Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.php > #9056 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2013-04-14 08:48 -0400 |
| Last post | 2013-04-19 21:02 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 27 — 5 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.php
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-04-14 08:48 -0400
Re: Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android Luuk <luuk@invalid.lan> - 2013-04-14 16:33 +0200
Re: Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-04-14 22:05 -0400
Re: Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-04-19 09:30 +0200
Re: Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-04-19 08:09 -0400
Re: Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-04-19 17:14 +0200
Re: Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-04-19 12:44 -0400
Re: Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-04-19 22:00 +0200
Re: Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-04-19 22:02 +0200
Re: Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-04-19 16:06 -0400
Re: Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-04-19 22:22 +0200
Re: Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-04-19 17:58 -0400
OT: What is a spammer (was: Re: Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android) Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-04-20 10:02 +0200
Re: OT: What is a spammer Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-04-20 07:48 -0400
Re: OT: What is a spammer Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-04-20 08:24 -0400
Re: OT: What is a spammer Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-04-20 14:36 +0200
Re: OT: What is a spammer Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-04-20 08:42 -0400
Re: Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-04-19 16:05 -0400
Re: Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-04-19 17:16 +0200
Re: Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-04-19 12:44 -0400
Re: Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-04-19 22:03 +0200
Re: Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-04-19 16:08 -0400
OT: Spam or not to spam (was: Re: Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android) Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-04-19 22:27 +0200
Re: OT: Spam or not to spam Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-04-19 17:59 -0400
Re: OT: Spam or not to spam (was: Re: Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android) Doug Miller <doug_at_milmac_dot_com@example.com> - 2013-04-19 22:17 +0000
Re: OT: Spam or not to spam The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-04-20 01:31 +0100
Re: OT: Spam or not to spam Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-04-19 21:02 -0400
Page 1 of 2 [1] 2 Next page →
| From | Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-04-14 08:48 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android |
| Message-ID | <kke8eb$ocn$1@dont-email.me> |
On 4/14/2013 3:46 AM, 23alagmy wrote: > Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android > > http://iamaspammer.com > What does this have to do with PHP, SPAMMER? -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle JDS Computer Training Corp. jstucklex@attglobal.net ==================
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Luuk <luuk@invalid.lan> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-04-14 16:33 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <hbrq3a-rvt.ln1@luuk.invalid.lan> |
| In reply to | #9056 |
On 14-04-2013 14:48, Jerry Stuckle wrote: > On 4/14/2013 3:46 AM, 23alagmy wrote: >> Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android >> >> http://iamaspammer.com >> > > What does this have to do with PHP, SPAMMER? > WHY is this message to comp.lang.php, comlaining that someone is spamming here? The sender of this spammed message probably will not read it anywayz........
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-04-14 22:05 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <kkfn41$g3q$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #9058 |
On 4/14/2013 10:33 AM, Luuk wrote: > On 14-04-2013 14:48, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >> On 4/14/2013 3:46 AM, 23alagmy wrote: >>> Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android >>> >>> http://iamaspammer.com >>> >> >> What does this have to do with PHP, SPAMMER? >> > > WHY is this message to comp.lang.php, comlaining that someone is > spamming here? The sender of this spammed message probably will not read > it anywayz........ > Maybe, maybe not. But ignoring SPAM does not make it go away. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle JDS Computer Training Corp. jstucklex@attglobal.net ==================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-04-19 09:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <5170F2B1.8050205@arnowelzel.de> |
| In reply to | #9060 |
Jerry Stuckle, 2013-04-15 04:05: > On 4/14/2013 10:33 AM, Luuk wrote: >> On 14-04-2013 14:48, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >>> On 4/14/2013 3:46 AM, 23alagmy wrote: >>>> Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android >>>> >>>> http://iamaspammer.com >>>> >>> >>> What does this have to do with PHP, SPAMMER? >>> >> >> WHY is this message to comp.lang.php, comlaining that someone is >> spamming here? The sender of this spammed message probably will not read >> it anywayz........ >> > > Maybe, maybe not. > > But ignoring SPAM does not make it go away. *Nothing* makes spam go away except filtering it. -- Arno Welzel http://arnowelzel.de http://de-rec-fahrrad.de
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-04-19 08:09 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <kkrbvl$q0g$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #9088 |
On 4/19/2013 3:30 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: > Jerry Stuckle, 2013-04-15 04:05: > >> On 4/14/2013 10:33 AM, Luuk wrote: >>> On 14-04-2013 14:48, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >>>> On 4/14/2013 3:46 AM, 23alagmy wrote: >>>>> Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android >>>>> >>>>> http://iamaspammer.com >>>>> >>>> >>>> What does this have to do with PHP, SPAMMER? >>>> >>> >>> WHY is this message to comp.lang.php, comlaining that someone is >>> spamming here? The sender of this spammed message probably will not read >>> it anywayz........ >>> >> >> Maybe, maybe not. >> >> But ignoring SPAM does not make it go away. > > *Nothing* makes spam go away except filtering it. > > Your proof? -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle JDS Computer Training Corp. jstucklex@attglobal.net ==================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-04-19 17:14 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <51715F3D.6050404@arnowelzel.de> |
| In reply to | #9090 |
Am 19.04.2013 14:09, schrieb Jerry Stuckle: > On 4/19/2013 3:30 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: >> Jerry Stuckle, 2013-04-15 04:05: >> >>> On 4/14/2013 10:33 AM, Luuk wrote: >>>> On 14-04-2013 14:48, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >>>>> On 4/14/2013 3:46 AM, 23alagmy wrote: >>>>>> Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android >>>>>> >>>>>> http://iamaspammer.com >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> What does this have to do with PHP, SPAMMER? >>>>> >>>> >>>> WHY is this message to comp.lang.php, comlaining that someone is >>>> spamming here? The sender of this spammed message probably will not read >>>> it anywayz........ >>>> >>> >>> Maybe, maybe not. >>> >>> But ignoring SPAM does not make it go away. >> >> *Nothing* makes spam go away except filtering it. > > Your proof? Nothing will keep spammers from trying to send their stuff. So filtering (or better rejecting) spam is the only reasonable solution to avoid it. What's your proof, that spammers will stop, just because you tell them you don't want their spam? How many spammers could you convince to stop it by responding to their spam? -- Arno Welzel http://arnowelzel.de http://de-rec-fahrrad.de
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-04-19 12:44 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <kkrs3a$in1$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #9091 |
On 4/19/2013 11:14 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: > Am 19.04.2013 14:09, schrieb Jerry Stuckle: > >> On 4/19/2013 3:30 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: >>> Jerry Stuckle, 2013-04-15 04:05: >>> >>>> On 4/14/2013 10:33 AM, Luuk wrote: >>>>> On 14-04-2013 14:48, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >>>>>> On 4/14/2013 3:46 AM, 23alagmy wrote: >>>>>>> Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://iamaspammer.com >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> What does this have to do with PHP, SPAMMER? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> WHY is this message to comp.lang.php, comlaining that someone is >>>>> spamming here? The sender of this spammed message probably will not read >>>>> it anywayz........ >>>>> >>>> >>>> Maybe, maybe not. >>>> >>>> But ignoring SPAM does not make it go away. >>> >>> *Nothing* makes spam go away except filtering it. >> >> Your proof? > > Nothing will keep spammers from trying to send their stuff. > > So filtering (or better rejecting) spam is the only reasonable solution > to avoid it. > > What's your proof, that spammers will stop, just because you tell them > you don't want their spam? How many spammers could you convince to stop > it by responding to their spam? > > Your proof? You made the claim that nothing will stop the spammers. The only claim I made was that ignoring it will not stop the spammers. So what's your proof? And yes, I have gotten spammers websites and email accounts terminated. Plus, if you've paid ANY attention, some spammers come back here and apologize for spamming. So, once more. Your proof? -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle JDS Computer Training Corp. jstucklex@attglobal.net ==================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-04-19 22:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <5171A24A.7010903@arnowelzel.de> |
| In reply to | #9096 |
