Flagged for abuse?

There was a posting yesterday by a member of the Soaring Association of Canada (SAC) announcing that the office condo had finally been sold resulting in additional funds available to the association. It had been for sale for a couple of years so we're all relieved that a buyer has been found. However, the message is gone and it appears to have been "flagged for abuse." How is posting that on rec.aviation.soaring an abuse and who has the power to flag it for removal?

On Saturday, January 26, 2013 11:06:34 AM UTC-7, wrote:
There was a posting yesterday by a member of the Soaring Association of Canada (SAC) announcing that the office condo had finally been sold resulting in additional funds available to the association. It had been for sale for a couple of years so we're all relieved that a buyer has been found. However, the message is gone and it appears to have been "flagged for abuse." How is posting that on rec.aviation.soaring an abuse and who has the power to flag it for removal?

Don't know who flagged it, but there was no indication it was soaring related. I wondered why it was posted as well, as it appeared to be a misplaced message about a real estate deal that finally went through. Who knew SAC was a soaring society?

Mike

On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 10:14:14 -0800 (PST), Mike C
wrote:
[snip]

Who knew SAC was a soaring society?

A B-52 pilot after all eight engines quit?

Hello , you wrote at 01-26-2013 19:06

How is posting that on rec.aviation.soaring an abuse and who has the power to flag it for removal?

ask someone at google and quit reading / posting via google groups. Use
an appropriate newsreader and access via a newsserver - there are a lot
of them free available / accessable.

regards
Werner

On Saturday, January 26, 2013 2:29:40 PM UTC-5, Werner Schmidt wrote:

ask someone at google and quit reading / posting via google groups. Use
an appropriate newsreader and access via a newsserver - there are a lot
of them free available / accessable.

regards

Werner

That less than helpful reply makes no sense to me. How does the way I access rec.aviation.soaring have anything to do with the removal of someone else's posting to the newsgroup?

.... and Mike. I guess you and whoever is in charge missed the details such as the following which was part of the original post (mirrored on a club site so I was able to find it) ...

"It is assumed this new cash will be used to support soaring competitions in Canada in the coming years, starting with the Nats at Gatineau."

Hello , you wrote at 01-26-2013 20:53

ask someone at google and quit reading / posting via google
groups. Use an appropriate newsreader and access via a newsserver -
there are a lot of them free available / accessable.

That less than helpful reply makes no sense to me. How does the way
I access rec.aviation.soaring have anything to do with the removal
of someone else's posting to the newsgroup?

newsgroups are mirrored to a lot of newsservers all around the world.
Using google as your accesss to the usenet is not the best choice for
several reasons.

In this case, for example, google groops doesn't show a posting any
more. But if you use another server like news.eternalseptember.org for
example (the server I use), the posting is still there :-)

Google !=internet, and usenet is far more than just google groups.

If google decides to remove a posting it is removed just from google
groups. Not from the usenet. There is no way to remove a posting from
all the usenet. The user who posted a message may send a cancel-message
afterwards and most (but by far not all) newsserver will delete the
posting ...

To at last answer your question "who has the power to flag it for
removal?" more exactly:

*No one has the power to remove any posting from usenet!*

But, of course, some google-employee (or script, or bot, or somewhat
else) may have the power to remove a posting from google groups.

regards
Werner

On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 11:53:07 -0800, stephen.szikora wrote:

That less than helpful reply makes no sense to me. How does the way I
access rec.aviation.soaring have anything to do with the removal of
someone else's posting to the newsgroup?

If you're read the RFC you'd know that the NNTP protocol only permits a
posted message to be deleted by the original poster and that such removal
is not guaranteed. As it happens, the original message is still visible
(to me at least) via a newsreader.

None of the above applies to Google Groups which has its own rules about
posting and removal of posts. There is allegedly a 1:1 correspondence
between messages in the NNTP servers and those in Google group of the
same name: they are said to be synchronised but this is not necessarily
the case in the Real World (TM).


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

On Saturday, January 26, 2013 12:53:07 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Saturday, January 26, 2013 2:29:40 PM UTC-5, Werner Schmidt wrote:



ask someone at google and quit reading / posting via google groups. Use

an appropriate newsreader and access via a newsserver - there are a lot

of them free available / accessable.



regards



Werner



That less than helpful reply makes no sense to me. How does the way I access rec.aviation.soaring have anything to do with the removal of someone else's posting to the newsgroup?



... and Mike. I guess you and whoever is in charge missed the details such as the following which was part of the original post (mirrored on a club site so I was able to find it) ...



"It is assumed this new cash will be used to support soaring competitions in Canada in the coming years, starting with the Nats at Gatineau."

Werner,

I am in no way in charge, but did not notice it as part of the original post.

Just responding as to why the post may have been flagged.

Mike

Hello mike, you wrote at 01-26-2013 22:54

I am in no way in charge, but did not notice it as part of the original post.

sorry, now I'm al little confused - *what* didn't you notice as part of
the (which?) original post?

Just responding as to why the post may have been flagged.

It has been flagged 'cause someone or something at google's thought or
computed it had to. Therefore my hint to not use google groups as access
to the usenet. It's crappy, even more than my english ;-)

regards
Werner

On Saturday, January 26, 2013 3:45:27 PM UTC-7, Werner Schmidt wrote:
Hello mike, you wrote at 01-26-2013 22:54



I am in no way in charge, but did not notice it as part of the original post.



sorry, now I'm al little confused - *what* didn't you notice as part of

the (which?) original post?



Just responding as to why the post may have been flagged.



It has been flagged 'cause someone or something at google's thought or

computed it had to. Therefore my hint to not use google groups as access

to the usenet. It's crappy, even more than my english ;-)



regards

Werner

Your English seems fine Werner. I get your point.

kind regards,

Mike