On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 17:36:25 -0500, Moshe Goldfarb
wrote:

>On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 22:23:38 +0000, [H]omer wrote:
>
>> The following is my opinion only, this is not an official FAQ.
>>
>> . COLA is unmoderated, therefore it is not possible to censor it
>>
>> Claims of censorship in an unmoderated group are just puerile and
>> blatantly false. There's only three situations where a poster may
>> be censured (although not necessarily censored):
>>
>> 1. Those who post in violation of their USENET / Internet Service
>> Provider's AUP or the COLA charter, may be subsequently LARTed
>> by anyone who takes offence. LARTs may, or may not result in a
>> successful remedy.
>> 2. Those who break the law (e.g. by stalking, threats, revealing
>> others' personal information) may face criminal prosecution.
>> 3. Some spam may be subject to CANCEL messages sent automatically
>> or manually by USENET administrators. Ordinary users typically
>> do not have the facility to cancel /others'/ messages, beyond
>> making an appeal to such administrators.
>
>
>By your own definition, Roy Schestowitz fits every single one of your
>criteria.
>
>1. Posting though Mark Kent's computer. A violation of his ISP's TOS. And
>yes this has been verified.
>2. Roy has made physical threats against people. He also seems to be
>posting flatfish's real name.
>3. SPAm? Schestowitz is the king of off topic SPAM and sorry but putting
>[OT] in front of the message is a poor excuse.
>
>So what are you going to do about Roy Schestowitz, [Homer] ?
I've never been threatened by Roy and I've never seen any "viagra"
posts. You might be exaggerating a bit.