Likewise, there is no authoritative group to which you can turn for 'justice'.
> > I have been complaining to mindsprings abuse department for the past 8
> > months about this person, and he continues to tell anyone that is new to
> > either newsgroup to get the FAQ at his url.
>
> See above, unless there is a consensus in the newsgroups _against_ that
And in fact, not even newsgroup consensus means all that much. One can
start some sort of 'arms wars' where you start cancelling each other's posts,
but that just ends up with no one's postings being around.
> FAQ, there is absolutely no reason why mindspring's abuse departmemnt
> should do anything. It could be seen as censoring if they would suppress
> that FAQ in that situation.
Well, now here I somewhat disagree. If Terry would stop the line of
arguing over which faq is the official one, and start down the path of
'the other person stole information which was mine' - AND CAN PROVE THAT CLAIM -
then I think the abuse angle might work a bit - assuming that ISPs care
about potential arrests over breaking copyright laws. Of course, Terry
would need to be prepared for the court costs ....
> > >From my understanding, posting that a FAQ is the approved FAQ is the
> > highest violation of usenet posting rules.
Nope - the highest violation would be posting something that resulted in
all of usenet being shutdown...
-- Larry W. Virden <URL: mailto:lvirden@cas.org> <URL: http://www.purl.org/NET/lvirden/> <*> O- "No one is what he seems." Unless explicitly stated to the contrary, nothing in this posting should be construed as representing my employer's opinions.
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Internet FAQ Consortium, 1997
All rights reserved