Tim Slattery wrote:
> >> I suggest you read about what usenet is and how it works.
> >
> > This is NOT usenet.
>
> It depends on how you define Usenet. Is it just the Big 8 ...
Any message or post that transits between two or more peers using the
NNTP protocal is a usenet message or post. The name of the group is
irrelavant.
Your argument is like saying real e-mails must have a subject that
begins with "Hello", and any e-mail that doesn't begin with "Hello" in
the subject line is technically not an e-mail, even if it is conveyed
using the SMTP protocal.
> The microsoft.public.* hierarchy exists outside of the Big 8
> structure. To that extent, it's not part of Usenet.
You seem to want to classify microsoft.* groups as being "outside" of
usenet. Are you one of those people that take offence at the notion
that by posting to a microsoft.* group you are posting to usenet?
> Many of us get the groups from that server, many get them
> from other NNTP servers, many from the web interface. It's
> like the blind men and the elephant.
Except that some of us see the entire elephant all at once, with our
eyes open, while others are indeed blind and don't want to acknowledge
that they're touching an elephant in the first place.
Why does this fake product key validate as being genuine (..
Moderators: DllAdmin, DLLADMIN ONLY
-
jake marley
- Posts: 3
- Joined: 27 Mar 2009, 00:00
Re: Why does this fake product key validate as being genuine
On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 05:32:50 -0500, Jay <user@domain.invalid> wrote:
>> I suggest you read about what usenet is and how it works.
>
>This is NOT usenet. Just because a particular group or set of groups is
>FED to usenet does not make msnews.microsoft.com "usenet" OR a usenet
>server. If that were true, then please explain to us how to access
>alt.binaries.whatever from this server.
Stupid test - probably a reflection of your IQ.
There are many Usenet servers that don't carry alt.binaries.
>> I suggest you read about what usenet is and how it works.
>
>This is NOT usenet. Just because a particular group or set of groups is
>FED to usenet does not make msnews.microsoft.com "usenet" OR a usenet
>server. If that were true, then please explain to us how to access
>alt.binaries.whatever from this server.
Stupid test - probably a reflection of your IQ.
There are many Usenet servers that don't carry alt.binaries.
Re: Why does this fake product key validate as being genuine
The date and time was Friday, March 27, 2009 7:32:36 AM, and on a whim,
Jake Marley pounded out on the keyboard:
> On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 05:32:50 -0500, Jay <user@domain.invalid> wrote:
>
>>> I suggest you read about what usenet is and how it works.
>> This is NOT usenet. Just because a particular group or set of groups is
>> FED to usenet does not make msnews.microsoft.com "usenet" OR a usenet
>> server. If that were true, then please explain to us how to access
>> alt.binaries.whatever from this server.
>
> Stupid test - probably a reflection of your IQ.
>
> There are many Usenet servers that don't carry alt.binaries.
Why don't you learn to reply without being offensive. Intelligent
people don't feel the need to belittle others.
Terry R.
--
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.
Jake Marley pounded out on the keyboard:
> On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 05:32:50 -0500, Jay <user@domain.invalid> wrote:
>
>>> I suggest you read about what usenet is and how it works.
>> This is NOT usenet. Just because a particular group or set of groups is
>> FED to usenet does not make msnews.microsoft.com "usenet" OR a usenet
>> server. If that were true, then please explain to us how to access
>> alt.binaries.whatever from this server.
>
> Stupid test - probably a reflection of your IQ.
>
> There are many Usenet servers that don't carry alt.binaries.
Why don't you learn to reply without being offensive. Intelligent
people don't feel the need to belittle others.
Terry R.
--
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.
Re: Why does this fake product key validate as being genuine
In article <eo42zctrJHA.3584@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>,
audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca says...
>
> You're trying to split hairs while grasping at straws. You're right, in
> the true sense of the meaning msnew.microsoft.com is not a "real" Usenet
> news server, why would Microsoft want to host such a server and peddle
> pron from the alt.binaries hierarchy on their corporate property? You
> don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure that out.
>
I think you need to check again - the Usenet Service IS a full Usenet
Server.
It has Push and Pull with peers, the difference, which is not really a
difference, is that they only SOURCE their own groups - which is
something that other companies also do.
This gives them the ability to "Filter" any content on THEIR server.
You don't have to carry ANY ALT. groups to be a full Usenet Server.
--
- 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)
audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca says...
>
> You're trying to split hairs while grasping at straws. You're right, in
> the true sense of the meaning msnew.microsoft.com is not a "real" Usenet
> news server, why would Microsoft want to host such a server and peddle
> pron from the alt.binaries hierarchy on their corporate property? You
> don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure that out.
>
I think you need to check again - the Usenet Service IS a full Usenet
Server.
It has Push and Pull with peers, the difference, which is not really a
difference, is that they only SOURCE their own groups - which is
something that other companies also do.
This gives them the ability to "Filter" any content on THEIR server.
You don't have to carry ANY ALT. groups to be a full Usenet Server.
--
- 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)
Re: Why does this fake product key validate as being genuine
Leythos wrote:
> I think you need to check again - the Usenet Service IS a full
> Usenet Server.
>
> It has Push and Pull with peers, the difference, which is not
> really a difference, is that they only SOURCE their own groups
Source is the wrong word.
Microsoft *carries* a certain set of usenet newsgroups - specifically
the hierarchy that begins with "microsoft.".
> - which is something that other companies also do.
That may be true. I'm not aware of other companies that operate NNTP
servers in a similar manner to MS - perhaps SUN or IBM or Nortel or
Cisco does. But I've never investigated.
> This gives them the ability to "Filter" any content on THEIR
> server.
Any operator of a usenet server can filter the posts *on their server*.
Microsoft is not unique in that regard.
> You don't have to carry ANY ALT. groups to be a full Usenet
> Server.
That is true - but I question the terminology you are using -> "full"
usenet server <-.
Is there such a thing as a "full" or "partial" usenet server?
Is such a distinction based on the carriage of alt groups? I doubt it.
> I think you need to check again - the Usenet Service IS a full
> Usenet Server.
>
> It has Push and Pull with peers, the difference, which is not
> really a difference, is that they only SOURCE their own groups
Source is the wrong word.
Microsoft *carries* a certain set of usenet newsgroups - specifically
the hierarchy that begins with "microsoft.".
> - which is something that other companies also do.
That may be true. I'm not aware of other companies that operate NNTP
servers in a similar manner to MS - perhaps SUN or IBM or Nortel or
Cisco does. But I've never investigated.
> This gives them the ability to "Filter" any content on THEIR
> server.
Any operator of a usenet server can filter the posts *on their server*.
Microsoft is not unique in that regard.
> You don't have to carry ANY ALT. groups to be a full Usenet
> Server.
That is true - but I question the terminology you are using -> "full"
usenet server <-.
Is there such a thing as a "full" or "partial" usenet server?
Is such a distinction based on the carriage of alt groups? I doubt it.
Re: Why does this fake product key validate as being genuine
The date and time was Friday, March 27, 2009 7:56:59 AM, and on a whim,
Roy Smith pounded out on the keyboard:
> XP Guy wrote:
>> Leythos wrote:
>>
>>> I think you need to check again - the Usenet Service IS a full
>>> Usenet Server.
>>>
>>> It has Push and Pull with peers, the difference, which is not
>>> really a difference, is that they only SOURCE their own groups
>> Source is the wrong word.
>>
>> Microsoft *carries* a certain set of usenet newsgroups - specifically
>> the hierarchy that begins with "microsoft.".
>>
>>> - which is something that other companies also do.
>> That may be true. I'm not aware of other companies that operate NNTP
>> servers in a similar manner to MS - perhaps SUN or IBM or Nortel or
>> Cisco does. But I've never investigated.
>
> Mozilla has 2 of them, news.mozilla.org and news.mozdev.org. The
> mozilla server is for all Mozilla products, Firefox, Thunderbird, etc...
> The mozdev server is for people who are developing software for
> mozilla, including add-ons and other software. Also unlike Microsoft,
> Mozilla keeps all messages whereas MS only keeps messages for 90 days or so.
>
Hi Roy,
Actually mozilla.org is hosted by Giganews, not their own. That's why
the expire date is so long. Don't know about mozdev.
Terry R.
--
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.
Roy Smith pounded out on the keyboard:
> XP Guy wrote:
>> Leythos wrote:
>>
>>> I think you need to check again - the Usenet Service IS a full
>>> Usenet Server.
>>>
>>> It has Push and Pull with peers, the difference, which is not
>>> really a difference, is that they only SOURCE their own groups
>> Source is the wrong word.
>>
>> Microsoft *carries* a certain set of usenet newsgroups - specifically
>> the hierarchy that begins with "microsoft.".
>>
>>> - which is something that other companies also do.
>> That may be true. I'm not aware of other companies that operate NNTP
>> servers in a similar manner to MS - perhaps SUN or IBM or Nortel or
>> Cisco does. But I've never investigated.
>
> Mozilla has 2 of them, news.mozilla.org and news.mozdev.org. The
> mozilla server is for all Mozilla products, Firefox, Thunderbird, etc...
> The mozdev server is for people who are developing software for
> mozilla, including add-ons and other software. Also unlike Microsoft,
> Mozilla keeps all messages whereas MS only keeps messages for 90 days or so.
>
Hi Roy,
Actually mozilla.org is hosted by Giganews, not their own. That's why
the expire date is so long. Don't know about mozdev.
Terry R.
--
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.
Re: Why does this fake product key validate as being genuine
In article <49CCE01C.56AD70BF@Guy.com>, XP@Guy.com says...
> Leythos wrote:
>
> > I think you need to check again - the Usenet Service IS a full
> > Usenet Server.
> >
> > It has Push and Pull with peers, the difference, which is not
> > really a difference, is that they only SOURCE their own groups
>
> Source is the wrong word.
>
> Microsoft *carries* a certain set of usenet newsgroups - specifically
> the hierarchy that begins with "microsoft.".
Nope, they were created by MS and OTHER providers opted to carry those
groups, replicating them as they choose. MS is the source of the tree,
but other servers "source" articles/posts from their own servers.
> > - which is something that other companies also do.
>
> That may be true. I'm not aware of other companies that operate NNTP
> servers in a similar manner to MS - perhaps SUN or IBM or Nortel or
> Cisco does. But I've never investigated.
It's easy, and you can setup PEERING agreements for a nominal fee.
> > This gives them the ability to "Filter" any content on THEIR
> > server.
>
> Any operator of a usenet server can filter the posts *on their server*.
> Microsoft is not unique in that regard.
Yep, and we use to be able to cancel messages across all of Usenet, but
that's frowned on today.
> > You don't have to carry ANY ALT. groups to be a full Usenet
> > Server.
>
> That is true - but I question the terminology you are using -> "full"
> usenet server <-.
FULL would be a server that is USENET vs. one that is a Web/BBS feel
that ports INTO Usenet peers.
> Is there such a thing as a "full" or "partial" usenet server?
>
> Is such a distinction based on the carriage of alt groups? I doubt it.
Today that are many configurations that appear as other things.
--
- 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)
> Leythos wrote:
>
> > I think you need to check again - the Usenet Service IS a full
> > Usenet Server.
> >
> > It has Push and Pull with peers, the difference, which is not
> > really a difference, is that they only SOURCE their own groups
>
> Source is the wrong word.
>
> Microsoft *carries* a certain set of usenet newsgroups - specifically
> the hierarchy that begins with "microsoft.".
Nope, they were created by MS and OTHER providers opted to carry those
groups, replicating them as they choose. MS is the source of the tree,
but other servers "source" articles/posts from their own servers.
> > - which is something that other companies also do.
>
> That may be true. I'm not aware of other companies that operate NNTP
> servers in a similar manner to MS - perhaps SUN or IBM or Nortel or
> Cisco does. But I've never investigated.
It's easy, and you can setup PEERING agreements for a nominal fee.
> > This gives them the ability to "Filter" any content on THEIR
> > server.
>
> Any operator of a usenet server can filter the posts *on their server*.
> Microsoft is not unique in that regard.
Yep, and we use to be able to cancel messages across all of Usenet, but
that's frowned on today.
> > You don't have to carry ANY ALT. groups to be a full Usenet
> > Server.
>
> That is true - but I question the terminology you are using -> "full"
> usenet server <-.
FULL would be a server that is USENET vs. one that is a Web/BBS feel
that ports INTO Usenet peers.
> Is there such a thing as a "full" or "partial" usenet server?
>
> Is such a distinction based on the carriage of alt groups? I doubt it.
Today that are many configurations that appear as other things.
--
- 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)
-
john john - mvp
- Posts: 37
- Joined: 30 Apr 2009, 23:00
Re: Why does this fake product key validate as being genuine
Leythos wrote:
> In article <eo42zctrJHA.3584@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>,
> audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca says...
>> You're trying to split hairs while grasping at straws. You're right, in
>> the true sense of the meaning msnew.microsoft.com is not a "real" Usenet
>> news server, why would Microsoft want to host such a server and peddle
>> pron from the alt.binaries hierarchy on their corporate property? You
>> don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure that out.
>>
>
> I think you need to check again - the Usenet Service IS a full Usenet
> Server.
>
> It has Push and Pull with peers, the difference, which is not really a
> difference, is that they only SOURCE their own groups - which is
> something that other companies also do.
>
> This gives them the ability to "Filter" any content on THEIR server.
>
> You don't have to carry ANY ALT. groups to be a full Usenet Server.
I meant "real" (or as you say "full") in the sense that it doesn't carry
or offer access to all the 100,000+ Usenet groups. In that sense it
isn't like the news servers made available by some ISPs or by companies
like Giganews or Supernews. msnews is a vanity news server but
otherwise it is still a Usenet server and the microsoft.public
newsgroups are Usenet groups. And yes, as you say, many other companies
and organizations have their own vanity Usenet servers that carry only
groups of importance or interest to them.
John
> In article <eo42zctrJHA.3584@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>,
> audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca says...
>> You're trying to split hairs while grasping at straws. You're right, in
>> the true sense of the meaning msnew.microsoft.com is not a "real" Usenet
>> news server, why would Microsoft want to host such a server and peddle
>> pron from the alt.binaries hierarchy on their corporate property? You
>> don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure that out.
>>
>
> I think you need to check again - the Usenet Service IS a full Usenet
> Server.
>
> It has Push and Pull with peers, the difference, which is not really a
> difference, is that they only SOURCE their own groups - which is
> something that other companies also do.
>
> This gives them the ability to "Filter" any content on THEIR server.
>
> You don't have to carry ANY ALT. groups to be a full Usenet Server.
I meant "real" (or as you say "full") in the sense that it doesn't carry
or offer access to all the 100,000+ Usenet groups. In that sense it
isn't like the news servers made available by some ISPs or by companies
like Giganews or Supernews. msnews is a vanity news server but
otherwise it is still a Usenet server and the microsoft.public
newsgroups are Usenet groups. And yes, as you say, many other companies
and organizations have their own vanity Usenet servers that carry only
groups of importance or interest to them.
John
-
jake marley
- Posts: 3
- Joined: 27 Mar 2009, 00:00
Re: Why does this fake product key validate as being genuine
On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 08:52:51 -0700, "Terry R." <F1Com@NOSPAMpobox.com>
wrote:
>The date and time was Friday, March 27, 2009 7:32:36 AM, and on a whim,
>Jake Marley pounded out on the keyboard:
>
>> On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 05:32:50 -0500, Jay <user@domain.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>> I suggest you read about what usenet is and how it works.
>>> This is NOT usenet. Just because a particular group or set of groups is
>>> FED to usenet does not make msnews.microsoft.com "usenet" OR a usenet
>>> server. If that were true, then please explain to us how to access
>>> alt.binaries.whatever from this server.
>>
>> Stupid test - probably a reflection of your IQ.
>>
>> There are many Usenet servers that don't carry alt.binaries.
>
>Why don't you learn to reply without being offensive. Intelligent
>people don't feel the need to belittle others.
>
>
>Terry R.
I will... right after you stop using that obnoxious reply header.
You won't, so bite me.
wrote:
>The date and time was Friday, March 27, 2009 7:32:36 AM, and on a whim,
>Jake Marley pounded out on the keyboard:
>
>> On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 05:32:50 -0500, Jay <user@domain.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>> I suggest you read about what usenet is and how it works.
>>> This is NOT usenet. Just because a particular group or set of groups is
>>> FED to usenet does not make msnews.microsoft.com "usenet" OR a usenet
>>> server. If that were true, then please explain to us how to access
>>> alt.binaries.whatever from this server.
>>
>> Stupid test - probably a reflection of your IQ.
>>
>> There are many Usenet servers that don't carry alt.binaries.
>
>Why don't you learn to reply without being offensive. Intelligent
>people don't feel the need to belittle others.
>
>
>Terry R.
I will... right after you stop using that obnoxious reply header.
You won't, so bite me.
Re: Why does this fake product key validate as being genuine
The date and time was Friday, March 27, 2009 1:24:46 PM, and on a whim,
Jake Marley pounded out on the keyboard:
> On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 08:52:51 -0700, "Terry R." <F1Com@NOSPAMpobox.com>
> wrote:
>
>> The date and time was Friday, March 27, 2009 7:32:36 AM, and on a whim,
>> Jake Marley pounded out on the keyboard:
>>
>>> On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 05:32:50 -0500, Jay <user@domain.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> I suggest you read about what usenet is and how it works.
>>>> This is NOT usenet. Just because a particular group or set of groups is
>>>> FED to usenet does not make msnews.microsoft.com "usenet" OR a usenet
>>>> server. If that were true, then please explain to us how to access
>>>> alt.binaries.whatever from this server.
>>> Stupid test - probably a reflection of your IQ.
>>>
>>> There are many Usenet servers that don't carry alt.binaries.
>> Why don't you learn to reply without being offensive. Intelligent
>> people don't feel the need to belittle others.
>>
>>
>> Terry R.
>
> I will... right after you stop using that obnoxious reply header.
>
> You won't, so bite me.
Thanks for letting us all know your intelligence level.
Terry R.
--
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.
Jake Marley pounded out on the keyboard:
> On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 08:52:51 -0700, "Terry R." <F1Com@NOSPAMpobox.com>
> wrote:
>
>> The date and time was Friday, March 27, 2009 7:32:36 AM, and on a whim,
>> Jake Marley pounded out on the keyboard:
>>
>>> On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 05:32:50 -0500, Jay <user@domain.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> I suggest you read about what usenet is and how it works.
>>>> This is NOT usenet. Just because a particular group or set of groups is
>>>> FED to usenet does not make msnews.microsoft.com "usenet" OR a usenet
>>>> server. If that were true, then please explain to us how to access
>>>> alt.binaries.whatever from this server.
>>> Stupid test - probably a reflection of your IQ.
>>>
>>> There are many Usenet servers that don't carry alt.binaries.
>> Why don't you learn to reply without being offensive. Intelligent
>> people don't feel the need to belittle others.
>>
>>
>> Terry R.
>
> I will... right after you stop using that obnoxious reply header.
>
> You won't, so bite me.
Thanks for letting us all know your intelligence level.
Terry R.
--
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.
Re: Why does this fake product key validate as being genuine
Leythos wrote:
> > > It has Push and Pull with peers, the difference, which is not
> > > really a difference, is that they only SOURCE their own groups
> >
> > Source is the wrong word.
> >
> > Microsoft *carries* a certain set of usenet newsgroups -
> > specifically the hierarchy that begins with "microsoft.".
>
> Nope, they were created by MS
Can you reproduce or point to the original group-create message?
> and OTHER providers opted to carry those groups, replicating
> them as they choose.
New groups are created all the time, and are usually added automatically
on any given server.
> MS is the source of the tree,
That terminology is wrong. You might refer to the "microsoft.*"
hierarchy as a tree, but they are NOT the source of it.
Someone at Microsoft may have been reponsible for generating the
original group-create message a long time ago, but Microsoft is NOT the
"source" of the messages posted in that hirearchy.
> but other servers "source" articles/posts from their own servers.
What the hell kind of bullshit terminology are you using?
Usenet postings are not "sourced". They are originated and then
distributed. I am posting a message right now, to a microsoft.x group,
and it is definately not being "sourced" from a microsoft server.
> > Any operator of a usenet server can filter the posts *on their
> > server*. Microsoft is not unique in that regard.
>
> Yep, and we use to be able to cancel messages across all of Usenet,
> but that's frowned on today.
Today?
Cancel messages have been ignored for the past 10 years, at least.
> > > It has Push and Pull with peers, the difference, which is not
> > > really a difference, is that they only SOURCE their own groups
> >
> > Source is the wrong word.
> >
> > Microsoft *carries* a certain set of usenet newsgroups -
> > specifically the hierarchy that begins with "microsoft.".
>
> Nope, they were created by MS
Can you reproduce or point to the original group-create message?
> and OTHER providers opted to carry those groups, replicating
> them as they choose.
New groups are created all the time, and are usually added automatically
on any given server.
> MS is the source of the tree,
That terminology is wrong. You might refer to the "microsoft.*"
hierarchy as a tree, but they are NOT the source of it.
Someone at Microsoft may have been reponsible for generating the
original group-create message a long time ago, but Microsoft is NOT the
"source" of the messages posted in that hirearchy.
> but other servers "source" articles/posts from their own servers.
What the hell kind of bullshit terminology are you using?
Usenet postings are not "sourced". They are originated and then
distributed. I am posting a message right now, to a microsoft.x group,
and it is definately not being "sourced" from a microsoft server.
> > Any operator of a usenet server can filter the posts *on their
> > server*. Microsoft is not unique in that regard.
>
> Yep, and we use to be able to cancel messages across all of Usenet,
> but that's frowned on today.
Today?
Cancel messages have been ignored for the past 10 years, at least.
-
jake marley
- Posts: 3
- Joined: 27 Mar 2009, 00:00
Re: Why does this fake product key validate as being genuine
On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 17:10:14 -0700, "Terry R." <F1Com@NOSPAMpobox.com>
wrote:
>The date and time was Friday, March 27, 2009 1:24:46 PM, and on a whim,
>Jake Marley pounded out on the keyboard:
>
>> On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 08:52:51 -0700, "Terry R." <F1Com@NOSPAMpobox.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The date and time was Friday, March 27, 2009 7:32:36 AM, and on a whim,
>>> Jake Marley pounded out on the keyboard:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 05:32:50 -0500, Jay <user@domain.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> I suggest you read about what usenet is and how it works.
>>>>> This is NOT usenet. Just because a particular group or set of groups is
>>>>> FED to usenet does not make msnews.microsoft.com "usenet" OR a usenet
>>>>> server. If that were true, then please explain to us how to access
>>>>> alt.binaries.whatever from this server.
>>>> Stupid test - probably a reflection of your IQ.
>>>>
>>>> There are many Usenet servers that don't carry alt.binaries.
>>> Why don't you learn to reply without being offensive. Intelligent
>>> people don't feel the need to belittle others.
>>>
>>>
>>> Terry R.
>>
>> I will... right after you stop using that obnoxious reply header.
>>
>> You won't, so bite me.
>
>Thanks for letting us all know your intelligence level.
>
>
>Terry R.
OOH! OOH!
I've been DISSED!
I am SO TOTALLY mortified!
wrote:
>The date and time was Friday, March 27, 2009 1:24:46 PM, and on a whim,
>Jake Marley pounded out on the keyboard:
>
>> On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 08:52:51 -0700, "Terry R." <F1Com@NOSPAMpobox.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The date and time was Friday, March 27, 2009 7:32:36 AM, and on a whim,
>>> Jake Marley pounded out on the keyboard:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 05:32:50 -0500, Jay <user@domain.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> I suggest you read about what usenet is and how it works.
>>>>> This is NOT usenet. Just because a particular group or set of groups is
>>>>> FED to usenet does not make msnews.microsoft.com "usenet" OR a usenet
>>>>> server. If that were true, then please explain to us how to access
>>>>> alt.binaries.whatever from this server.
>>>> Stupid test - probably a reflection of your IQ.
>>>>
>>>> There are many Usenet servers that don't carry alt.binaries.
>>> Why don't you learn to reply without being offensive. Intelligent
>>> people don't feel the need to belittle others.
>>>
>>>
>>> Terry R.
>>
>> I will... right after you stop using that obnoxious reply header.
>>
>> You won't, so bite me.
>
>Thanks for letting us all know your intelligence level.
>
>
>Terry R.
OOH! OOH!
I've been DISSED!
I am SO TOTALLY mortified!