who complained about Mx would just SHUT UP,
then 95% of the junk would disappear.

Cheers, Kev

[Thomas Borchert]

Kev,

> Actually, he almost always prefaces the start of a thread with "in my
> sim" or "I fly a sim aircraft".
>

Oh? That'S simply not true for at least the last five big questions he
started. In fact, I can't remember him doing that even once.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)