Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Computer Security > cmioj esiuof SAFEBOOT SOLO IS DISCONTINUED: CONTROL BREAK INTERNATIONAL is a Disreputable Company, DO NOT Patronize Them odfjg09erj0

Reply
Thread Tools

cmioj esiuof SAFEBOOT SOLO IS DISCONTINUED: CONTROL BREAK INTERNATIONAL is a Disreputable Company, DO NOT Patronize Them odfjg09erj0

 
 
*Vanguard*
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-02-2004
"(E-Mail Removed)" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote in news:(E-Mail Removed):
>
> You two are the whiners. Without you two control freaks this thread
> would have died out long ago.


The poster declared that they will continually repost their bitchpost
about once a week. Whether or not we bitch about their bitching won't
stop their bitching. As much as the OP believes they have the right to
repetitive "warn" and spam the newsgroup then we also have the right to
warn potential believers of this OP of the true nature of their
postings. So as often as this whiner posts then we will post, too.
Using your same arguments, we can also warn against bad software and bad
users. They warn, so we warn. They have declared that they will repeat
their warnings. So will we.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
marty12@hotmail.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-02-2004
On Mon, 2 Aug 2004 11:05:01 -0500, "*Vanguard*"
<do-not-email@reply-to-group> wrote:

>"privacy.at Anonymous Remailer"
><Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]>
>wrote in news:(E-Mail Removed) vacy.at:
>> https://www.regsoft.net/regsoft/view...roductid=50499
>>
>>
>> SAFEBOOT SOLO if full disk encryption software. It is
>> incompatible with Norton Speed Disk; this fact is not brought to

><snip>
>
>Same bitchpost this whiner has repeated assailed this newsgroup using an
>anonymouse remailer (mail2news) which can be considered the equivalent
>of a spammer abusing an open relay.


Bullshit!

In NO way is a remailer equated with an "open relay."

> Guess this whiner chose to use a
>different mail2news open proxy since several news servers decided to
>block any posts originating from gradwell.net in the PATH, or it could
>be gradwell.net got complaints and block this abuser using their IP
>address. Now this whiner had to move and is using another remailer
>(dizum.net).


Since no other regulars seem to be using anon remailers, killfiling on
anon remailers is that hard. There are a number of ways of doing it. I
know from experience because I have posted to alt.privacy.anon-server
for some years.

>It doesn't matter if the OP has a valid case or not. That's not the
>issue. The issue is that the OP keeps reposting their same diatribe
>over and over and over.


What do you regard as "over and over." Once a week for a number of
weeks. That's hardly over and over. Even so, unanswered his posts would
fall into the black hole of retention time if you dweebs would let it be
- or KILLFILE him.

> The OP thus equates their message to SPAM
>(hence the use of the hash busting string in the Subject and postfixed
>to the body)! This is a poster that is not concerned about helping the
>peer community of the newsgroup. They just want to bitch and do so
>repeatedly about once a week.


That's his right. Once a week is what you are bitching about. You *do*
have a problem - in your own head.

>The OP is rude in not providing a constant moniker by which others that
>no longer want to be assailed with this diatribe can killfile this
>poster. Perhaps their open proxy (mail2news) doesn't permit selecting a
>moniker (i.e., author or sender name). Not all e-mail clients can
>filter or have clauses for rules to block by IP address (in the
>NNTP-Posting-Host header, if even included).


That is wrong. He should not be forcing all who have seen his message to
see it over and over. He absolutely should allow killfiling because he
should only be concerned with new readers of the group to see it. If the
group thinks him full of it, he should not exacerbate it with forcing
such inepts as yourself to this point of frustration.

> I would love to know which
>NNTP clients will let me define a rule to killfile based on a substring
>in the PATH header.


Agent's Global Search/Filter allows filtering on *any* header, including
the Path header. Of course, it also filters on body text. If it is the
same message over and over, just kill file on keywords in the body text.

X-News, a freebie, also allows filtering on headers and body text.

http://xnews.newsguy.com/

http://www.geocities.com/d4vidb/x_setup10.html#status

> I could then block any and all messages originating
>from open remailers by filtering out any that have "!mail2news" in the
>PATH header. OE won't do it, Thunderbird won't do it, and I didn't see
>anywhere in Forte Agent to do it.


