You all know who I mean.

On 11/6/22 3:45 PM, Alan wrote:
> You all know who I mean.

Ha. I put trolls in my KF .

philo wrote:

> Ha.

Please respond to this note because I spent a lot of time HELPING you
recently in multiple posts - and if you do NOT respond to this post - then
I will know I wasted my time trying to provide you answers and assistance.

If you do not respond in one day, you will be the fourth person in twenty
years to get the high honor of _my_ killfile, which would mean you'd join
the likes of Snit, Alan Baker & Rodspeed.

On 2022-11-06 18:14, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> philo wrote:
>
>> Ha.
>
> Please respond to this note because I spent a lot of time HELPING you
> recently in multiple posts - and if you do NOT respond to this post - then
> I will know I wasted my time trying to provide you answers and assistance.
>
> If you do not respond in one day, you will be the fourth person in twenty
> years to get the high honor of _my_ killfile, which would mean you'd join
> the likes of Snit, Alan Baker & Rodspeed.

So you understand that you're the asshole...

....and you weren't bright enough not to admit it.

Alan,

> You all know who I mean.

Simple : I put them into my killfile so I don't see their posts or any of
the responses to those.

.... Which, after having checked what you have been responding with these
last months and quite disliking it, I've done with you.

Goodbye.

Hows that for a Streisand effect ? :-)

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

Am 07.11.22 um 00:28 schrieb philo:
> On 11/6/22 3:45 PM, Alan wrote:
>> You all know who I mean.
>
>
> Ha. I put trolls in my KF .

Then why are you answering this Super-Troll Alan?

--
Gutta cavat lapidem (Ovid)

Am 07.11.22 um 03:32 schrieb Alan:
> On 2022-11-06 18:14, Andy Burnelli wrote:
>> philo wrote:
>>
>>> Ha.
>>
>> Please respond to this note because I spent a lot of time HELPING you
>> recently in multiple posts - and if you do NOT respond to this post - then
>> I will know I wasted my time trying to provide you answers and assistance.
>>
>> If you do not respond in one day, you will be the fourth person in twenty
>> years to get the high honor of _my_ killfile, which would mean you'd join
>> the likes of Snit, Alan Baker & Rodspeed.
>
> So you understand that you're the asshole...
>
> ...and you weren't bright enough not to admit it.

You are not bright enough to understand that you are by no means better
than Arlen/Burnelli.

--
Gutta cavat lapidem (Ovid)

On 2022-11-07 01:39, R.Wieser wrote:
> Alan,
>
>> You all know who I mean.
>
> Simple : I put them into my killfile so I don't see their posts or any of
> the responses to those.
>
> ... Which, after having checked what you have been responding with these
> last months and quite disliking it, I've done with you.
>
> Goodbye.
>
> Hows that for a Streisand effect ? :-)
>
> Regards,
> Rudy Wieser
>
>

Whatever gets you through the night

On 2022-11-07 01:44, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
> Am 07.11.22 um 03:32 schrieb Alan:
>> On 2022-11-06 18:14, Andy Burnelli wrote:
>>> philo wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ha.
>>>
>>> Please respond to this note because I spent a lot of time HELPING you
>>> recently in multiple posts - and if you do NOT respond to this post - then
>>> I will know I wasted my time trying to provide you answers and assistance.
>>>
>>> If you do not respond in one day, you will be the fourth person in twenty
>>> years to get the high honor of _my_ killfile, which would mean you'd join
>>> the likes of Snit, Alan Baker & Rodspeed.
>>
>> So you understand that you're the asshole...
>>
>> ...and you weren't bright enough not to admit it.
>
> You are not bright enough to understand that you are by no means better
> than Arlen/Burnelli.
>

LOL!

Am 07.11.22 um 10:39 schrieb R.Wieser:
> Alan,
>
>> You all know who I mean.
>
> Simple : I put them into my killfile so I don't see their posts or any of
> the responses to those.

Dear Rudy. Your stoneage client declared clinically dead roughly 10
years ago by its manufacturer won't do that, won't it?

X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512
X-Priority: 3
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5512
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
Xref: news.solani.org comp.mobile.android:9702

--
Gutta cavat lapidem (Ovid)

On Sun, 6 Nov 2022 17:28:38 -0600, philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote:

>On 11/6/22 3:45 PM, Alan wrote:
>> You all know who I mean.
>
>
>Ha. I put trolls in my KF .

As do I. And as everyone should do, so the rest of us don't have to
see a troll quoted in replies to him.

Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote:
> Am 07.11.22 um 03:32 schrieb Alan:
> > On 2022-11-06 18:14, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> >> philo wrote:
> >>
> >>> Ha.
> >>
> >> Please respond to this note because I spent a lot of time HELPING you
> >> recently in multiple posts - and if you do NOT respond to this post - then
> >> I will know I wasted my time trying to provide you answers and assistance.
> >>
> >> If you do not respond in one day, you will be the fourth person in twenty
> >> years to get the high honor of _my_ killfile, which would mean you'd join
> >> the likes of Snit, Alan Baker & Rodspeed.
> >
> > So you understand that you're the asshole...
> >
> > ...and you weren't bright enough not to admit it.
>
> You are not bright enough to understand that you are by no means better
> than Arlen/Burnelli.

Wow! We've found a common ground! :-)

Ken Blake wrote:

> On Sun, 6 Nov 2022 17:28:38 -0600, philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>>On 11/6/22 3:45 PM, Alan wrote:
>>> You all know who I mean.
>>
>>
>>Ha. I put trolls in my KF .
>
> As do I. And as everyone should do, so the rest of us don't have to
> see a troll quoted in replies to him.

This thread is the best "quality" that uneducated trolls can come up with?

By way of contrast, the type of quality that I produce is such as this:
*What steps do you perform on your phone expressly for privacy purposes?*
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/Wbgaq5x5Zb8>

Compare that with the garbage from uneducated ignorant trolls like Alan.
Alas, I always strive to make _every_ thread a new useful learning task.

Given the comparison of that thread's value with that of this thread,
I suddenly realized how we can _all_ make this thread valuable to us!

Yup.
It's a perfect idea, thanks to Alan Baker's acumen.

Let's make a deal, shall we?
Can you trolls be trusted to uphold a gentlemen's agreement?

Here's the deal...

Whoever wants to be in _my_ killfile... just post the affirmation to this
thread, where I will consider, a priori, every post to it to be such.
From: Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> (already there long ago)
From: philo <philo@privacy.net> (just added)
From: Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> (just added)
From: Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> (just added)
From: "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> (just added)

If you want to be in _my_ killfile, simply respond in any manner.
This solution will work out best for all of us, don't you think?
--
Posted out of the goodness of my heart to disseminate useful information
which, in this case, is to ask people to have me put them in my killfile.

On 11/7/22 9:07 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Nov 2022 17:28:38 -0600, philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>> On 11/6/22 3:45 PM, Alan wrote:
>>> You all know who I mean.
>>
>>
>> Ha. I put trolls in my KF .
>
> As do I. And as everyone should do, so the rest of us don't have to
> see a troll quoted in replies to him.

I bet you recall years ago , The Kadaitcha Man.
He (or maybe she) was the worst troll on all of Usenet but I actually
found too entertaining to block.
Kind of a Don Rickles.

One day, after I had been bragging about what a great job I had, I was
given the insult: "So in other words, a spittoon cleaner."

Rather than get in an argument, I simply replied, "Oh no, my job wasn't
/that/ good." I guess he thought it funny because he never made a nasty
comment to me again.

The good old days.

philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote:
> On 11/7/22 9:07 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
> > On Sun, 6 Nov 2022 17:28:38 -0600, philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On 11/6/22 3:45 PM, Alan wrote:
> >>> You all know who I mean.
> >>
> >>
> >> Ha. I put trolls in my KF .
> >
> > As do I. And as everyone should do, so the rest of us don't have to
> > see a troll quoted in replies to him.
>
>
> I bet you recall years ago , The Kadaitcha Man.
> He (or maybe she) was the worst troll on all of Usenet but I actually
> found too entertaining to block.
> Kind of a Don Rickles.
>
> One day, after I had been bragging about what a great job I had, I was
> given the insult: "So in other words, a spittoon cleaner."
>
> Rather than get in an argument, I simply replied, "Oh no, my job wasn't
> /that/ good." I guess he thought it funny because he never made a nasty
> comment to me again.
>
> The good old days.

Exactly! In The Good Old Days (TM), a proper troll was provocative,
but also funny, witty, smart, etc., so good traits, instead of only bad
ones as is the case these days.

That's why I'm not likely to call somebody a troll, because for me
that't giving too much credit.