Jerry Stuckle, 2013-04-19 18:44: > On 4/19/2013 11:14 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: >> Am 19.04.2013 14:09, schrieb Jerry Stuckle: >> >>> On 4/19/2013 3:30 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: >>>> Jerry Stuckle, 2013-04-15 04:05: >>>> >>>>> On 4/14/2013 10:33 AM, Luuk wrote: >>>>>> On 14-04-2013 14:48, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >>>>>>> On 4/14/2013 3:46 AM, 23alagmy wrote: >>>>>>>> Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://iamaspammer.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What does this have to do with PHP, SPAMMER? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> WHY is this message to comp.lang.php, comlaining that someone is >>>>>> spamming here? The sender of this spammed message probably will not read >>>>>> it anywayz........ >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Maybe, maybe not. >>>>> >>>>> But ignoring SPAM does not make it go away. >>>> >>>> *Nothing* makes spam go away except filtering it. >>> >>> Your proof? >> >> Nothing will keep spammers from trying to send their stuff. >> >> So filtering (or better rejecting) spam is the only reasonable solution >> to avoid it. >> >> What's your proof, that spammers will stop, just because you tell them >> you don't want their spam? How many spammers could you convince to stop >> it by responding to their spam? >> >> > > Your proof? Spam exists. > You made the claim that nothing will stop the spammers. The only claim > I made was that ignoring it will not stop the spammers. So what? > So what's your proof? > > And yes, I have gotten spammers websites and email accounts terminated. > Plus, if you've paid ANY attention, some spammers come back here and > apologize for spamming. Then those people where not spammers - otherwise the would have apologized. > So, once more. Your proof? Spam exists. -- Arno Welzel http://arnowelzel.de http://de-rec-fahrrad.de
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-04-19 22:02 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <5171A2C6.60209@arnowelzel.de> |
| In reply to | #9100 |
Arno Welzel, 2013-04-19 22:00: > Jerry Stuckle, 2013-04-19 18:44: > >> On 4/19/2013 11:14 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: >>> Am 19.04.2013 14:09, schrieb Jerry Stuckle: >>> >>>> On 4/19/2013 3:30 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: >>>>> Jerry Stuckle, 2013-04-15 04:05: >>>>> >>>>>> On 4/14/2013 10:33 AM, Luuk wrote: >>>>>>> On 14-04-2013 14:48, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >>>>>>>> On 4/14/2013 3:46 AM, 23alagmy wrote: >>>>>>>>> Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> http://iamaspammer.com >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> What does this have to do with PHP, SPAMMER? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> WHY is this message to comp.lang.php, comlaining that someone is >>>>>>> spamming here? The sender of this spammed message probably will not read >>>>>>> it anywayz........ >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Maybe, maybe not. >>>>>> >>>>>> But ignoring SPAM does not make it go away. >>>>> >>>>> *Nothing* makes spam go away except filtering it. >>>> >>>> Your proof? >>> >>> Nothing will keep spammers from trying to send their stuff. >>> >>> So filtering (or better rejecting) spam is the only reasonable solution >>> to avoid it. >>> >>> What's your proof, that spammers will stop, just because you tell them >>> you don't want their spam? How many spammers could you convince to stop >>> it by responding to their spam? >>> >>> >> >> Your proof? > > Spam exists. > >> You made the claim that nothing will stop the spammers. The only claim >> I made was that ignoring it will not stop the spammers. > > So what? > >> So what's your proof? >> >> And yes, I have gotten spammers websites and email accounts terminated. >> Plus, if you've paid ANY attention, some spammers come back here and >> apologize for spamming. > > Then those people where not spammers - otherwise the would have apologized. Sorry - sent to early and typing to fast... So those people where not spammers - otherwise they would not have apologized since spammers *never* apologize to send spam. -- Arno Welzel http://arnowelzel.de http://de-rec-fahrrad.de
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-04-19 16:06 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <kks7vo$hlu$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #9101 |
