Re: c.o.o.moderated -- RIP - OS2

This is a discussion on Re: c.o.o.moderated -- RIP - OS2 ; Don Hills wrote: > In article , > "Stan Goodman" wrote: > >>Trolls were the impetus behind the moderated NG? I don't remember >>that. There really aren't enough of them to make that necessary. My >>own bete noir (and last ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Re: c.o.o.moderated -- RIP

  1. Re: c.o.o.moderated -- RIP

    Don Hills wrote:
    > In article ,
    > "Stan Goodman" wrote:
    >
    >>Trolls were the impetus behind the moderated NG? I don't remember
    >>that. There really aren't enough of them to make that necessary. My
    >>own bete noir (and last straw) has been He Who Shall Not Be Named
    >>(mostly because he has too many of them).

    >
    >
    > Not its creation, just the most recent burst of usage. The Nameless One
    > tried very hard to persuade people not to use it because it would limit
    > his scope for disruption.


    And no one uses it today. Either "The Nameless One" was able to persuade
    people not to use it or he is able to block the posts he dislikes.
    Either way,
    "The Nameless One" seems to be in control of the c.o.o.moderated.

    >> ... But there are also notes from people who
    >>just bought Warp3 on eBay, to whom it would never occur to look for
    >>eCS groups. As long as OS/2 groups are inhabited, they have somebody
    >>to talk to; if we would all move to the eCS groups, they would be
    >>lost. I think there is a real value to the survival of
    >>comp.os.os2.moderated; sporadic activity doesn't count.

    >
    > I agree. I have more licenses of Warp 3 running than Warp 4 and above.
    > I provide more help via email than newsgroups these days, new users search
    > the newsgroups and email people who they think may help instead of wading
    > into the cess-pits. Maybe we should run a CFV to remove all the un-moderated
    > comp.os.os2.* groups?


    Stay with private email. The riff-raff don't belong in the OS/2
    newsgroups. :-)

    The eCS Guy©


  2. Re: c.o.o.moderated -- RIP

    Don Hills wrote:
    > In article <11r1jrkjjltnv43@news.supernews.com>,
    > =?ISO-8859-1?Q?The_eCS_Guy=A9?= wrote:
    >
    >>Don Hills wrote:
    >>
    >>>In article ,
    >>>"Stan Goodman" wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> ... But there are also notes from people who
    >>>>just bought Warp3 on eBay ...
    >>>
    >>>I agree. I have more licenses of Warp 3 running than Warp 4 and above.
    >>>I provide more help via email than newsgroups these days, new users search
    >>>the newsgroups and email people who they think may help instead of wading
    >>>into the cess-pits. ...

    >>
    >>Stay with private email. The riff-raff don't belong in the OS/2
    >>newsgroups. :-)

    >
    >
    > Really? You say new OS/2 users don't belong in the OS/2 newsgroups?
    > How odd. A quick Google search shows dozens of posts from you saying that
    > the OS/2 newsgroups are for OS/2 users. Maybe you were just joking above,
    > as evidenced by the smiley icon. I expect you'll apologise for any possible
    > misunderstanding immediately, it wouldn't be smart for such an active and
    > dedicated advocate of OS/2 as yourself to appear to offend new OS/2 users.
    >


    Reading comprehension problem. I said the "riff-raff" do not belong in the
    OS/2 newsgroups. Look in the mirror. You could be using OS/2 v7.0 and
    you're presence would still be unwelcome.

    You can read, can't you?

    The eCS Guy©


  3. Re: c.o.o.moderated -- RIP

    On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 02:22:06 UTC, The eCS Guy
    wrote:

    > Don Hills wrote:
    > > In article ,
    > > "Stan Goodman" wrote:
    > >
    > >>Trolls were the impetus behind the moderated NG? I don't remember
    > >>that. There really aren't enough of them to make that necessary. My
    > >>own bete noir (and last straw) has been He Who Shall Not Be Named
    > >>(mostly because he has too many of them).

    > >
    > >
    > > Not its creation, just the most recent burst of usage. The Nameless One
    > > tried very hard to persuade people not to use it because it would limit
    > > his scope for disruption.

    >
    > And no one uses it today. Either "The Nameless One" was able to persuade
    > people not to use it or he is able to block the posts he dislikes.
    > Either way,
    > "The Nameless One" seems to be in control of the c.o.o.moderated.
    >


    Strange that the one posting to the newsgroup by him had to be
    approved by the REAL moderator

  4. Re: c.o.o.moderated -- RIP

    Kevin K wrote:
    >
    > Strange that the one posting to the newsgroup by him had to be
    > approved by the REAL moderator


    The claim was that I was banned from posting. Another fallacious claim
    made by the typical fleeced eCS Luser.

    18 posts were submitted to c.o.o.moderated today. I denied 17 of them.

    --
    Dr. Timothy Martin, The Official and Only OS/2 Guy
    Warp City Web Site - http://www.warpcity.com
    email: OS2Guy@Gmail.com OR eCSGuy@Gmail.com

  5. Re: c.o.o.moderated -- RIP [FUD4]

    © The OS/2 Guy © wrote:
    > 18 posts were submitted to c.o.o.moderated today. I denied 17 of them.


    But couldn't even approve his own post.
    Within c.o.o.moderated, there has been no indication whatsoever that you
    are a moderator. Easy to explain: such a post would be rejected by the
    only moderator: Pat.

  6. FUD4 Tim Martin making claims without prove again - is he a liar?

    © The OS/2 Guy © schrieb:

    >> Strange that the one posting to the newsgroup by him had to be
    >> approved by the REAL moderator

    > [..]
    > 18 posts were submitted to c.o.o.moderated today. I denied 17 of them.


    Provide a prove for this claim, or be (according to eCS Guy©) exposed as a liar.
    Show us the msg you claim to have deleted.

    Explain why even your own msg was not approved by you, but by Pat Gunn.

    Until now you
    - failed to prove that you are a doctor.
    - failed to prove that you are moderator of c.o.o.moderated.
    - failed to prove that you ever deleted any msg in c.o.o.moderated.

    I bet you wont dare to answer this msg, probably eCS Guy© (who is still
    not man/woman enough to reveal his/her real name, like a coward) will jump
    in and spread more accusations from anonymity.

    Herwig

+ Reply to Thread