On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 01:18:41 -0600, philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote:

>On 11/7/22 9:07 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
>> On Sun, 6 Nov 2022 17:28:38 -0600, philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/6/22 3:45 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>> You all know who I mean.
>>>
>>>
>>> Ha. I put trolls in my KF .
>>
>> As do I. And as everyone should do, so the rest of us don't have to
>> see a troll quoted in replies to him.
>
>
>I bet you recall years ago , The Kadaitcha Man.

I remember the name but nothing about him, since he was killfiled
almost as soon as I read his first message.

>He (or maybe she) was the worst troll on all of Usenet but I actually
>found too entertaining to block.

Not me. I never find trolls entertaining.

I don't really mind if you (or anyone else) doesn't kill a troll. What
I want to happen is that trolls don't get replies. As far as I'm
concerned, killfiling is the easiest way to accomplish that, but for
anyone who finds reading a troll's messages entertaining, that's fine
with me as long as not killfiling a troll doesn't result in replies to
him.

>Kind of a Don Rickles.
>
>One day, after I had been bragging about what a great job I had, I was
>given the insult: "So in other words, a spittoon cleaner."
>
>Rather than get in an argument, I simply replied, "Oh no, my job wasn't
>/that/ good."

You replied. That's what I'm against. When you reply to a troll, one
of the results is those of us who have him killedfiled have to see his
message quoted in a reply. I don't want to see troll's messages. They
piss me off and they make my reading through a newsgroup take longer.

>I guess he thought it funny because he never made a nasty
>comment to me again.

Funny or not, please, please, please, either killfile trolls or
refrain from replying to them. If someone keeps replying to trolls,
sooner or later I killfile the replyer too, even if his other messages
are valuable or interesting.

On 2022-11-08 20:37, Ken Blake wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 01:18:41 -0600, philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote:
>> On 11/7/22 9:07 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
>>> On Sun, 6 Nov 2022 17:28:38 -0600, philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote:

....

>> He (or maybe she) was the worst troll on all of Usenet but I actually
>> found too entertaining to block.
>
> Not me. I never find trolls entertaining.
>
> I don't really mind if you (or anyone else) doesn't kill a troll. What
> I want to happen is that trolls don't get replies. As far as I'm
> concerned, killfiling is the easiest way to accomplish that, but for
> anyone who finds reading a troll's messages entertaining, that's fine
> with me as long as not killfiling a troll doesn't result in replies to
> him.

Thunderbird can kill the post and all the replies.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 21:43:38 +0100, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

>On 2022-11-08 20:37, Ken Blake wrote:
>> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 01:18:41 -0600, philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote:
>>> On 11/7/22 9:07 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 6 Nov 2022 17:28:38 -0600, philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>
>...
>
>>> He (or maybe she) was the worst troll on all of Usenet but I actually
>>> found too entertaining to block.
>>
>> Not me. I never find trolls entertaining.
>>
>> I don't really mind if you (or anyone else) doesn't kill a troll. What
>> I want to happen is that trolls don't get replies. As far as I'm
>> concerned, killfiling is the easiest way to accomplish that, but for
>> anyone who finds reading a troll's messages entertaining, that's fine
>> with me as long as not killfiling a troll doesn't result in replies to
>> him.
>
>Thunderbird can kill the post and all the replies.

Yes, I know. That's what I don't want to do. I don't want to go to the
trouble of doing that for every post a troll makes. I want to kill the
*poster* and all the replies to him, and all the replies to anyone who
replies to someone who replies to a reply to him, etc.

Besides, I had tried Thunderbird for Usenet and had problems with it.
I now use Agent for Usenet and Thunderbird for e-mail.

Am 09.11.22 um 00:12 schrieb Ken Blake:
> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 21:43:38 +0100, "Carlos E.R."
> <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 2022-11-08 20:37, Ken Blake wrote:
>>> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 01:18:41 -0600, philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>> On 11/7/22 9:07 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 6 Nov 2022 17:28:38 -0600, philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> ...
>>
>>>> He (or maybe she) was the worst troll on all of Usenet but I actually
>>>> found too entertaining to block.
>>>
>>> Not me. I never find trolls entertaining.
>>>
>>> I don't really mind if you (or anyone else) doesn't kill a troll. What
>>> I want to happen is that trolls don't get replies. As far as I'm
>>> concerned, killfiling is the easiest way to accomplish that, but for
>>> anyone who finds reading a troll's messages entertaining, that's fine
>>> with me as long as not killfiling a troll doesn't result in replies to
>>> him.
>>
>> Thunderbird can kill the post and all the replies.
>
>
> Yes, I know. That's what I don't want to do. I don't want to go to the
> trouble of doing that for every post a troll makes. I want to kill the
> *poster* and all the replies to him, and all the replies to anyone who
> replies to someone who replies to a reply to him, etc.

Thtat is exactly what TB is able to do: "If from is/contains Ken Blake
then ignore subthread.

--
Gutta cavat lapidem (Ovid)

On 11/8/22 5:12 PM, Ken Blake wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 21:43:38 +0100, "Carlos E.R."
> <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 2022-11-08 20:37, Ken Blake wrote:
>>> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 01:18:41 -0600, philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>> On 11/7/22 9:07 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 6 Nov 2022 17:28:38 -0600, philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> ...
>>
>>>> He (or maybe she) was the worst troll on all of Usenet but I actually
>>>> found too entertaining to block.
>>>
>>> Not me. I never find trolls entertaining.
>>>
>>> I don't really mind if you (or anyone else) doesn't kill a troll. What
>>> I want to happen is that trolls don't get replies. As far as I'm
>>> concerned, killfiling is the easiest way to accomplish that, but for
>>> anyone who finds reading a troll's messages entertaining, that's fine
>>> with me as long as not killfiling a troll doesn't result in replies to
>>> him.
>>
>> Thunderbird can kill the post and all the replies.
>
>
> Yes, I know. That's what I don't want to do. I don't want to go to the
> trouble of doing that for every post a troll makes. I want to kill the
> *poster* and all the replies to him, and all the replies to anyone who
> replies to someone who replies to a reply to him, etc.
>
>
> Besides, I had tried Thunderbird for Usenet and had problems with it.
> I now use Agent for Usenet and Thunderbird for e-mail.

I have had great results with Thunderbird and am pleased to hear that it
is expected to come to Android

Am 09.11.22 um 09:32 schrieb philo:
> On 11/8/22 5:12 PM, Ken Blake wrote:
>> Besides, I had tried Thunderbird for Usenet and had problems with it.
>> I now use Agent for Usenet and Thunderbird for e-mail.
>
>
> I have had great results with Thunderbird and am pleased to hear that it
> is expected to come to Android

It probably won't. It will remain basically K-9.

--
Gutta cavat lapidem (Ovid)

On 2022-11-09 00:12, Ken Blake wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 21:43:38 +0100, "Carlos E.R."
> <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 2022-11-08 20:37, Ken Blake wrote:
>>> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 01:18:41 -0600, philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>> On 11/7/22 9:07 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 6 Nov 2022 17:28:38 -0600, philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> ...
>>
>>>> He (or maybe she) was the worst troll on all of Usenet but I actually
>>>> found too entertaining to block.
>>>
>>> Not me. I never find trolls entertaining.
>>>
>>> I don't really mind if you (or anyone else) doesn't kill a troll. What
>>> I want to happen is that trolls don't get replies. As far as I'm
>>> concerned, killfiling is the easiest way to accomplish that, but for
>>> anyone who finds reading a troll's messages entertaining, that's fine
>>> with me as long as not killfiling a troll doesn't result in replies to
>>> him.
>>
>> Thunderbird can kill the post and all the replies.
>
>
> Yes, I know. That's what I don't want to do. I don't want to go to the
> trouble of doing that for every post a troll makes. I want to kill the
> *poster* and all the replies to him, and all the replies to anyone who
> replies to someone who replies to a reply to him, etc.

That's precisely what Thunderbird does.

Action: ignore subthread.

>
>
> Besides, I had tried Thunderbird for Usenet and had problems with it.
> I now use Agent for Usenet and Thunderbird for e-mail.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 21:43:38 +0100, "Carlos E.R."
> <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>
> >On 2022-11-08 20:37, Ken Blake wrote:
> >> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 01:18:41 -0600, philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote:
> >>> On 11/7/22 9:07 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
> >>>> On Sun, 6 Nov 2022 17:28:38 -0600, philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >...
> >
> >>> He (or maybe she) was the worst troll on all of Usenet but I actually
> >>> found too entertaining to block.
> >>
> >> Not me. I never find trolls entertaining.
> >>
> >> I don't really mind if you (or anyone else) doesn't kill a troll. What
> >> I want to happen is that trolls don't get replies. As far as I'm
> >> concerned, killfiling is the easiest way to accomplish that, but for
> >> anyone who finds reading a troll's messages entertaining, that's fine
> >> with me as long as not killfiling a troll doesn't result in replies to
> >> him.
> >
> >Thunderbird can kill the post and all the replies.
>
>
> Yes, I know. That's what I don't want to do. I don't want to go to the
> trouble of doing that for every post a troll makes. I want to kill the
> *poster* and all the replies to him, and all the replies to anyone who
> replies to someone who replies to a reply to him, etc.
>
>
> Besides, I had tried Thunderbird for Usenet and had problems with it.
> I now use Agent for Usenet and Thunderbird for e-mail.

Those in the know, say that also (Forte) Agent can do this.

From my Ignore_thread_started_by_bozo file:

"In Agent 6.0, killfiling "JohnDoe" and choosing as Action "Ignore
Thread" means (after setting my View to 'not ignored') I see nothing of
his posts and nothing of those who respond to him."

[Courtesy BD on July 8, 2011 in news.software.readers.]

AFAIK, this works for both threads and sub-threads, so "JohnDoe" does
not have to be the one who strted the thread.

HTH.

On Wed, 9 Nov 2022 08:08:19 +0100, Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch>
wrote:

>Am 09.11.22 um 00:12 schrieb Ken Blake:
>> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 21:43:38 +0100, "Carlos E.R."
>> <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2022-11-08 20:37, Ken Blake wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 01:18:41 -0600, philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 11/7/22 9:07 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, 6 Nov 2022 17:28:38 -0600, philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>>>> He (or maybe she) was the worst troll on all of Usenet but I actually
>>>>> found too entertaining to block.
>>>>
>>>> Not me. I never find trolls entertaining.
>>>>
>>>> I don't really mind if you (or anyone else) doesn't kill a troll. What
>>>> I want to happen is that trolls don't get replies. As far as I'm
>>>> concerned, killfiling is the easiest way to accomplish that, but for
>>>> anyone who finds reading a troll's messages entertaining, that's fine
>>>> with me as long as not killfiling a troll doesn't result in replies to
>>>> him.
>>>
>>> Thunderbird can kill the post and all the replies.
>>
>>
>> Yes, I know. That's what I don't want to do. I don't want to go to the
>> trouble of doing that for every post a troll makes. I want to kill the
>> *poster* and all the replies to him, and all the replies to anyone who
>> replies to someone who replies to a reply to him, etc.
>
>Thtat is exactly what TB is able to do: "If from is/contains Ken Blake
>then ignore subthread.

OK, thanks. I hadn't realized that. I either never knew it or had
forgotten it.

But it doesn't matter, since I no longer use Thunderbird for Usenet,
for other reasons. I use Forte Agent. Agent requires that you set up a
filter expression. Can an appropriate filter expression for Agent be
set up to do this? Perhaps. Maybe even probably.

But I don't know how to do it.

I know that this isn't the appropriate newsgroup for this question,
but since the thread is already started...

....if you or anyone else here knows Agent and can tell me how to do
this, I'd appreciate it. If I don't get any answers here, I'll ask in
the Agent newsgroup

On Wed, 9 Nov 2022 14:05:55 +0100, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

>On 2022-11-09 00:12, Ken Blake wrote:
>> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 21:43:38 +0100, "Carlos E.R."
>> <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2022-11-08 20:37, Ken Blake wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 01:18:41 -0600, philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 11/7/22 9:07 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, 6 Nov 2022 17:28:38 -0600, philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>>>> He (or maybe she) was the worst troll on all of Usenet but I actually
>>>>> found too entertaining to block.
>>>>
>>>> Not me. I never find trolls entertaining.
>>>>
>>>> I don't really mind if you (or anyone else) doesn't kill a troll. What
>>>> I want to happen is that trolls don't get replies. As far as I'm
>>>> concerned, killfiling is the easiest way to accomplish that, but for
>>>> anyone who finds reading a troll's messages entertaining, that's fine
>>>> with me as long as not killfiling a troll doesn't result in replies to
>>>> him.
>>>
>>> Thunderbird can kill the post and all the replies.
>>
>>
>> Yes, I know. That's what I don't want to do. I don't want to go to the
>> trouble of doing that for every post a troll makes. I want to kill the
>> *poster* and all the replies to him, and all the replies to anyone who
>> replies to someone who replies to a reply to him, etc.
>
>That's precisely what Thunderbird does.
>
>Action: ignore subthread.

That sounds very familiar. Back when I was using Thunderbird for
Usenet, I think I tried it. I can't remember the details, but I
couldn't get that action to do what I wanted.

>> Besides, I had tried Thunderbird for Usenet and had problems with it.
>> I now use Agent for Usenet and Thunderbird for e-mail.