Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by cadmin, Jan 25, 2004.

  1. It was on Tue, 27 Jan 2004 15:55:25 -0800, just as I was halfway through a
    He's got that right.
    I for one won't see it, as I'd had enough of the apathetic jerk & binned.

    William Poaster, Jan 28, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. cadmin

    Mara Guest

    On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 15:55:25 -0800, trout wrote:

    Since the sending of spam has been increasing exponentially in some cases, but
    not all, whether in e-mail or on usenet, you are totally correct. There are too
    many variables to make a simple count of spam in this group have any meaning
    whatsoever. The amount of accounts closed because it's been reported possibly
    would, but the spam intensity would fluctuate even while the count was ongoing,
    and no one has time enough to check each and every spam reported, not even
    Voodoo, though I suspect h/sh/it would claim that it did, simply to prolong this
    bizarre, senseless, and totally meaningless argument. And certainly no
    information gleaned from that would apply to the spam situation anywhere else.
    It would of course simply make h/h/it look even more foolish than h/sh/it
    already does, but you can't teach people who don't want to learn.

    Come to think of it, I never did see any evidence whatsoever that Voodoo even
    knows _how_ to complain effectively. Or even to trace headers. But it's too late
    for that, anyway.

    "He's in my bin for being a dip, and in six months, will still be in there for
    being a dip. THAT'S the only real truth I've seen, and will see."
    Mara, Jan 28, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. cadmin

    °Mike° Guest

    If a third party was to do the exact same "count", and came up with
    figures that conflicted with those of Voodoo, he would just poo-poo
    them out of hand. You're right, he just wants to back up his ridiculous
    statements with a few well placed figures.
    °Mike°, Jan 28, 2004
  4. cadmin

    trout Guest

    °Mike° wrote:
    Not to mention the basically-flawed reasoning.
    He might as well say that arresting people makes no difference in crime
    statistics, so there's no point in it. He'd then request that people not
    tie-up the phone by calling the police; because it just 'draws
    attention' to the criminals, and interferes with his ability to chat.
    trout, Jan 28, 2004
  5. cadmin

    °Mike° Guest

    Yes, this concept has already been put to him, albeit not so
    elegantly; he couldn't see it then, and there's no reason to
    believe that he will ever take the blinkers off.
    °Mike°, Jan 28, 2004
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.