A suggestion

[John Corliss]

In the past, this group has come up with a way to allow message
filters to work on such things as spam replies and off topic posts. I
have had A.A. Fussy killfiled for quite a while now, but unfortunately
his troll or at the very least troll-like activity continues to be
very effective in eliciting responses that nobody can filter out.
Thus, here is my suggestion:

How about if the group agrees on a subject line inclusion for replies
to or posts about A.A. Fussy or Babyaware like:

*FUSSY*

or:

*BABYA*

As always, the asterisks are uncommonly enough used in subject lines
that it would allow easy filtering.

JMHO.
HTM.
etc.

80)>

 

[Steven Burn]

How about if the group agrees on a subject line inclusion for replies
to or posts about A.A. Fussy or Babyaware like:

Tools > Message Rules > News

"Where Subject line contains specific words"

Words: Babya, Fussy

Action: Delete it

Works for me............

--
Regards

Steven Burn
Ur I.T. Mate Group
www.it-mate.co.uk

Keeping it FREE!

Disclaimer:
I know I'm probably wrong, I just like taking part ;o)

 

[FYIS.org/estore]

In John Corliss posted:

In the past, this group has come up with a way to allow message
filters to work on such things as spam replies and off topic posts. I
have had A.A. Fussy killfiled for quite a while now, but unfortunately
his troll or at the very least troll-like activity continues to be
very effective in eliciting responses that nobody can filter out.
Thus, here is my suggestion:

How about if the group agrees on a subject line inclusion for replies
to or posts about A.A. Fussy or Babyaware like:

*FUSSY*

or:

*BABYA*

As always, the asterisks are uncommonly enough used in subject lines
that it would allow easy filtering.

JMHO.
HTM.
etc.

80)>

How 'bout if post/subject = Babya/Fussy, activate willpower and ignore
it!

DanlK, FYI Services
www.FYIS.org
Visit our Commemorative Collectible www.FYIS.org/estore!
____________________________________________
Don't forget to put this html code on your web page:
<SCRIPT language=JavaScript
src="http://www.georgewbush.com/WStuff/BPForm.aspx">
</SCRIPT>

 

[John Corliss]

Tools > Message Rules > News
"Where Subject line contains specific words"
Words: Babya, Fussy
Action: Delete it

Works for me............

Right, Steven. However, what if somebody posts something like "I'm
real fussy and need a good freeware slideviewer program" in their
subject line? See, my idea (which the group actually came up with long
ago) prevents accidental filtering of valid posts.

 

[John Corliss]

In John Corliss posted:



How 'bout if post/subject = Babya/Fussy, activate willpower and ignore
it!

I agree and wouldn't it be nice if everybody would simply ignore him.
However, that isn't going to happen soon.

 

[Ed]

In the past, this group has come up with a way to allow message
filters to work on such things as spam replies and off topic posts. I
have had A.A. Fussy killfiled for quite a while now, but unfortunately
his troll or at the very least troll-like activity continues to be
very effective in eliciting responses that nobody can filter out.
Thus, here is my suggestion:

How about if the group agrees on a subject line inclusion for replies
to or posts about A.A. Fussy or Babyaware like:

*FUSSY*

or:

*BABYA*

As always, the asterisks are uncommonly enough used in subject lines
that it would allow easy filtering.

JMHO.
HTM.
etc.

80)>

--
Regards from John Corliss
No adware, cdware, commercial software, crippleware, demoware,
nagware, shareware, spyware, time-limited software, trialware, viruses
or warez please.

Hey John (and others), what exactly is the problem here? I've been
reading/contributing to this group for a while now and, of course, I come
across Mr Fussy's postings. But I can choose to read and/or reply and/or
ignore them as I wish. Just as I can with yours or anyone else's postings.
And likewise you probably do the same with me! So why do you advocate some
group response to his postings rather than let me, myself, decide who and
what I want to read? I really don't understand what's going on here.

 

[Dan Goodman]

Hey John (and others), what exactly is the problem here?

The problem -- which I thought he'd stated quite clearly, but evidently
it wasn't clear to you -- is not Fussy himself but RESPONSES to him.

Myself, I see those responses as an opportunity rather than a problem.
That is, the opportunity to killfile. So far, the people who've chosen
to use Fussy as a target haven't included anyone who'd also contributed
anything I considered valuable.

 

[dszady]

The problem -- which I thought he'd stated quite clearly, but evidently
it wasn't clear to you -- is not Fussy himself but RESPONSES to him.

Myself, I see those responses as an opportunity rather than a problem.
That is, the opportunity to killfile. So far, the people who've chosen
to use Fussy as a target haven't included anyone who'd also contributed
anything I considered valuable.

[...]

You are right. Let me use this as an opportunity since you don't
contribute anything of value to this group. *Ploink*
Second today. Feels pretty good I must say.
With the utmost respect,

 

[burnr]

Myself, I see those responses as an opportunity rather than a problem.
That is, the opportunity to killfile. So far, the people who've chosen
to use Fussy as a target haven't included anyone who'd also contributed
anything I considered valuable.

Agreed! They all reside happily, side by side in my killfile. The most
effective troll killing is to *completely* ignore.

 

[Derald]

I really don't understand what's going on here.