On 4/19/2013 4:02 PM, Arno Welzel wrote: > Arno Welzel, 2013-04-19 22:00: > >> Jerry Stuckle, 2013-04-19 18:44: >> >>> On 4/19/2013 11:14 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: >>>> Am 19.04.2013 14:09, schrieb Jerry Stuckle: >>>> >>>>> On 4/19/2013 3:30 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: >>>>>> Jerry Stuckle, 2013-04-15 04:05: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 4/14/2013 10:33 AM, Luuk wrote: >>>>>>>> On 14-04-2013 14:48, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 4/14/2013 3:46 AM, 23alagmy wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> http://iamaspammer.com >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> What does this have to do with PHP, SPAMMER? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> WHY is this message to comp.lang.php, comlaining that someone is >>>>>>>> spamming here? The sender of this spammed message probably will not read >>>>>>>> it anywayz........ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Maybe, maybe not. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But ignoring SPAM does not make it go away. >>>>>> >>>>>> *Nothing* makes spam go away except filtering it. >>>>> >>>>> Your proof? >>>> >>>> Nothing will keep spammers from trying to send their stuff. >>>> >>>> So filtering (or better rejecting) spam is the only reasonable solution >>>> to avoid it. >>>> >>>> What's your proof, that spammers will stop, just because you tell them >>>> you don't want their spam? How many spammers could you convince to stop >>>> it by responding to their spam? >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Your proof? >> >> Spam exists. >> >>> You made the claim that nothing will stop the spammers. The only claim >>> I made was that ignoring it will not stop the spammers. >> >> So what? >> >>> So what's your proof? >>> >>> And yes, I have gotten spammers websites and email accounts terminated. >>> Plus, if you've paid ANY attention, some spammers come back here and >>> apologize for spamming. >> >> Then those people where not spammers - otherwise the would have apologized. > > Sorry - sent to early and typing to fast... > > So those people where not spammers - otherwise they would not have > apologized since spammers *never* apologize to send spam. > > Maybe *YOU* don't apologize for sending SPAM. Some people do, when they realize it IS spam. A spammer is a person who sends spam - not some subset like you want to make them. When the error of their ways is pointed out, some people correct those errors. But then you have a VERY narrow view of who spammers are. One which is NOT shared by most of the world. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle JDS Computer Training Corp. jstucklex@attglobal.net ==================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-04-19 22:22 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <5171A790.2010001@arnowelzel.de> |
| In reply to | #9104 |
Jerry Stuckle, 2013-04-19 22:06: > On 4/19/2013 4:02 PM, Arno Welzel wrote: >> Arno Welzel, 2013-04-19 22:00: >> >>> Jerry Stuckle, 2013-04-19 18:44: >>> >>>> On 4/19/2013 11:14 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: >>>>> Am 19.04.2013 14:09, schrieb Jerry Stuckle: >>>>> >>>>>> On 4/19/2013 3:30 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: >>>>>>> Jerry Stuckle, 2013-04-15 04:05: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 4/14/2013 10:33 AM, Luuk wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 14-04-2013 14:48, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 4/14/2013 3:46 AM, 23alagmy wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> http://iamaspammer.com >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> What does this have to do with PHP, SPAMMER? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> WHY is this message to comp.lang.php, comlaining that someone is >>>>>>>>> spamming here? The sender of this spammed message probably will not read >>>>>>>>> it anywayz........ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Maybe, maybe not. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> But ignoring SPAM does not make it go away. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *Nothing* makes spam go away except filtering it. >>>>>> >>>>>> Your proof? >>>>> >>>>> Nothing will keep spammers from trying to send their stuff. >>>>> >>>>> So filtering (or better rejecting) spam is the only reasonable solution >>>>> to avoid it. >>>>> >>>>> What's your proof, that spammers will stop, just because you tell them >>>>> you don't want their spam? How many spammers could you convince to stop >>>>> it by responding to their spam? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> Your proof? >>> >>> Spam exists. >>> >>>> You made the claim that nothing will stop the spammers. The only claim >>>> I made was that ignoring it will not stop the spammers. >>> >>> So what? >>> >>>> So what's your proof? >>>> >>>> And yes, I have gotten spammers websites and email accounts terminated. >>>> Plus, if you've paid ANY attention, some spammers come back here and >>>> apologize for spamming. >>> >>> Then those people where not spammers - otherwise the would have apologized. >> >> Sorry - sent to early and typing to fast... >> >> So those people where not spammers - otherwise they would not have >> apologized since spammers *never* apologize to send spam. >> >> > > Maybe *YOU* don't apologize for sending SPAM. Some people do, when they > realize it IS spam. Then they are not spammers. They are just people who did a mistake. > A spammer is a person who sends spam - not some subset like you want to > make them. When the error of their ways is pointed out, some people > correct those errors. No - a "spammer" is a person who sends spam and does not care about the negative effects. > But then you have a VERY narrow view of who spammers are. One which is > NOT shared by most of the world. The opposite is true - otherwise everybody would kindly ask every spammer to stop their business instead of using tools like SpamAssassing, greylisting, blacklisting etc. -- Arno Welzel http://arnowelzel.de http://de-rec-fahrrad.de
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-04-19 17:58 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <kksefv$k8$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #9107 |
On 4/19/2013 4:22 PM, Arno Welzel wrote: > Jerry Stuckle, 2013-04-19 22:06: > >> On 4/19/2013 4:02 PM, Arno Welzel wrote: >>> Arno Welzel, 2013-04-19 22:00: >>> >>>> Jerry Stuckle, 2013-04-19 18:44: >>>> >>>>> On 4/19/2013 11:14 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: >>>>>> Am 19.04.2013 14:09, schrieb Jerry Stuckle: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 4/19/2013 3:30 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: >>>>>>>> Jerry Stuckle, 2013-04-15 04:05: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 4/14/2013 10:33 AM, Luuk wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 14-04-2013 14:48, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 4/14/2013 3:46 AM, 23alagmy wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> http://iamaspammer.com >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> What does this have to do with PHP, SPAMMER? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> WHY is this message to comp.lang.php, comlaining that someone is >>>>>>>>>> spamming here? The sender of this spammed message probably will not read >>>>>>>>>> it anywayz........ >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Maybe, maybe not. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> But ignoring SPAM does not make it go away. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *Nothing* makes spam go away except filtering it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Your proof? >>>>>> >>>>>> Nothing will keep spammers from trying to send their stuff. >>>>>> >>>>>> So filtering (or better rejecting) spam is the only reasonable solution >>>>>> to avoid it. >>>>>> >>>>>> What's your proof, that spammers will stop, just because you tell them >>>>>> you don't want their spam? How many spammers could you convince to stop >>>>>> it by responding to their spam? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Your proof? >>>> >>>> Spam exists. >>>> >>>>> You made the claim that nothing will stop the spammers. The only claim >>>>> I made was that ignoring it will not stop the spammers. >>>> >>>> So what? >>>> >>>>> So what's your proof? >>>>> >>>>> And yes, I have gotten spammers websites and email accounts terminated. >>>>> Plus, if you've paid ANY attention, some spammers come back here and >>>>> apologize for spamming. >>>> >>>> Then those people where not spammers - otherwise the would have apologized. >>> >>> Sorry - sent to early and typing to fast... >>> >>> So those people where not spammers - otherwise they would not have >>> apologized since spammers *never* apologize to send spam. >>> >>> >> >> Maybe *YOU* don't apologize for sending SPAM. Some people do, when they >> realize it IS spam. > > Then they are not spammers. They are just people who did a mistake. > According to YOUR definition. Most of the rest of the world does NOT agree with you. >> A spammer is a person who sends spam - not some subset like you want to >> make them. When the error of their ways is pointed out, some people >> correct those errors. > > No - a "spammer" is a person who sends spam and does not care about the > negative effects. > >> But then you have a VERY narrow view of who spammers are. One which is >> NOT shared by most of the world. > > The opposite is true - otherwise everybody would kindly ask every > spammer to stop their business instead of using tools like > SpamAssassing, greylisting, blacklisting etc. > > > No, YOU'RE the one with the VERY narrow view of who spammers are. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle JDS Computer Training Corp. jstucklex@attglobal.net ==================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-04-20 10:02 +0200 |
| Subject | OT: What is a spammer (was: Re: Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android) |
| Message-ID | <51724B7A.1080604@arnowelzel.de> |
| In reply to | #9113 |
Jerry Stuckle, 2013-04-19 23:58: > On 4/19/2013 4:22 PM, Arno Welzel wrote: >> Jerry Stuckle, 2013-04-19 22:06: [Jerry Stuckle explaining that he asked people to stop sending spam and some of them apologized] >>> Maybe *YOU* don't apologize for sending SPAM. Some people do, when they >>> realize it IS spam. >> >> Then they are not spammers. They are just people who did a mistake. > > According to YOUR definition. Most of the rest of the world does NOT > agree with you. Well - i may not be that experienced after just about 15 years of running mailservers. But at least i noticed, that *none* of the spammers ever stopped by telling them to stop sending their junk and *none* of my clients even considered using *spam* as a form of advertisement. [...] >> No - a "spammer" is a person who sends spam and does not care about the >> negative effects. >> >>> But then you have a VERY narrow view of who spammers are. One which is >>> NOT shared by most of the world. >> >> The opposite is true - otherwise everybody would kindly ask every >> spammer to stop their business instead of using tools like >> SpamAssassing, greylisting, blacklisting etc. > > No, YOU'RE the one with the VERY narrow view of who spammers are. I see... -- Arno Welzel http://arnowelzel.de http://de-rec-fahrrad.de
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-04-20 07:48 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: OT: What is a spammer |
| Message-ID | <kktv5f$172$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #9137 |
On 4/20/2013 4:02 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: > Jerry Stuckle, 2013-04-19 23:58: > >> On 4/19/2013 4:22 PM, Arno Welzel wrote: >>> Jerry Stuckle, 2013-04-19 22:06: > > [Jerry Stuckle explaining that he asked people to stop sending spam and > some of them apologized] >>>> Maybe *YOU* don't apologize for sending SPAM. Some people do, when they >>>> realize it IS spam. >>> >>> Then they are not spammers. They are just people who did a mistake. >> >> According to YOUR definition. Most of the rest of the world does NOT >> agree with you. > > Well - i may not be that experienced after just about 15 years of > running mailservers. But at least i noticed, that *none* of the spammers > ever stopped by telling them to stop sending their junk and *none* of my > clients even considered using *spam* as a form of advertisement. > You've been running mail servers. So what? You claim to be a programmer also, but I've seen some of the suggestions you've made. And who cares what either of your clients think? This isn't about whether SPAM is a form of advertisement or not. But then this is a typical action of a troll who doesn't have an argument. > [...] >>> No - a "spammer" is a person who sends spam and does not care about the >>> negative effects. >>> >>>> But then you have a VERY narrow view of who spammers are. One which is >>>> NOT shared by most of the world. >>> >>> The opposite is true - otherwise everybody would kindly ask every >>> spammer to stop their business instead of using tools like >>> SpamAssassing, greylisting, blacklisting etc. >> >> No, YOU'RE the one with the VERY narrow view of who spammers are. > > I see... > > Here's a basic English lesson for you. broad [brawd] Show IPA adjective, broad·er, broad·est, adverb, noun adjective 1. of great breadth: The river was too broad to swim across. 2. measured from side to side: The desk was three feet broad. 3. of great extent; large: the broad expanse of ocean. 4. widely diffused; open; full: We awoke to broad daylight. 5. not limited or narrow; of extensive range or scope: A modern doctor must have a broad knowledge of medicine. nar·row [nar-oh] Show IPA adjective, nar·row·er, nar·row·est, verb, noun adjective 1. of little breadth or width; not broad or wide; not as wide as usual or expected: a narrow path. 2. limited in extent or space; affording little room: narrow quarters. 3. limited in range or scope: a narrow sampling of public opinion. 4. lacking breadth of view or sympathy, as persons, the mind, or ideas: a narrow man, knowing only his professional specialty; a narrow mind. 5. with little margin to spare; barely adequate or successful; close: a narrow escape. Your definition of spammer is much narrower than mine. But then trolls always try to change the subject or lay blame on the other person. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle JDS Computer Training Corp. jstucklex@attglobal.net ==================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-04-20 08:24 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: OT: What is a spammer |
| Message-ID | <kku17m$cru$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #9137 |
On 4/20/2013 8:18 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: (via email) > >> But then trolls always try to change the subject or lay blame on the >> other person. > > May i remind you, that YOU started all this with this in > <kke8eb$ocn$1@dont-email.me>: > > "What does this have to do with PHP, SPAMMER?" > > No, just like the troll you are, trying to pin it on someone else. I responded to a spammer and told him he was a spammer. YOU started the discussion. But like the cowardly troll you are, you won't post this in the newsgroup. That's OK, I'll do it for you. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle JDS Computer Training Corp. jstucklex@attglobal.net ==================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-04-20 14:36 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: OT: What is a spammer |
| Message-ID | <51728BD1.6010606@arnowelzel.de> |
| In reply to | #9143 |
Jerry Stuckle, 2013-04-20 14:24: > On 4/20/2013 8:18 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: (via email) [...] Yep - via email, since it is OFF-TOPIC HERE! And it is very rude to post e-mail without asking. But stubborn as you are, you can't stop posting here again and again. F'up to poster and EOD for me - but i think, you can't resist ignoring this anyway. -- Arno Welzel http://arnowelzel.de http://de-rec-fahrrad.de
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-04-20 08:42 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: OT: What is a spammer |
| Message-ID | <kku29q$l04$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #9146 |
On 4/20/2013 8:36 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: > Jerry Stuckle, 2013-04-20 14:24: > >> On 4/20/2013 8:18 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: (via email) > [...] > > Yep - via email, since it is OFF-TOPIC HERE! And it is very rude to post > e-mail without asking. > You don't want something posted in the newsgroup, don't send it. > But stubborn as you are, you can't stop posting here again and again. > > F'up to poster and EOD for me - but i think, you can't resist ignoring > this anyway. > > I don't respond to trolls via email, and any email they send related to the newsgroup is posted in the newsgroup. But then trolls don't like people to know who they are - which is why they respond via email. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle JDS Computer Training Corp. jstucklex@attglobal.net ==================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-04-19 16:05 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <kks7sf$hlu$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #9100 |
On 4/19/2013 4:00 PM, Arno Welzel wrote: > Jerry Stuckle, 2013-04-19 18:44: > >> On 4/19/2013 11:14 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: >>> Am 19.04.2013 14:09, schrieb Jerry Stuckle: >>> >>>> On 4/19/2013 3:30 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: >>>>> Jerry Stuckle, 2013-04-15 04:05: >>>>> >>>>>> On 4/14/2013 10:33 AM, Luuk wrote: >>>>>>> On 14-04-2013 14:48, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >>>>>>>> On 4/14/2013 3:46 AM, 23alagmy wrote: >>>>>>>>> Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> http://iamaspammer.com >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> What does this have to do with PHP, SPAMMER? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> WHY is this message to comp.lang.php, comlaining that someone is >>>>>>> spamming here? The sender of this spammed message probably will not read >>>>>>> it anywayz........ >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Maybe, maybe not. >>>>>> >>>>>> But ignoring SPAM does not make it go away. >>>>> >>>>> *Nothing* makes spam go away except filtering it. >>>> >>>> Your proof? >>> >>> Nothing will keep spammers from trying to send their stuff. >>> >>> So filtering (or better rejecting) spam is the only reasonable solution >>> to avoid it. >>> >>> What's your proof, that spammers will stop, just because you tell them >>> you don't want their spam? How many spammers could you convince to stop >>> it by responding to their spam? >>> >>> >> >> Your proof? > > Spam exists. > So? What does that prove? >> You made the claim that nothing will stop the spammers. The only claim >> I made was that ignoring it will not stop the spammers. > > So what? > >> So what's your proof? >> >> And yes, I have gotten spammers websites and email accounts terminated. >> Plus, if you've paid ANY attention, some spammers come back here and >> apologize for spamming. > > Then those people where not spammers - otherwise the would have apologized. > >> So, once more. Your proof? > > Spam exists. > > So what? -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle JDS Computer Training Corp. jstucklex@attglobal.net ==================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-04-19 17:16 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <51715FC6.8020504@arnowelzel.de> |
| In reply to | #9056 |
Am 14.04.2013 14:48, schrieb Jerry Stuckle: > On 4/14/2013 3:46 AM, 23alagmy wrote: >> Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android >> >> http://iamaspammer.com >> > > What does this have to do with PHP, SPAMMER? Why did you even reply? individual.de does not have this posting anyway (cleanfeed etc. exists) - but thanks to you i know, that there was something and have some additional traffic which i otherwise would have missed ;-) -- Arno Welzel http://arnowelzel.de http://de-rec-fahrrad.de
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-04-19 12:44 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <kkrs46$in1$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #9092 |
On 4/19/2013 11:16 AM, Arno Welzel wrote: > Am 14.04.2013 14:48, schrieb Jerry Stuckle: > >> On 4/14/2013 3:46 AM, 23alagmy wrote: >>> Microsoft accuses Google of pushing services to Android >>> >>> http://iamaspammer.com >>> >> >> What does this have to do with PHP, SPAMMER? > > Why did you even reply? individual.de does not have this posting anyway > (cleanfeed etc. exists) - but thanks to you i know, that there was > something and have some additional traffic which i otherwise would have > missed ;-) > > Like I really give a damn what you think. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle JDS Computer Training Corp. jstucklex@attglobal.net ==================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 2 [1] 2 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.php
csiph-web