I've covered that.

There are approximately 24 non-middle remailers you have to be concerned
with -

amessage antani austria
bigapple bunker cripto
discord dizum edo
freedom frell futurew
george hastio italy
krotus lemuria metacolo
paranoia starwars tonga
kroken liberty randseed

Filter on them.

there are two middleman - that I know of presently, which also deliver
to Usenet : bikikii and dingo.

It is beyond me how you people operate usenet so unprepared with the
right software.

Since the important key points in the text cannot change because he must
continually refer to the company and other keywords, body text
filtering would be a snap.

To make myself plain:

I do not condone fascist censoring.

I do not condone idiots who deliberately avoid killfiles.

I do condone bitch'n and whining. That's Usenet.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
*Vanguard*
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-02-2004
"(E-Mail Removed)" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote in news:(E-Mail Removed):
>
> You two are the whiners. Without you two control freaks this thread

<snip - repeat post>

Duplicating your post lends it no further validity nor further
importance.

Since you use Forte Agent and what you must therefore deem as "proper
[usenet] software", (and this for a newsreader that cannot handle
multiple news servers without resorting to shortcuts loading different
config files), please explain how to define a kill filter that checks on
a substring in the PATH header. From what I saw of what little Agent
lets you define for kill filters, all you get is Author and E-mail
Address for filtering out a post. When I attempted to define a kill
filter using a "NNTP-Posting-Host" qualifier, it spewed back an error
message saying it doesn't understand that qualifier. Wow, what an
all-encompassing set of qualifiers in that you get to check all of 2,
just TWO, headers. In Forte Agent, how would I, for examples, kill
filter on:

- PATH contains substring "mail2news".
- NNTP-Posting-Host, if exists, has value of xx.xx.xx.xx (i.e., some
specific IP address).
- X-No-Archive = YES (case insensitive, of course).
- A header with substring "Complaint" somewhere in its name does not
exist.
- Subject contains "Re:" AND References header is missing.

Kill filtering on Author and E-mail Address is as stupid as blocking
spam using the Junk Mail rule based on E-mail address. Those are fields
that the *sender* specifies and so they can change at will. They are
worthless for kill filters. Oooh, I'm gonna kill filter on Joe Schmuck
who then changes their name to My Muck, so then I filter on their e-mail
address of http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) only for them to later change it
in their client to (E-Mail Removed). Yeah, like kill
filtering on name and e-mail address are really useful. NOT! You need
to kill filter on a header over which the sender has no immediate or
direct control, something that got added AFTER they sent their message.

If Forte Agent is such the wonderful NNTP client you profess it to be
then, please, show me how to define the above example kill filters. I
already know OE won't do it. I also know Thunderbird won't do it. From
what I saw in Forte, it won't do it, either.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Leythos
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-02-2004
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, marty12
@hotmail.com says...
> (It seems what we have here are bunch of newbies who cannot kill filter
> and refuse to operate Usenet with the proper software, or some
> egocentric, frustrated flips trying to be the "bosses" of a.c.s.)


And it seems that you don't know much about using the reply function,
other than in it's default state - most people snip the parts of the
reply that are no longer needed. Maybe you should get a quality
newsreader that you can use.

And just so that you know, my newsreader will let me bozo-list threads
based on the word SAFEBOOT, but I don't care to.

The only way to get rid of lamers posting about a product that they
didn't use properly, hiding behind an anonymous address, is to treat
them like the spammers they are (or like the unnamed one we can't
mention).

Get a life, usenet is working, it's letting people reply as they see
fit.