Oh, c'mon, now... sure you do... ;-)

 

[Seabat]

You are right. Let me use this as an opportunity since you don't
contribute anything of value to this group. *Ploink*
Second today. Feels pretty good I must say.
With the utmost respect,

!!!! Ploink !!!! on you! You're right, feels good.

 

[dszady]

!!!! Ploink !!!! on you! You're right, feels good.

Number 3! Fillher' up Boys.

 

[John Corliss]

Hey John (and others), what exactly is the problem here? I've been
reading/contributing to this group for a while now and, of course, I come
across Mr Fussy's postings. But I can choose to read and/or reply and/or
ignore them as I wish. Just as I can with yours or anyone else's postings.
And likewise you probably do the same with me! So why do you advocate some
group response to his postings rather than let me, myself, decide who and
what I want to read? I really don't understand what's going on here.

Ed,
What I'm saying is that many (like myself) have chosen to filter
out Fussy's message. When people repeatedly respond to him, that's
undermining the purpose of a killfile. It would be nice if they'd give
others a choice about reading their O.T. posts. And it was just a
suggestion. Sheesh.

 

[Vic Dura]

Hey John (and others), what exactly is the problem here? I've been
reading/contributing to this group for a while now and, of course, I come
across Mr Fussy's postings. But I can choose to read and/or reply and/or
ignore them as I wish. Just as I can with yours or anyone else's postings.
And likewise you probably do the same with me! So why do you advocate some
group response to his postings rather than let me, myself, decide who and
what I want to read? I really don't understand what's going on here.

It's about command, control and power.

 

[|3iff //ullins]

In the past, this group has come up with a way to allow message
filters to work on such things as spam replies and off topic posts. I
have had A.A. Fussy killfiled for quite a while now, but unfortunately
his troll or at the very least troll-like activity continues to be
very effective in eliciting responses that nobody can filter out.
Thus, here is my suggestion:

How about if the group agrees on a subject line inclusion for replies
to or posts about A.A. Fussy or Babyaware like:

*FUSSY*

or:

*BABYA*

As always, the asterisks are uncommonly enough used in subject lines
that it would allow easy filtering.

JMHO.
HTM.
etc.

<rhetorical>
but unless the usual very first poster in any given babya-oriented
thread (usually fussy p*ssy herself) is the one whom inserts the
asterisks (or other notation) into the subject line, won't later
insertion create more partial-threads and chaos for the people which
decide *not to killfile the babya posts and responses because they are
amused, informed or otherwise facinated by them and/or their fine
corinthian content?

you know... kinda like how *you make spam and ot situations worse by
creating partial threads stating that something posted was "*SPAM"" or
"[OT]" even though anyone with half the brains of an aol'er could tell
that is what it is just by simply parsing the original subject line?
</rhetorical>

hth!

80)>

=^o.O^=

--
"John Corliss is a sick human being. We shouldn't hate him, we
shouldn't make fun of him, we shouldn't treat him as a pariah or a
net.idiot--above all, we shouldn't flame him. We should reach out to
him as a brother, with love and compassion, and operate on his brain."

- Gene Ward Smith

 

[donutbandit]

Hey John (and others), what exactly is the problem here? I've been
reading/contributing to this group for a while now and, of course, I
come across Mr Fussy's postings. But I can choose to read and/or
reply and/or ignore them as I wish. Just as I can with yours or
anyone else's postings. And likewise you probably do the same with me!
So why do you advocate some group response to his postings rather
than let me, myself, decide who and what I want to read? I really
don't understand what's going on here.

It's attention getting behavior. They just can't or won't drop it, which
makes them just as bad as the person they purport to be resisting.

 

[A.A. Fussy]

In the past, this group has come up with a way to allow message
filters to work on such things as spam replies and off topic posts. I
have had A.A. Fussy killfiled for quite a while now, but unfortunately
his troll or at the very least troll-like activity continues to be
very effective in eliciting responses that nobody can filter out.
Thus, here is my suggestion:

How about if the group agrees on a subject line inclusion for replies
to or posts about A.A. Fussy or Babyaware like:

*FUSSY*

or:

*BABYA*

As always, the asterisks are uncommonly enough used in subject lines
that it would allow easy filtering.

JMHO.
HTM.
etc.

80)>

--
Regards from John Corliss
No adware, cdware, commercial software, crippleware, demoware,
nagware, shareware, spyware, time-limited software, trialware, viruses
or warez please.

Thanks-I've used [babya] often.

 

[A.A. Fussy]

Right, Steven. However, what if somebody posts something like "I'm
real fussy and need a good freeware slideviewer program" in their
subject line? See, my idea (which the group actually came up with long
ago) prevents accidental filtering of valid posts.

--
Regards from John Corliss
No adware, cdware, commercial software, crippleware, demoware,
nagware, shareware, spyware, time-limited software, trialware, viruses
or warez please.

or if I announce new versions with download links-not spamming but informing
of a new version to download

 

[G. W. Clay]

Second today. Feels pretty good I must say.

Kerplonk

 

[Nicolaas Hawkins]

Kerplonk

Hope you brought a roll of paper with you.
--

Regards,
Nicolaas.


- Why be difficult? A little more effort and you can be IMPOSSIBLE!