|
|
|
Re: Proposed Unofficial Call to Votes
Tue, 18 Aug 2009 18:00:17 +0100
In uk.net.news.config on Sun, 16 Aug 2009 03:34:36 +0100, Dave J
<requiem@freeuk.com> wrote:
> In MsgID<7eobq5F2fvt53U1@mid.individual.net> on Sat, 15 Aug 2009 19:06:57
> +0100, in uk.net.news.config, 'kat' wrote:
>
>>> Why is it elitist to say they need to be 'educated' ? If he'd said
>>> they need to be kick ...
|
Re: Proposed Unofficial Call to Votes
Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:40:45 +0100
In uk.net.news.config on Sat, 15 Aug 2009 19:06:57 +0100, kat
<kat.news@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> I am afraid I read every post Peter made and concluded he sees it more as a
> private club, access being gained only once you have mastered a degree
> course fancy scoring and killfile filters. He doesn't seem to wa ...
|
Re: Proposed Unofficial Call to Votes
Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:42:51 +0100
In uk.net.news.config on Mon, 17 Aug 2009 16:23:34 +0100, Pedt <"\"@
@\""@user-unknown.mx2.org.uk> wrote:
> In message <dsNRydiKb+hKFwbc@[127.0.0.1]>, at 12:00:26 on Sun, 16 Aug
> 2009, Wm... <tcnw71@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> wibbled
>>Sun, 16 Aug 2009 10:49:01 <6flf85lofummq98rc68f3q59c7bqooa3mo@4ax.com>
...
|
Re: uk.rec.cycling.moderated proposal
Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:33:27 +0100
Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:00:52 <slrnh8lk1k.ne3.pjr@pjr.gotdns.org>
uk.net.news.config Peter J Ross <pjr@example.invalid>
>I repeat what I've said before: the natural consequence of this RFD is
>the eventual removal of URC.
Bollocks.
--
Wm...
Reply-To: address valid for at least 7 days ...
|
Re: Proposed Unofficial Call to Votes
Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:29:36 +0100
In uk.net.news.config on Sat, 15 Aug 2009 23:29:59 +0100, jms
<moderation2009@live.co.uk> wrote:
> I have not abused the voting process.
> I have not vandalised a harmless newsgroup.
"In response to a polite request, I, jms, got my tits out for the
lads."
The three statements are equally truthful.
W ...
|
Re: uk.rec.cycling.moderated proposal
Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:00:52 +0100
In uk.net.news.config on Sun, 16 Aug 2009 02:40:10 +0100, Phil W Lee
<phil> wrote:
> Sara Merriman <saramerriman@blueyonder.co.uk> considered Sat, 15 Aug
> 2009 20:43:49 +0100 the perfect time to write:
>
>>In article <slrnh8drri.t5e.pjr@pjr.gotdns.org>,
>> Peter J Ross <pjr@example.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>
...
|
Re: Open question to Ian Jackson re URCM
Tue, 18 Aug 2009 10:53:52 +0100
Tue, 18 Aug 2009 10:13:11 <c0sk85ldan8ugoebn8d4h45c55p8gg9env@4ax.com>
uk.net.news.config . m <nospam@notnominet.name.invalid>
>On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 02:43:04 +0100, %steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth)
>wrote:
>
>>> Where is the Rev Doc Cummins when you (?don't) want him?
>>
>>http://www.insidetime.org/backissue ...
|
Re: Open question to Ian Jackson re URCM
Tue, 18 Aug 2009 02:01:04 +0100
At 20:54:10 on Mon, 17 Aug 2009, . m <nospam@notnominet.name.invalid>
wrote in <u9dj855mq12jv634sp6peggsm2pk94cftn@4ax.com>:
>Where is the Rev Doc Cummins when you (?don't) want him?
It would be really good to have his incisive intelligence and analytic
thought in this particular discussion :-(
--
Molly
...
|
Re: Open question to Ian Jackson re URCM
Mon, 17 Aug 2009 21:33:21 +0100
Mon, 17 Aug 2009 20:54:10 <u9dj855mq12jv634sp6peggsm2pk94cftn@4ax.com>
uk.net.news.config . m <nospam@notnominet.name.invalid>
>On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 18:32:33 +0100, "Wm..."
><tcnw71@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> wrote:
>
>>I can see god's revelations working ...
>
>Where is the Rev Doc Cummins when you (?don't) ...
|
Re: Open question to Ian Jackson re URCM
Mon, 17 Aug 2009 18:32:33 +0100
Mon, 17 Aug 2009 18:17:23 <cZUUODJjCZiKFwQO@gehena.demon.co.uk>
uk.net.news.config Rex M F Smith <usenet@gehena.demon.co.uk>
>In message <vfht+2M3DWiKFwH3@[127.0.0.1]>, Wm...
><tcnw71@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> writes
>
>>settle it this way: I call you a shit.
>>
>>If many people agree is that person actu ...
|
|
|