--
--
(E-Mail Removed)
(Remove 999 to reply to me)
 
Reply With Quote
 
marty12@hotmail.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-02-2004
On Mon, 2 Aug 2004 11:53:42 -0500, "*Vanguard*"
<do-not-email@reply-to-group> wrote:

>"(E-Mail Removed)" <(E-Mail Removed)>
>wrote in news:(E-Mail Removed):
>>
>> You two are the whiners. Without you two control freaks this thread

><snip - repeat post>
>
>Duplicating your post lends it no further validity nor further
>importance.
>
>Since you use Forte Agent and what you must therefore deem as "proper
>[usenet] software", (and this for a newsreader that cannot handle
>multiple news servers without resorting to shortcuts loading different
>config files), please explain how to define a kill filter that checks on
>a substring in the PATH header. From what I saw of what little Agent
>lets you define for kill filters, all you get is Author and E-mail
>Address for filtering out a post. When I attempted to define a kill
>filter using a "NNTP-Posting-Host" qualifier, it spewed back an error
>message saying it doesn't understand that qualifier. Wow, what an
>all-encompassing set of qualifiers in that you get to check all of 2,
>just TWO, headers. In Forte Agent, how would I, for examples, kill
>filter on:
>
>- PATH contains substring "mail2news".


Using the Global Search/Filter entails first having to download the
message bodies. This doesn't mean you have to read them.

A global filter can name the header it wants filtered. For instance,
here are some keywords filtered, plus the Path header.

safeboot or crooks or path: athenanews.com (if you wanted to filter out
my messages.)

>- NNTP-Posting-Host, if exists, has value of xx.xx.xx.xx (i.e., some
>specific IP address).
>- X-No-Archive = YES (case insensitive, of course).
>- A header with substring "Complaint" somewhere in its name does not
>exist.
>- Subject contains "Re:" AND References header is missing.


For filtering anon messages where the body message remains significantly
the same is a snap. Just filter on those keywords. This is method you
should use with Agent or X-news.

>Kill filtering on Author and E-mail Address is as stupid as blocking
>spam using the Junk Mail rule based on E-mail address. Those are fields
>that the *sender* specifies and so they can change at will. They are
>worthless for kill filters. Oooh, I'm gonna kill filter on Joe Schmuck
>who then changes their name to My Muck, so then I filter on their e-mail
>address of (E-Mail Removed) only for them to later change it
>in their client to (E-Mail Removed). Yeah, like kill
>filtering on name and e-mail address are really useful. NOT! You need
>to kill filter on a header over which the sender has no immediate or
>direct control, something that got added AFTER they sent their message.


Tell me the obvious.

>If Forte Agent is such the wonderful NNTP client you profess it to be
>then, please, show me how to define the above example kill filters. I
>already know OE won't do it. I also know Thunderbird won't do it. From
>what I saw in Forte, it won't do it, either.


Jeez, man. Don't tell somebody who uses Agent - and has used it near
since its inception, what it won't do.

The below is taken from Agent's HELP file.
(You do not have to necessarily use a label to filter on body text. Just
put it into the filter.)

Expression Qualifiers In general, Agent searches as much of the message
as possible for the words or phrases in the expression. How much of the
message is searched depends on the type of search (Usenet, email, or
global search). In addition, you can use so-called expression
qualifiers to limit the search to selected fields. If a search
expression contains no qualifies, the follow items are searched:

Usenet Filters: The Subject and Author fields only (and not the message
body)

Email Filters: All header fields (and not the message body)

Global Search: All header fields and the message body. To limit the
search to
a particular message field, use a qualifier prefix, which is the name
of the field to be searched, followed by a colon. For example:

subject: testing searches just the subject field for the word "testing"

subject: testing and from: tom gold searches just the subject field for
the word "testing" and just the from field for the phrase "tom
gold". Thus, it matches only those messages for which the
subject contains the word "testing" and the from field
contains the phrase "tom gold". Usenet, email, and global
search expressions all allow different qualifiers, as detailed
below. Usenet Filters may contain the following qualifiers:

subject: matches the subject header field author: or from: match the
author of the message, which is normally the From header field
Email Filters may use the name of any header field as a
qualifier. For example, you match all messages posted with
Agent with the expression:

x-mailer: forte agent In addition, email filters may use the following
special qualifier words: any-sender: matches any of the fields From,
Apparently-From, Sender, Reply-To, or X-Sender. any-recipient: matches
any of the fields To, Apparently-To, Cc, or Bcc. Global Search
expressions allow all of the qualifiers allowed by email filters, and
the following additional qualifiers: body: matches the text sections of
the message body. IOW, it matches all of the text that you would
normally read in the message if you were not viewing the raw,
unformatted message.

raw-body: matches the complete, unformatted body of the message,
including sections containing binary attachments and images.

Now, I am not going to hold a seminar on this. Agent's HELP section can
show you how to do all this. X-News is a bit harder and takes some
getting used to.

If you want to sit here and continually bitch about this anon poster, be
my guest. But *don't* tell me you cannot killfilter him. That's the
fault in your choice of software.
 
Reply With Quote
 
marty12@hotmail.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-02-2004
On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 17:07:06 GMT, Leythos <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, marty12
>@hotmail.com says...
>> (It seems what we have here are bunch of newbies who cannot kill filter
>> and refuse to operate Usenet with the proper software, or some
>> egocentric, frustrated flips trying to be the "bosses" of a.c.s.)

>
>And it seems that you don't know much about using the reply function,
>other than in it's default state - most people snip the parts of the
>reply that are no longer needed. Maybe you should get a quality
>newsreader that you can use.
>
>And just so that you know, my newsreader will let me bozo-list threads
>based on the word SAFEBOOT, but I don't care to.
>
>The only way to get rid of lamers posting about a product that they
>didn't use properly, hiding behind an anonymous address, is to treat
>them like the spammers they are (or like the unnamed one we can't
>mention).
>
>Get a life, usenet is working, it's letting people reply as they see
>fit.
>

You are a very disingenuous sort who continually evades the main
argument. In short, you are a dishonest liar.

*You* are heretofore PLONKED!

 
Reply With Quote
 
Leythos
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-02-2004
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, marty12
@hotmail.com says...
> You are a very disingenuous sort who continually evades the main
> argument. In short, you are a dishonest liar.


Um, so, you are saying that I'm lying when all I care about is that the
lame poster take his crappy, spam, to another place, other than usenet.
He would get farther ahead is there was some reason to believe him or
his posts, but reporting what he says is the truth and then hiding
behind a anon service leads most intelligent people to believe there is
an ulterior reason for his postings, which means something other than
his posted issue.

Nothing I've posted is dishonest or a lie, unlike the lamer that is
hiding behind the post.

--
--
(E-Mail Removed)
(Remove 999 to reply to me)
 
Reply With Quote
 
*Vanguard*
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-02-2004
"(E-Mail Removed)" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote in news:(E-Mail Removed):
> In NO way is a remailer equated with an "open relay."


Your opinion, not mine. Someone sending e-mail through a proxy for
which they never have to establish an account and cannot be traced and
which isn't regulated in its use in any way whatsoever by that proxy
provider is an open relay. So how does a mail2news gateway, other than
the destination is usenet versus SMTP, qualify as different than an open
relay used for e-mail? As I understand, the mail2news gateway do not by
themselves make messages anonymous but the e-mails sent to them may
first go through the anonymous remailer of the service providing the
mail2news gateway. Also, almost all the toothless "policies" that I've
read for the remailers makes their operation and effect pretty much the
same as someone running an open proxy: no bandwidth quota, no logging of
IP address of sender, no accounts required for use, no way to bar the
sender in case of abuse, spam, or illegal activities.

The remailer disavows any responsibility (which is typical of any e-mail
service) and acknowledges they have no control over the use of their
resources. Read http://dingo.1hwy.com/abuse.htm for an example of how
stupid and toothless is any "policy" regarding abuse for a remailer.
While some remailers will let you submit your e-mail address to add
yourself to THIER voluntarily enforced blacklist to eliminate any
e-mails from them from reaching you, that would require you actually
manage the resource receiving the e-mails. For usenet, that doesn't
apply. You cannot and should not be able to censor what other usenet
users can see just because you disagree with one or a few posters. I
really don't want to bother running my own local and private news server
and getting a news feed for it just so I can define rules as to what
posts my news server will accept which can then be read with my
newsreader client.

> Since no other regulars seem to be using anon remailers, killfiling on
> anon remailers is that hard. There are a number of ways of doing it.
> I know from experience because I have posted to
> alt.privacy.anon-server for some years.


Do none of the remailers permit selecting a constant moniker (i.e.,
sender or author)? An ever changing name one each of your posts is a
pointless and bogus identifier and you might as well as leave it blank.

> What do you regard as "over and over." Once a week for a number of
> weeks. That's hardly over and over. Even so, unanswered his posts
> would fall into the black hole of retention time if you dweebs would
> let it be - or KILLFILE him.


No, their posts will not fall into the black hole of retention time;
i.e., his posts will not expire on the news servers. Why? Because the
OP has declared that they will repeatedly repost their message to
deliberately obviate the expiration of posts. Without anyone ever
replying to their post, this dweeb will repost it again in about another
week, and in another week, and ad nauseum. It isn't going to go away
because you hope it expires eventually across the news servers. The old
copy expires, vaporizes, and voila, another same-content copy of it
reappears. It is a deliberate attempt by theOP to circumvent the
expiration of posts whether on the news server or by users employing
views or rules to eliminate old posts. Just because you toss out the
Sunday paper doesn't mean that ad won't appear in next Sunday's paper,
and again the next Sunday, and so on ad nauseum, especially since there
is no cost and no responsibility on the part of the advertiser.

<snip>
> That is wrong. He should not be forcing all who have seen his message
> to see it over and over. He absolutely should allow killfiling
> because he should only be concerned with new readers of the group to
> see it. If the group thinks him full of it, he should not exacerbate
> it with forcing such inepts as yourself to this point of frustration.


But the OP gives us nothing to killfile on (except, according to you,
maybe in Forte Agent in can be done). In your use of remailers, do you
get to choose what moniker (i.e., sender or name) gets used in your
posts? From what I've seen of the OP's posts, each and every one gets a
new moniker; i.e., their remailer cycles through a randomly generated
set of names. At the beginning, their IP address got included in the
NNTP-Posting-Host header but now that has disappeared when they changed
to a different remailer. Killfiling on "mail2news" in the PATH header
will killfile all such users, not just this one user. So this OP gives
us nothing concrete upon which to base a kill filter.

>> I would love to know which
>> NNTP clients will let me define a rule to killfile based on a
>> substring in the PATH header.

>
> Agent's Global Search/Filter allows filtering on *any* header,
> including the Path header. Of course, it also filters on body text.
> If it is the same message over and over, just kill file on keywords
> in the body text.


Yet I see no *action* that can be attached to the search to delete the
messages that I am attempting to kill. I don't want to search for them
and then have to manually delete them. I want to kill them without ever
having to see them. Also, once I define "PATH: mail2news" in a search,
how do I save that search to reuse it later? By scrolling through a
long history of past searches? And why would I want to do searching as
opposed to creating a rule so an automatic *action* (of delete) could be
associated with each result found in the search without any intervention
from me? I don't want to be going through a history of searches, find
the ones relevant to those that I would've preferred to be in a rule,
manually execute the search again, and manually delete all the results
found in the manual search.

And if all headers can be searched in a global search, why were all
those headers omitted in the Message -> Filters -> Add Kill Filter menu?
They obviously have the code to search all headers in the global search
but didn't bother reusing it for kill filters. Can a search be saved as
a rule AND an action attached to that saved search (i.e., make it a rule
or filter), so the results found by the searching will get automatically
acted upon?

I don't want to bother doing searches. I want to use a rule or filter
to do that automatically for me. According to Forte's help, "Add Usenet
Filter dialog - If a message header is selected in the Message List
pane, Agent automatically inserts the selected message's subject or
author into this field." In that dialog, there are only 2 buttons for
adding qualifiers: Author and Subject. If I enter any other qualifier
(i.e., header), it bitches that it cannot filter on that header.
*OTHER* than manual searches, where do you define rules or filters in
Forte Agent that will run automatically and that actually have an action
associated with them. The task is not to manually *find* the message
but to automatically *delete* it.

Note that when I downloaded and installed the trial version of Forte
that there is no "Global Search/Filter" option that you mention. I
found "Edit -> Global Search", or hitting Ctrl-G, but there is no Filter
sub-menu or sub-function available in that dialog; i.e., I cannot define
a search and then save it as a filter. The "filtering" is the search
criteria you enter. Search-and-delete (all manual) is not the same as
rule-deleted (and automatic). Global Search isn't filtering out
anything. It FINDS whatever you specified for the search criteria.

Since Forte Agent often gets touted as the better newsreader, its dearth
of filters and/or rules is surprising. With all the hoopla that Forte
Agent is better, and if it were true, then I must be missing something
in Forte Agent where I can define rules or filters that operate WITHOUT
user intervention and to which an action, like delete, can be applied.
I also don't like the workaround to provide support for multiple news
servers just because Forte Agent can only handle one at a time, but
that's another issue.

> X-News, a freebie, also allows filtering on headers and body text.
>
> http://xnews.newsguy.com/


I'll have to revisit that newsreader. I remember looking at it a couple
years ago but thought it got dropped, went dead, or was no longer
supported. Even if it did get revived, it still, for example, has old
references to DejaNews. How long ago did DejaNews become Google Groups?
February 2001, wasn't it? If the documentation isn't accurate, it bodes
ill for the program.

From what I read at http://xnews.newsguy.com/manual.html#filters,
filters in Xnews are what are called views in other newsreaders.
Nothing gets deleted, just hidden. That means you waste the disk space
in your message store for message that you never want to see, and you
will see those unwanted posts once you remove the filter or change to a
different one. It looks like I would instead have to score a post.
Supposedly ALL the headers would be usable so I could select the PATH
header. *IF* all headers are available for scoring then this might
work, and regular expressions might make it possible to specify exactly
where in the header to look, like "$\!mail2news" to check it is at the
end of the PATH value.

> There are approximately 24 non-middle remailers you have to be
> concerned with -
>
> amessage antani austria
> bigapple bunker cripto
> discord dizum edo
> freedom frell futurew
> george hastio italy
> krotus lemuria metacolo
> paranoia starwars tonga
> kroken liberty randseed
>
> Filter on them.


Do you know if it is standard or de facto policy to use "mail2news" in
the PATH header when using these remailers? Or is that optional?
Rather than filter on "...!news.dizum.com!..." somewhere in the PATH, I
could catch them all with just filtering on "!mail2news".

> there are two middleman - that I know of presently, which also deliver
> to Usenet : bikikii and dingo.
>
> It is beyond me how you people operate usenet so unprepared with the
> right software.


Not everyone has the time to waste researching every possible client
that exists. Also, not everyone has the luxury of dictating what client
they get to use. If you use my computer, you use what software is on it
and you don't get to install anything else. If you use a desktop at
work, you are responsible for obeying your company policies regarding
software and installs. You use what you know, you use what you are
allowed to use, and you use what best meets YOUR needs and not someone
else's. OE fits okay but know I'd like something more, a choice I can
make for my home computer not at work. I don't see Forte doing what I
want since I'm not interested in performing manual searches (that carry
no action on the results) and having to do manual deletes.

> Since the important key points in the text cannot change because he
> must continually refer to the company and other keywords, body text
> filtering would be a snap.


Filtering on words within the body is much less a reliable filter unless
the words can be guaranteed to be unique. A filter on Safeboot,
encryption, "Speed Disk" isn't sufficient to guarantee only these
bitchposts gets killed automatically. Adding "Simon Hunt" and "Marco
Versteine" might help, but any replies to the post that I killfiled will
also not be seen (for those that quote most or all of the post). In
rare instances, I do want to kill the entire thread, but often I do
start secondary discussions which I do want to see. I cannot add the
garbage strings that the poster adds to the Subject header and also in
the body, and the fact that the poster is adding these to their post to
circumvent anti-spam filters is equating their post to spam. The poster
wrote it using hash busting strings for a reason, and it is not a
beneficial reason to the peer community in the newsgroup. Looks like
spam means it is spam.

Again, however, the kill filters in Forte Agent only let me designate
Author and E-mail Address to filter on. Searching is worthless as a
kill filter because that requires manual intervention which obviates the
point of *automatically* kill filing someone. It is possible I missed
the instructions on how to convert a global *search* into a rule or
filter that runs automatically.

> To make myself plain:
>
> I do not condone fascist censoring.
>
> I do not condone idiots who deliberately avoid killfiles.
>
> I do condone bitch'n and whining. That's Usenet.


So you agree that you can whine that we can whine about the OP's
whining. You whine about our whining, so you, too, are whining! hee
hee hee ;->

 
Reply With Quote
 
*Vanguard*
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-02-2004
"(E-Mail Removed)" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote in news:(E-Mail Removed):
> On Mon, 2 Aug 2004 11:53:42 -0500, "*Vanguard*"
> <do-not-email@reply-to-group> wrote:
>
>> "(E-Mail Removed)" <(E-Mail Removed)>
>> wrote in news:(E-Mail Removed):
>>>
>>> You two are the whiners. Without you two control freaks this thread
>>> <snip - repeat post>

>>
>> Duplicating your post lends it no further validity nor further
>> importance.
>>
>> Since you use Forte Agent and what you must therefore deem as "proper
>> [usenet] software", (and this for a newsreader that cannot handle
>> multiple news servers without resorting to shortcuts loading
>> different config files), please explain how to define a kill filter
>> that checks on a substring in the PATH header. From what I saw of
>> what little Agent lets you define for kill filters, all you get is
>> Author and E-mail Address for filtering out a post. When I
>> attempted to define a kill filter using a "NNTP-Posting-Host"
>> qualifier, it spewed back an error message saying it doesn't
>> understand that qualifier. Wow, what an all-encompassing set of
>> qualifiers in that you get to check all of 2, just TWO, headers. In
>> Forte Agent, how would I, for examples, kill filter on:
>>
>> - PATH contains substring "mail2news".

>
> Using the Global Search/Filter entails first having to download the
> message bodies. This doesn't mean you have to read them.
>
> A global filter can name the header it wants filtered. For instance,
> here are some keywords filtered, plus the Path header.
>
> safeboot or crooks or path: athenanews.com (if you wanted to filter
> out my messages.)
>
>> - NNTP-Posting-Host, if exists, has value of xx.xx.xx.xx (i.e., some
>> specific IP address).
>> - X-No-Archive = YES (case insensitive, of course).
>> - A header with substring "Complaint" somewhere in its name does not
>> exist.
>> - Subject contains "Re:" AND References header is missing.

>
> For filtering anon messages where the body message remains
> significantly the same is a snap. Just filter on those keywords.
> This is method you should use with Agent or X-news.
>
>> Kill filtering on Author and E-mail Address is as stupid as blocking
>> spam using the Junk Mail rule based on E-mail address. Those are
>> fields that the *sender* specifies and so they can change at will.
>> They are worthless for kill filters. Oooh, I'm gonna kill filter on
>> Joe Schmuck who then changes their name to My Muck, so then I filter
>> on their e-mail address of (E-Mail Removed) only for them
>> to later change it in their client to (E-Mail Removed).
>> Yeah, like kill filtering on name and e-mail address are really
>> useful. NOT! You need to kill filter on a header over which the
>> sender has no immediate or direct control, something that got added
>> AFTER they sent their message.

>
> Tell me the obvious.
>
>> If Forte Agent is such the wonderful NNTP client you profess it to be
>> then, please, show me how to define the above example kill filters.
>> I already know OE won't do it. I also know Thunderbird won't do it.
>> From what I saw in Forte, it won't do it, either.

>
> Jeez, man. Don't tell somebody who uses Agent - and has used it near
> since its inception, what it won't do.
>
> The below is taken from Agent's HELP file.
> (You do not have to necessarily use a label to filter on body text.
> Just put it into the filter.)
>
> Expression Qualifiers In general, Agent searches as much of the
> message as possible for the words or phrases in the expression. How
> much of the message is searched depends on the type of search
> (Usenet, email, or global search). In addition, you can use so-called
> expression qualifiers to limit the search to selected fields. If a
> search expression contains no qualifies, the follow items are
> searched:
>
> Usenet Filters: The Subject and Author fields only (and not the
> message body)
>
> Email Filters: All header fields (and not the message body)
>
> Global Search: All header fields and the message body. To limit the
> search to
> a particular message field, use a qualifier prefix, which is the name
> of the field to be searched, followed by a colon. For example:
>
> subject: testing searches just the subject field for the word
> "testing"
>
> subject: testing and from: tom gold searches just the subject field
> for the word "testing" and just the from field for the
> phrase "tom gold". Thus, it matches only those messages for
> which the subject contains the word "testing" and the from
> field contains the phrase "tom gold". Usenet, email, and
> global search expressions all allow different qualifiers, as
> detailed below. Usenet Filters may contain the following
> qualifiers:
>
> subject: matches the subject header field author: or from: match the
> author of the message, which is normally the From header
> field Email Filters may use the name of any header field as a
> qualifier. For example, you match all messages posted with
> Agent with the expression:
>
> x-mailer: forte agent In addition, email filters may use the following
> special qualifier words: any-sender: matches any of the fields From,
> Apparently-From, Sender, Reply-To, or X-Sender. any-recipient: matches
> any of the fields To, Apparently-To, Cc, or Bcc. Global Search
> expressions allow all of the qualifiers allowed by email filters, and
> the following additional qualifiers: body: matches the text sections
> of the message body. IOW, it matches all of the text that you would
> normally read in the message if you were not viewing the raw,
> unformatted message.
>
> raw-body: matches the complete, unformatted body of the message,
> including sections containing binary attachments and images.
>
> Now, I am not going to hold a seminar on this. Agent's HELP section
> can show you how to do all this. X-News is a bit harder and takes
> some getting used to.
>
> If you want to sit here and continually bitch about this anon poster,
> be my guest. But *don't* tell me you cannot killfilter him. That's the
> fault in your choice of software.


I download Forte Agent (again) and looked at Global Search. Previously
I was looking at Filters -> Add Kill Filter since that seemed the
obvious place to define a filter or rule.

Okay, so now I have a global search defined. How do I attach an action
to it, like delete? I don't want to be remembering and performing
manual searches to then manually delete messages.

Once a global *search* is defined, how do I make it a global *view* or
filter or rule that gets executed automatically upon even visit to a
newsgroup? I am completely new to Forte Agent so I might be missing
something obvious. There are 2 entries in the Index for its help found
by searching on "filter" and neither one of them describe how to define
a filter or rule that executes automatically to perform an action.

I did find mention of the "Manage Views Dialog", which led me to "How to
Create Views", but that doesn't let me specify headers and their values
or substrings in order to hide the posts that I want to killfile.


--
__________________________________________________
*** Post replies to newsgroup. Share with others.
(E-mail: domain = ".com", add "=NEWS=" to Subject)
__________________________________________________

 
Reply With Quote
 
Leythos
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-02-2004
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, do-not-email@reply-to-
group says...
[snip]

The real problem, as has been mentioned, is that even KFing the person
won't help the situation - there will still be some lame cry-baby
posting about something that he blames another for and he's said that
he'll keep posting.

I would say that it almost puts him in the same category as the ferret
loving nameless one.

--
--
(E-Mail Removed)
(Remove 999 to reply to me)
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
vjn jion io CONTROL BREAK INTERNATIONAL is a Disreputable Company, DO NOT Patronize Them jm ioerd h9 Anonymous Sender Computer Security 1 10-06-2004 08:39 PM
Re: nc io sio iss i SAFEBOOT SOLO IS DISCONTINUED, FLAW DISCOVERED: CONTROL BREAK INTERNATIONAL is a Disreputable Company, DO NOT Patronize Them cn jkh ioshio io Computer Security 3 08-04-2004 11:28 AM
Do not use SAFEBOOT SOLO from CONTROL BREAK INTERNATIONAL mncvklsdnfoesdjhfgod Guy Domville Computer Security 48 08-03-2004 07:01 AM
Do not use SAFEBOOT SOLO from CONTROL BREAK INTERNATIONAL vlfdjgdsjgdfjghfg A.Melon Computer Security 8 07-14-2004 08:00 PM
SAFEBOOT SOLO from CONTROL BREAK INTERNATIONAL: DO NOT USE hwefoech9hfcvkbvi Fritz Wuehler Computer Security 6 07-02-2004 03:07 PM



Advertisments