«

Uh oh! wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 20:25:35 -0400, "Bowser" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> Kodachrome is gone soon, but the images will live quite a while. If you've
>> shot some Kodachrome, find some good ones, scan them and send them in. Show
>> us what you liked about Kodachrome (any speed or variation of emulsion).
>> Show us your oldest Kodachrome shots and how they've held up. The older the
>> better.
>>
>> http://www.%spamlink*.com/shootin/kodachrome
>
> Or not.
>
> Sounds like a plagiarists dream.
>

Where the hell did the "spamlink" link come from?

On 7/2/2009 8:11 AM Bowser spake thus:

> Uh oh! wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 20:25:35 -0400, "Bowser" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>> Kodachrome is gone soon, but the images will live quite a while. If you've
>>> shot some Kodachrome, find some good ones, scan them and send them in. Show
>>> us what you liked about Kodachrome (any speed or variation of emulsion).
>>> Show us your oldest Kodachrome shots and how they've held up. The older the
>>> better.
>>>
>>> http://www.%spamlink*.com/shootin/kodachrome
>>
>> Or not.
>>
>> Sounds like a plagiarists dream.
>
> Where the hell did the "spamlink" link come from?

Um, Pbase = spam.


--
Found--the gene that causes belief in genetic determinism

Bowser wrote:
>
> "David Nebenzahl" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:4a4ceb3f$0$18241$(E-Mail Removed) s.com...
>> On 7/2/2009 8:11 AM Bowser spake thus:
>>
>>> Uh oh! wrote:
>> >
>>>> On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 20:25:35 -0400, "Bowser" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Kodachrome is gone soon, but the images will live quite a while. If
>>>>> you've shot some Kodachrome, find some good ones, scan them and
>>>>> send them in. Show us what you liked about Kodachrome (any speed or
>>>>> variation of emulsion). Show us your oldest Kodachrome shots and
>>>>> how they've held up. The older the better.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.%spamlink*.com/shootin/kodachrome
>>>>
>>>> Or not.
>>>>
>>>> Sounds like a plagiarists dream.
>>>
>>> Where the hell did the "spamlink" link come from?
>>
>> Um, Pbase = spam.
>
> Pbase, the photosite, is spam? Since when?

Since you and that Jackass from Tennessee began spamming every bloody
newsgroup on the planet with links to it.

Bowser wrote:
>
> "Shon Kei" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:h2j4op$b27$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Bowser wrote:

>>> Pbase, the photosite, is spam? Since when?
>>
>> Since you and that Jackass from Tennessee began spamming every bloody
>> newsgroup on the planet with links to it.
>
> Uh, pointing people to a site where we all post photos and are asking
> nothing in return hardly constitutes spam. It's a photo sharing site,
> that's all. Spam is unwanted advertising. We aren't advertising for pbase.
>
> Here's a tip: EVERY SINGLE SHOOTIN POST starts with the prefix "[SI]."
> Simply filter that out, and you'll never see the SI posts again. If you
> need help configuring your newsreader for filtering, just ask and I'm
> sure you'll get the help you need.

The mission posters are back. There are all of two of them who have
these weird beliefs about pBase...

--
john mcwilliams

~A Serenity Prayer~

"God, grant me the senility to forget the people I never liked anyway,
the good fortune to run into the ones I do, and the eyesight to tell the
difference."

John McWilliams wrote:
> Bowser wrote:
>>
>> "Shon Kei" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:h2j4op$b27$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> Bowser wrote:
>
>>>> Pbase, the photosite, is spam? Since when?
>>>
>>> Since you and that Jackass from Tennessee began spamming every bloody
>>> newsgroup on the planet with links to it.
>>
>> Uh, pointing people to a site where we all post photos and are asking
>> nothing in return hardly constitutes spam. It's a photo sharing site,
>> that's all. Spam is unwanted advertising. We aren't advertising for
>> pbase.
>>
>> Here's a tip: EVERY SINGLE SHOOTIN POST starts with the prefix "[SI]."
>> Simply filter that out, and you'll never see the SI posts again. If
>> you need help configuring your newsreader for filtering, just ask and
>> I'm sure you'll get the help you need.
>
> The mission posters are back. There are all of two of them who have
> these weird beliefs about pBase...
>

It's not a belief it's a known fact. *ADVERTISING IS SPAM*.

Netetiquette and most of the charters for news groups, as well as
Bowsers own news provider prohibit what he's doing and prohibit cross
posting to more than 3 groups.

Bowser is following in the footsteps of Alan Brown by Cross posting to 4
groups and only 2 of them are photography relative. The other two are
for discussion about equipment.

One of them forbids what he's doing. Does that stop him? No! He doesn't
give a rat's arse about Netetiquette or for that matter, the rules under
which he gets access to Usenet.

The curious part is that Alan Brown formulated the charter for r.p.d.
slr-systems and it reads:

"This newsgroup explicitly prohibits the posting of advertisements of
any kind, whether personal, private or commercial, as well as all other
promotional material, whether or not it is in any way related to
photography."

Tell me now John, that bowsers posts are not advertising shootin and
pbase. Or are you less of a hypocrite than you come across as being?

Alan in his typical bigoted way, started the spam from shootin going to
groups where it is unwanted and in the process, totally ignored his own
rules. That makes three major transgressions by him of the rules he
formulated for that group. What a bloody hypocrite

In case you have lost track of what society is and why those societies
that have rules prosper and those founded on anarchy eventually fall
into disarray like Usenet is doing, there is no purpose in making rules
if no one bothers to abide by them. The fact Alan Browne formulated the
rules and within hours broke them, is evidence enough that he cares only
about himself... Now Bowser is following in his footsteps.

For you to speak out in defence of the indefensible just exposes you as
hypocrite too.



--
D-Mac... Back from the near-dead!
With my survival comes a new ability ...multi-tasking.
I can laugh, cough, sneeze, fart and pee all at the same time!

[aus.photo out]

D-Mac wrote:
> John McWilliams wrote:
>>
>> The mission posters are back. There are all of two of them who have
>> these weird beliefs about pBase...

> It's not a belief it's a known fact. *ADVERTISING IS SPAM*.
>
<< Snipped bits out >>
>
> Tell me now John, that bowsers posts are not advertising shootin and
> pbase. Or are you less of a hypocrite than you come across as being?

> << Snipped bits out >>

> For you to speak out in defence of the indefensible just exposes you as
> hypocrite too.

[Speaking out in defense of the indefensible is not per se hypocritical,
but that's besides the point.]

pBase mentions isn't spam; it's part of the NG activities, which still
seems to send a few in paroxysms years after it was founded.

--
lsmft

D-Mac wrote:
> John McWilliams wrote:
>> Bowser wrote:

> Netetiquette and most of the charters for news groups, as well as
> Bowsers own news provider prohibit what he's doing and prohibit cross
> posting to more than 3 groups.

> For you to speak out in defence of the indefensible just exposes you
> as hypocrite too.

Oh, the bloody irony.
You, Mr Hypocrite, cross posted *your* reply to four groups. Rules, as
described by you for everyone else, are to be obeyed, except by you?

And, yes, I crossposted to four groups. The difference is, I don't regard
four as excessive provided they're relevant.

--
Dyna

All rights reserved. All wrongs avenged.

Bowser wrote:
> Uh oh! wrote:
>> On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 20:25:35 -0400, "Bowser" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>> Kodachrome is gone soon, but the images will live quite a while. If
>>> you've shot some Kodachrome, find some good ones, scan them and send
>>> them in. Show us what you liked about Kodachrome (any speed or
>>> variation of emulsion). Show us your oldest Kodachrome shots and how
>>> they've held up. The older the better.
>>>
>>> http://www.%spamlink*.com/shootin/kodachrome
>>
>> Or not.
>>
>> Sounds like a plagiarists dream.
>>
>
> Where the hell did the "spamlink" link come from?

The idiot kook edited the quoted material.

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

Savageduck wrote:
> On 2009-07-02 17:34:35 -0700, D-Mac <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
>

>
> Doug,
> You are loosing me on this one. first how on Earth could a link to a
> non-commercial Pbase site be considered spam?
> The X-Posts were to groups where the proposal was relevant, and
> therefore not offensive within posting guidelines.
> Certainly given this proposed SI subject (Kodachrome archive shots) it
> would be appropriately posted in RPDSS & RPE35mm, given that Kodachrome
> could be loosely described as "part of an SLR system" and "35mm equipment."
> In a usual SI proposal I would not be opposed to the exclusion of those
> 2 groups (RPDSS & RPE35mm) and the inclusion of alt.photography in the
> X-Post.
>
> I have no idea what Bowser's news provider limits him to with regard to
> X-Posts. Mine limits me to 4, and will block any post with more than 4
> X-Posts. There have been times I have had to delete some of the
> inappropriate X-Posts to 4 or less, so I could post a response.
>
> The SI provides the photo groups a diversion from some of the annoying
> bitching, and gets us back to thinking of photography. So on this issue
> lighten up some.

I see.
So the rules: "Explicitly prohibits the posting of advertisements" and
"Whether personal private or commercial" should actually exclude
advertising Shootin, should they?

You can't have it both ways. Either all forms of advertising are
"explicitly prohibited" or they are explicitly permitted. Which is it?

You might think Shootin is "relevant" to the cross posted groups but the
charter of them says differently. Are you suggesting then that everyone
should ignore the rules Alan Brown formulated and make up their own (as
he did) or just go back to anarchy and let anything prevail?

If you don't follow the rules, everything is fair game. Including
posting pornography and binary files in these groups (annika1980 is
going to love the last bit if that's what you are suggesting).

On Fri, 03 Jul 2009 17:03:56 +1000, Shon Kei <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Savageduck wrote:
>> On 2009-07-02 17:34:35 -0700, D-Mac <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
>>
>
>>
>> Doug,
>> You are loosing me on this one. first how on Earth could a link to a
>> non-commercial Pbase site be considered spam?
>> The X-Posts were to groups where the proposal was relevant, and
>> therefore not offensive within posting guidelines.
>> Certainly given this proposed SI subject (Kodachrome archive shots) it
>> would be appropriately posted in RPDSS & RPE35mm, given that Kodachrome
>> could be loosely described as "part of an SLR system" and "35mm equipment."
>> In a usual SI proposal I would not be opposed to the exclusion of those
>> 2 groups (RPDSS & RPE35mm) and the inclusion of alt.photography in the
>> X-Post.
>>
>> I have no idea what Bowser's news provider limits him to with regard to
>> X-Posts. Mine limits me to 4, and will block any post with more than 4
>> X-Posts. There have been times I have had to delete some of the
>> inappropriate X-Posts to 4 or less, so I could post a response.
>>
>> The SI provides the photo groups a diversion from some of the annoying
>> bitching, and gets us back to thinking of photography. So on this issue
>> lighten up some.
>
>I see.
>So the rules: "Explicitly prohibits the posting of advertisements" and
>"Whether personal private or commercial" should actually exclude
>advertising Shootin, should they?
>
>You can't have it both ways. Either all forms of advertising are
>"explicitly prohibited" or they are explicitly permitted. Which is it?
>
>You might think Shootin is "relevant" to the cross posted groups but the
>charter of them says differently. Are you suggesting then that everyone
>should ignore the rules Alan Brown formulated and make up their own (as
>he did) or just go back to anarchy and let anything prevail?
>
>If you don't follow the rules, everything is fair game. Including
>posting pornography and binary files in these groups (annika1980 is
>going to love the last bit if that's what you are suggesting).

Shoot-In posts are not an advertisement. They are invitations.
Invitations to submit, to show, and to comment.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida