Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 72

Thread: Great Firewall/Australia censorship proposal

  1. #41
    Skywise
    Guest

    Re: Great Firewall/Australia censorship proposal

    More hot air from the blow hole.

    Brian
    --
    http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
    Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
    Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
    Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?



    Chilly8 <chilly8@hotmail.com> wrote in news:868c331a-b9a2-407e-98fc-
    967627abe7c9@e25g2000vbe.googlegroups.com:

    >
    > The next evolution for us will be online television. We are working on
    > ways now to simulcast both using online TV and online radio. I found
    > one P2P television service that supports the use of proxies, so as
    > long as we keep the outgoing bitrate below about 310K, one encrypted
    > subscription Socks proxy service, in Belgium, will work.
    >
    > There are still a lot of technical details to be worked out, but once
    > we get it going, we will be broadcasting sports, and other stuff, on
    > our new online TV station, using TVants (which supports proxies, and
    > thus, can be used with one encrypted Socks proxy service).
    >
    > If and when we get to broadcast the innauguration on Barack Obama on
    > 20th January, on our new online TV station, we expect it to be
    > corporate admins WORST NIGHTMARE. We plan to broadcast at a bitrate of
    > about 300K, just below the bandwidth cap that this one subscription
    > socks service has. Corporate admins will be wondering what all the
    > encrypted stuff that users are receiving, at 300K apiece.
    >
    > And European admins will be stocking in on the aspirin, when we cause
    > them a REAL headche during the European Fiugre Skating Championships
    > (assuming we get everything fixed in time). Admins will get a
    > splitting headche figuring out what is going on.
    >



  2. #42
    Chilly8
    Guest

    Re: Great Firewall/Australia censorship proposal


    X-No-Archive: Yes


    On Dec 7, 6:11*pm, Leythos <spam999f...@rrohio.com> wrote:
    > In article <ghhn3a$pu...@aioe.org>, chil...@hotmail.com says...
    >
    > > I do know that I am seeing listening coming from a lot of
    > > small and mid-sized companies that cannot afford the cost
    > > of a decent filtering solution, and those networks are not
    > > filtered.

    >
    > And the real thing is that the companies don't understand the amount of
    > LOSS they experience from letting their employees have unrestricted
    > access.
    >
    > In general, you can recover 30% productivity and regain speed on the net
    > with a cheap $1500firewallsolution that would block crap like you.
    >
    > That's $1500 per year, and the savings are many times that.
    >



    I think some Fortune 500 companies are cutting out filtering to save
    money. Since many filter makers demand "per seat" licensing, which can
    really add up in a large company, in these recessionary times

    I have noticed, in the past few weeks, that visits to my radio
    station, and website, from office networks has outright EXPLODED, and
    even more so from the networks of a few Fortune 500 companies and
    other large corporations. A lot of corporations appear to be cutting
    out filtering in order to save money, which is a boon for us in the
    online radio biz, becuase it means that more people can listen from
    work. For large corporations, the cost can be in the tens, or even
    hundreds of thousands per year. And when every penny counts, filtering
    is the easiest thing to cancel.

    And since NOTHING compes on the screen anymore telling them they are
    doing something forbidden, they cannot be accused stealing company
    resoruces, While it may be hard times for everyone else, for those of
    us in the online radio industry, it will be boom times for us, as long
    as corporate networks cut out filtering.

  3. #43
    Leythos
    Guest

    Re: Great Firewall/Australia censorship proposal

    In article <d4169471-2143-4800-a625-10cd09da0428
    @o40g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, chilly8@hotmail.com says...
    > I think some Fortune 500 companies are cutting out filtering to save
    > money. Since many filter makers demand "per seat" licensing, which can
    > really add up in a large company, in these recessionary times
    >


    Proper filtering doesn't cost a penny. Use of "Some" filters can cost,
    but you can filter for free very easily.

    You are nothing but a troll and unethical business person.

    --
    - Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
    - Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a
    drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
    spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)

  4. #44
    Chilly8
    Guest

    Re: Great Firewall/Australia censorship proposal


    X-No-Archive: Yes


    On Dec 21, 3:39*pm, Leythos <spam999f...@rrohio.com> wrote:
    > In article <d4169471-2143-4800-a625-10cd09da0428
    > @o40g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, chil...@hotmail.com says...
    >
    > > I think some Fortune 500 companies are cutting out filtering to save
    > > money. Since many filter makers demand "per seat" licensing, which can
    > > really add up in a large company, in these recessionary times

    >
    > Proper filtering doesn't cost a penny. Use of "Some" filters can cost,
    > but you can filter for free very easily.
    >
    > You are nothing but a troll and unethical business person.



    Well, the Christmas music programme we run from Oct. 31 to through Dec
    25th has always been popular, but not like it has been this year. Even
    with proxies, workplace listening has not reached the levels it has
    this year. Everytime Iook at the StatCounter logs to see where
    listening is coming from, I am amazed. A lot of the visits reads like
    a whos-who of the Fortune 500. Like I said, when companies have to cut
    costs like they have to now in this economy, they will obviously knock
    off anything, including filtering.

    Its not just me. A lot of other broadcasters on the Live 365 network,
    and all genres, are reporting marked increasing in listenership,
    especially from workplaces, as many companies knock off filtering in
    order to save money in these tough ecoonomic times.

  5. #45
    Chilly8
    Guest

    Re: Great Firewall/Australia censorship proposal


    X-No-Archive: Yes


    On Dec 8, 5:55*am, VanguardLH <V...@nguard.LH> wrote:
    > Chilly8 wrote:
    > > X-No-Archive: Yes

    >
    > > "Leythos" <spam999f...@rrohio.com> wrote in message
    > >news:MPG.23a624103e431e198975e@us.news.astraweb.com...
    > >> In article <ghhikj$99...@aioe.org>, chil...@hotmail.com says...
    > >>> Howeer, the filtering software vendors use automated "spiders"
    > >>> to crawl sites, which is why firewall trick work. If it were done
    > >>> b humans, instead of automated web crawlers, then, yes, a
    > >>> human could use a proxy, but the automated web crawlers
    > >>> know no better.

    >
    > >> Which is why any responsible solution would have your site, as well as
    > >> any non-business site, blocked by default.

    >
    > >> Easy to spot, easy to tell it's streaming, easy to have blocked by
    > >> default.

    >
    > > I do know that I am seeing listening coming from a lot of
    > > small and mid-sized companies that cannot afford the cost
    > > of a decent filtering solution, and those networks are not
    > > filtered. Since switching over to Christmas music (when
    > > not doing live programming), I have seen listening from
    > > smaller and mid-sized companies increase by quite a
    > > bit.

    >
    > So your claim is now that some of your customers can listen to your
    > multimedia datastream from companies that don't employ or poorly employ
    > any security or censoring of content or source which means all your
    > webcrawler filtering and proxying was unnecessary.- Hide quoted text -
    >
    > - Show quoted text -


    Well, like I said in another thread, it could be companies cutting off
    filtering in order to save money in these tough economic times. Our
    Christmas programme (when not airing live programming) has always been
    popular, but not like this year. Our listenership has gone THROUGH THE
    ROOF, and there are more connections coming directly from office
    networks.

  6. #46
    Leythos
    Guest

    Re: Great Firewall/Australia censorship proposal

    In article <8aae23bc-065d-4681-a958-f09c642f0686
    @z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, chilly8@hotmail.com says...
    > as many companies knock off filtering in
    > order to save money in these tough ecoonomic times.
    >


    As I said, we can block access to ANY/All of your sites without cost and
    we don't have to know where they are either.

    You are still an unethical person.

    --
    - Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
    - Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a
    drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
    spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)

  7. #47
    Bernd Felsche
    Guest

    Re: Great Firewall/Australia censorship proposal

    Chilly8 <chilly8@hotmail.com> wrote:

    >X-No-Archive: Yes


    Ha Ha!

    >On Dec 8, 3:57=A0am, Leythos <spam999f...@rrohio.com> wrote:
    >> In article <ggvtga$gj...@aioe.org>, chil...@hotmail.com says...


    >> > I was reading a debate about Australia's proposed censorship
    >> > regime, and VPN tunnels. And one guy mentioned there letting
    >> > his brother do a VPN into his computer in Sydney to bypass
    >> > Chinese censorship and the Chinese authorites have no CLUE
    >> > as they what is happening. His brother is making an encrypted
    >> > connection into his ADSL connected computer in Sydney, and
    >> > there is no POSSIBLE way for the Chinese auhorities to know
    >> > what you are up to.


    >The next evolution for us will be online television. We are working on
    >ways now to simulcast both using online TV and online radio. I found
    >one P2P television service that supports the use of proxies, so as
    >long as we keep the outgoing bitrate below about 310K, one encrypted
    >subscription Socks proxy service, in Belgium, will work.


    And people will pay for the bandwidth?

    >There are still a lot of technical details to be worked out, but once
    >we get it going, we will be broadcasting sports, and other stuff, on
    >our new online TV station, using TVants (which supports proxies, and
    >thus, can be used with one encrypted Socks proxy service).


    >If and when we get to broadcast the innauguration on Barack Obama on
    >20th January, on our new online TV station, we expect it to be
    >corporate admins WORST NIGHTMARE. We plan to broadcast at a bitrate of


    You really are a stupid little spamming jerk.

    >about 300K, just below the bandwidth cap that this one subscription
    >socks service has. Corporate admins will be wondering what all the
    >encrypted stuff that users are receiving, at 300K apiece.


    >And European admins will be stocking in on the aspirin, when we cause
    >them a REAL headche during the European Fiugre Skating Championships
    >(assuming we get everything fixed in time). Admins will get a
    >splitting headche figuring out what is going on.

    --
    /"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
    \ / ASCII ribbon campaign | Second to agriculture, humbug is the
    X against HTML mail | biggest industry of our age.
    / \ and postings | -- Alfred Nobel

  8. #48
    Bernd Felsche
    Guest

    Re: Great Firewall/Australia censorship proposal

    Chilly8 <chilly8@hotmail.com> wrote:

    >X-No-Archive: Yes


    Ha Ha.

    >On Dec 21, 3:39=A0pm, Leythos <spam999f...@rrohio.com> wrote:
    >> In article <d4169471-2143-4800-a625-10cd09da0428
    >> @o40g2000prn.googlegroups.com>, chil...@hotmail.com says...
    >>
    >> > I think some Fortune 500 companies are cutting out filtering to save
    >> > money. Since many filter makers demand "per seat" licensing, which can
    >> > really add up in a large company, in these recessionary times

    >>
    >> Proper filtering doesn't cost a penny. Use of "Some" filters can cost,
    >> but you can filter for free very easily.
    >>
    >> You are nothing but a troll and unethical business person.


    >Well, the Christmas music programme we run from Oct. 31 to through Dec
    >25th has always been popular, but not like it has been this year. Even
    >with proxies, workplace listening has not reached the levels it has
    >this year.


    No argument then that you're being unethical.

    It is very easy for admins to monitor network traffic on their LAN
    and to identify abuse simply by the meta-data. I've been asked on a
    number of occasions to identify who is using excessive amounts of
    bandwidth quota and for what purpose. That's not been difficult to
    determine at all. Reports were submitted.

    Sites that I support have existing policies or have adopted the
    simple one that I provide at no (extra) cost. All employees and
    contractors are required to agree to the policy.

    DCMs issued to offenders by management. That was before the
    "financial crisis". Companies always watch their spending.

    >Everytime Iook at the StatCounter logs to see where
    >listening is coming from, I am amazed. A lot of the visits reads like
    >a whos-who of the Fortune 500. Like I said, when companies have to cut
    >costs like they have to now in this economy, they will obviously knock
    >off anything, including filtering.


    You are an ignoramus. And you seem to have foolish customers whose
    jobs are at risk because you MISREPRESENT your product as being
    hidden from scrutiny. I you've taken their money. The money trail
    leads to you. And those sacked for abuse by their employers may seek
    civil damages from you. You'd better make sure that none of your
    customers are good lawyers or highly-paid professionals. Most
    countries have laws against false advertising.

    >Its not just me. A lot of other broadcasters on the Live 365 network,
    >and all genres, are reporting marked increasing in listenership,
    >especially from workplaces, as many companies knock off filtering in
    >order to save money in these tough ecoonomic times.


    Employee salary/wage costs are far higher than those for filtering.
    The licence cost for effective filtering can be as low as $0.00
    Annual maintenance costs of the filters are around the 20 hours,
    averaged over 5 years.


    Libre Policy Document:

    Corporate Data Policy

    * Data processing facilities are provided for the benefit of
    the company.

    Computers and networks are provided for the company to
    conduct its business in a cost-effective, efficient and
    professional manner.

    Use for any other purpose must not impair business use;
    either directly or by distraction of others doing their work.


    * Data are a valuable resource

    Data represents the fruits of labour. Data belong to the
    people who initially produce the data, unless they give those
    rights away to somebody else. Data are often used to make
    business decisions.

    Data security is necessary to protect the data from being
    seen or changed by those who shouldn't; and from being lost
    or corrupted due to equipment failure and human error.
    --
    /"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
    \ / ASCII ribbon campaign | Second to agriculture, humbug is the
    X against HTML mail | biggest industry of our age.
    / \ and postings | -- Alfred Nobel

  9. #49
    Chilly8
    Guest

    Re: Great Firewall/Australia censorship proposal


    X-No-Archive: Yes


    On Dec 22, 6:01*am, Leythos <spam999f...@rrohio.com> wrote:
    > In article <8aae23bc-065d-4681-a958-f09c642f0686
    > @z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, chil...@hotmail.com says...
    >
    > > as many companies knock off filtering in
    > > order to save money in these tough ecoonomic times.

    >
    > As I said, we can block access to ANY/All of your sites without cost and
    > we don't have to know where they are either.
    >
    > You are still an unethical person.



    We provide a variety of services. With the online television station
    that we also run as well, I have been, for a few years, providing
    services to one group that travels to broadcast solar eclipses. After
    the problem they ran into once, in Panama, some years ago, with having
    to get a government permit just to film a solar eclipse and broadcast
    on the Internet, we have been providing services that allow them to
    make an encrypted connection into my servers, to avoid ever having
    that problem again, no matter WHAT country they travel to.

    By connecting to my VPN server, and sending the broadcast to the
    online television station that I own and run, they avoid problems,
    becuase the VPN connection makes it impossible for the local
    authorities to know WHAT they are doing. This avoids the problems of
    having to get a government permit, like they did in Panama over a
    decade ago. Because they are making an encryptd VPN tunnel to my
    server, their filming and broadcasing any solar eclipse will be
    IMPOSSIBLE to detect.

    We providing encrypted services to them, even before VPNs became
    commonplace. We will be providing services to them again in July when
    they go to broadcast the very long total eclipse from China. With the
    VPN tunnel to my U.S. server, there will be no POSSIBLE way for the
    Chinese authorities to know WHAT they are up to. THey connect to my
    VPN server and then the feed is sent out via our online television
    station.

  10. #50
    Skywise
    Guest

    Re: Great Firewall/Australia censorship proposal

    Chilly8 <chilly8@hotmail.com> wrote in news:72100e92-b90d-4567-89f2-
    3fd5a9fa35a6@q30g2000prq.googlegroups.com:

    > X-No-Archive: Yes


    idiot


    >
    >
    > On Dec 22, 6:01*am, Leythos <spam999f...@rrohio.com> wrote:
    >> In article <8aae23bc-065d-4681-a958-f09c642f0686
    >> @z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, chil...@hotmail.com says...
    >>
    >> > as many companies knock off filtering in
    >> > order to save money in these tough ecoonomic times.

    >>
    >> As I said, we can block access to ANY/All of your sites without cost and
    >> we don't have to know where they are either.
    >>
    >> You are still an unethical person.

    >
    >
    > We provide a variety of services. With the online television station
    > that we also run as well, I have been, for a few years, providing
    > services to one group that travels to broadcast solar eclipses. After
    > the problem they ran into once, in Panama, some years ago, with having
    > to get a government permit just to film a solar eclipse and broadcast
    > on the Internet, we have been providing services that allow them to
    > make an encrypted connection into my servers, to avoid ever having
    > that problem again, no matter WHAT country they travel to.
    >
    > By connecting to my VPN server, and sending the broadcast to the
    > online television station that I own and run, they avoid problems,
    > becuase the VPN connection makes it impossible for the local
    > authorities to know WHAT they are doing. This avoids the problems of
    > having to get a government permit, like they did in Panama over a
    > decade ago. Because they are making an encryptd VPN tunnel to my
    > server, their filming and broadcasing any solar eclipse will be
    > IMPOSSIBLE to detect.
    >
    > We providing encrypted services to them, even before VPNs became
    > commonplace. We will be providing services to them again in July when
    > they go to broadcast the very long total eclipse from China. With the
    > VPN tunnel to my U.S. server, there will be no POSSIBLE way for the
    > Chinese authorities to know WHAT they are up to. THey connect to my
    > VPN server and then the feed is sent out via our online television
    > station.
    >




    --
    http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
    Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
    Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
    Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

  11. #51
    DevilsPGD
    Guest

    Re: Great Firewall/Australia censorship proposal

    In message <qkj4l.73280$XB5.54429@newsfe29.ams2> Skywise
    <into@oblivion.nothing.com> was claimed to have wrote:

    >Chilly8 <chilly8@hotmail.com> wrote in news:72100e92-b90d-4567-89f2-
    >3fd5a9fa35a6@q30g2000prq.googlegroups.com:
    >
    >> X-No-Archive: Yes

    >
    >idiot


    Despite his claims, he knows he has something to hide. Interesting.

  12. #52
    Leythos
    Guest

    Re: Great Firewall/Australia censorship proposal

    In article <72100e92-b90d-4567-89f2-3fd5a9fa35a6
    @q30g2000prq.googlegroups.com>, chilly8@hotmail.com says...
    > By connecting to my VPN server, and sending the broadcast to the
    > online television station that I own and run, they avoid problems,
    > becuase the VPN connection makes it impossible for the local
    > authorities to know WHAT they are doing.
    >

    But your VPN connection stands out like a red-flare on a dark night -
    both the source IP and the destination IP are plainly visible.

    VPN is easy to block and since your destination IP is not a business
    need, it would not be permitted by default.

    --
    - Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
    - Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a
    drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
    spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)

  13. #53
    Skywise
    Guest

    Re: Great Firewall/Australia censorship proposal

    DevilsPGD <spam_narf_spam@crazyhat.net> wrote in
    news:ub14l4lbo6ccjtp6ug5nn11gbh4v8lp7lg@4ax.com:

    > In message <qkj4l.73280$XB5.54429@newsfe29.ams2> Skywise
    > <into@oblivion.nothing.com> was claimed to have wrote:
    >
    >>Chilly8 <chilly8@hotmail.com> wrote in news:72100e92-b90d-4567-89f2-
    >>3fd5a9fa35a6@q30g2000prq.googlegroups.com:
    >>
    >>> X-No-Archive: Yes

    >>
    >>idiot

    >
    > Despite his claims, he knows he has something to hide. Interesting.


    Probably trying to hide his online activities from his employer
    for fear of getting fired.

    Brian
    --
    http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
    Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
    Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
    Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

  14. #54
    Leythos
    Guest

    Re: Great Firewall/Australia censorship proposal

    In article <1ae0f383-3b15-4caa-bed1-
    379c0d5bf33e@w1g2000prk.googlegroups.com>, chilly8@hotmail.com says...
    >

    [snip]

    Why do you post your crap too this group since nothing you post has
    anything to do with firewalls?

    --
    - Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
    - Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a
    drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
    spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)

  15. #55
    Skywise
    Guest

    Re: Great Firewall/Australia censorship proposal

    Chilly8 <chilly8@hotmail.com> wrote in news:1ae0f383-3b15-4caa-bed1-
    379c0d5bf33e@w1g2000prk.googlegroups.com:

    >
    > X-No-Archive: Yes


    Idiot.

    >
    > On Dec 24 2008, 5:40*am, Leythos <spam999f...@rrohio.com> wrote:
    >> In article <72100e92-b90d-4567-89f2-3fd5a9fa35a6
    >> @q30g2000prq.googlegroups.com>, chil...@hotmail.com says...> By

    connectin
    > g to my VPN server, and sending the broadcast to the
    >> > online television station that I own and run, they avoid problems,
    >> > becuase the VPN connection makes it impossible for the local
    >> > authorities to know WHAT they are doing.

    >>
    >> But your VPN connection stands out like a red-flare on a dark night -
    >> both the source IP and the destination IP are plainly visible.
    >>
    >> VPN is easy to block and since your destination IP is not a business
    >> need, it would not be permitted by default.

    >
    >
    > Well, there is a new more secure encrypted proxy on the market now,
    > that has purchased advertising from us. On the TV side of things, when
    > not airing any programs, we run a looping PowerPoint slide show, which
    > inlcudes station announces, and messages from advertisers. One new
    > proxy service is running an advert with us, that makes bypassing
    > workplace firewalls a selling point of their service. Here is one
    > quote from the advert they have paid us for
    >
    > "Your surfing activities at work will be undetectable"
    >
    > This is a new super-secure encrypted proxy service that just came into
    > being. The company is in the USA, since it is NOT a CRIMINAL offence,
    > in the USA, to bypass work filters, it is LEGAL for my to carry the
    > advert, since the server carrying the PowerPoint slides is at a
    > colocation facility in the USA. In short, I am NOT SUBJECT to
    > prosecution in Britain, or any other country where bypassing workplace
    > firewalls IS a criminal offence, for merely CARRYING their advert. All
    > since my server is at a colocation facility in the USA, any adverts
    > that clients choose to run on either banner ads, PowerPoint Slides or
    > audio adverts, are covered by the 1st amendment. Since the advert runs
    > from a U.S.-colocated server, I am ONLY subject to UNITED STATES
    > laws, in carrying that advert, and NOT SUBJECT to the laws of Britain,
    > or any other country, where bypassing work firewalls is a criminal
    > offence, becuase the SERVER is in the USA, and its where the SERVER is
    > that determines what laws apply.
    >
    > And since this company is in CHINA, they are ONLY subject to CHINESE
    > laws, and the laws of wherver their servers are (Singapore, USA,
    > Germany). In short, they are ONLY subject to the laws of China,
    > Singapore, Germany, and the USA, and are NOT SUBJECT to the laws of
    > ANY other country.
    >
    > This Chinese company is in the business of helping people evade work
    > and school firewalls, and really raking in the dough, from what I have
    > heard.
    >
    >




    --
    http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
    Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
    Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
    Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

  16. #56
    Leythos
    Guest

    Re: Great Firewall/Australia censorship proposal

    In article <ekeal.30702$cU4.28351@newsfe19.ams2>,
    into@oblivion.nothing.com says...
    >
    > Chilly8 <chilly8@hotmail.com> wrote in news:1ae0f383-3b15-4caa-bed1-
    > 379c0d5bf33e@w1g2000prk.googlegroups.com:
    >
    > >
    > > X-No-Archive: Yes

    >
    > Idiot.
    >


    Why not snip the rest of his post after your single comment?

    --
    - Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
    - Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a
    drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
    spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)

  17. #57
    Skywise
    Guest

    Re: Great Firewall/Australia censorship proposal

    Leythos <spam999free@rrohio.com> wrote in news:MPG.23d3bc6a9be1952f9897e5
    @us.news.astraweb.com:

    > In article <ekeal.30702$cU4.28351@newsfe19.ams2>,
    > into@oblivion.nothing.com says...
    >>
    >> Chilly8 <chilly8@hotmail.com> wrote in news:1ae0f383-3b15-4caa-bed1-
    >> 379c0d5bf33e@w1g2000prk.googlegroups.com:
    >>
    >> >
    >> > X-No-Archive: Yes

    >>
    >> Idiot.
    >>

    >
    > Why not snip the rest of his post after your single comment?
    >


    That would defeat the purpose.

    Brian
    --
    http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
    Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
    Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
    Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

  18. #58
    Leythos
    Guest

    Re: Great Firewall/Australia censorship proposal

    In article <hLxal.22821$l%2.4513@newsfe26.ams2>,
    into@oblivion.nothing.com says...
    > Leythos <spam999free@rrohio.com> wrote in news:MPG.23d3bc6a9be1952f9897e5
    > @us.news.astraweb.com:
    >
    > > In article <ekeal.30702$cU4.28351@newsfe19.ams2>,
    > > into@oblivion.nothing.com says...
    > >>
    > >> Chilly8 <chilly8@hotmail.com> wrote in news:1ae0f383-3b15-4caa-bed1-
    > >> 379c0d5bf33e@w1g2000prk.googlegroups.com:
    > >>
    > >> >
    > >> > X-No-Archive: Yes
    > >>
    > >> Idiot.
    > >>

    > >
    > > Why not snip the rest of his post after your single comment?
    > >

    >
    > That would defeat the purpose.


    If the purpose is to re-blast the group then it's not helping, we
    already know he's a idiot.

    --
    - Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
    - Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a
    drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
    spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)

  19. #59
    PAJ
    Guest

    Re: Great Firewall/Australia censorship proposal

    On Mon, 12 Jan 2009 05:51:13 -0500, Leythos <spam999free@rrohio.com>
    wrote:

    >If the purpose is to re-blast the group then it's not helping, we
    >already know he's a idiot.


    I believe he mistakenly thinks that, by quoting someone who has used the
    "X-No-Archive: Yes" flag, he is ensuring their post is archived.
    What he obviously does not realise is, it is his own post that is being
    archived and not the OP who he responded to.

  20. #60
    Leythos
    Guest

    Re: Great Firewall/Australia censorship proposal

    In article <9ktmm4hp6hnk16ra5mcifprvqk8pr7r9s1@4ax.com>, news@news-
    only.invalid says...
    > On Mon, 12 Jan 2009 05:51:13 -0500, Leythos <spam999free@rrohio.com>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >If the purpose is to re-blast the group then it's not helping, we
    > >already know he's a idiot.

    >
    > I believe he mistakenly thinks that, by quoting someone who has used the
    > "X-No-Archive: Yes" flag, he is ensuring their post is archived.
    > What he obviously does not realise is, it is his own post that is being
    > archived and not the OP who he responded to.


    Additionally, XNA is not honored by all archive services, making it
    almost useless in many cases.

    --
    - Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
    - Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a
    drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
    spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)

Similar Threads

  1. 'Australia to implement mandatory internet censorship'
    By Brk in forum General Discussion Board
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 11-03-08, 04:46 PM
  2. BCS rejects playoff proposal
    By Roody in forum General Discussion Board
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 05-01-08, 01:52 PM
  3. Yahoo! says no go to Microsoft buyout proposal
    By Comtrad in forum General Discussion Board
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-14-08, 10:46 AM
  4. great signal very low download speed great up load speed
    By Discitt in forum Wireless Networks & Routers
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-08-08, 12:37 PM
  5. Great Park balloon ready for liftoff
    By Spammy in forum General Discussion Board
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-12-07, 02:54 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •