Bill "Bozo" Sloman is scared to death that people might be able to decide for
themselves who they associate with on the Internet.

A simple implementation of mutual blocking for USENET...

No one who is blocked can reply to your post, or in a new thread you
start, or in a thread branch you start. The same goes for you with respect
to their posts. Therefore, there is nothing unfair about it.

Mutual blocking does not prevent you from saying anything. You can always
start a new thread. You can always post alongside of someone who has
blocked you, unless you are mutually blocked by the person they replied
to, too.

In fact, mutual blocking would allow people who enjoy talking about vulgar
things like urine to say anything they feel like saying. There would be no
censors to stop them. None at all. As long as they don't get in trouble
with law enforcement, they can say any the fuck thing they want. Why not?

Mutual blocking would allow for the most civilized, or at least organized,
conversations imaginable. No biased censors choosing for us what we can
say and who we associate with. It would be done by intelligent people
choosing for themselves who they want to associate with.

Mutual blocking would give everybody the exact same opportunity to express
themselves. Readers can decide for themselves who they want to read and
who they don't want to read. It's nothing to do with censorship. It's more
like self-defense.

The cannibal left strongly object to self-defense, therefore they object
to mutual blocking.

Always Wrong threatens to kill people who disagree with it, and here it's
pretending to be against "censorship"...

DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

> John Dope <always.look@message.header> wrote in news:t6ei7q$tb0$5@dont-
> email.me:
>
>> A simple implementation of mutual blocking for USENET...
>>
>
> You are an idiot. "blocking" as you define it is censorship.
>
> That is why Usenet uses filters at the READER level. No imposition
> on a person posting.
>
> The onus is on you, John Dope. But you are not alone. Usenet is
> fully fool of idiots like you wanting others to be blocked from using
> the forum.
>
> S e d does not have a more stupid poster than John Dope.

On Monday, May 23, 2022 at 9:11:18 AM UTC-7, John Doe wrote:

> whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sunday, May 22, 2022 at 4:50:24 PM UTC-7, John Doe wrote:
> >> A simple implementation of mutual blocking for USENET...
> >>
> >> No one who is blocked can reply to your post, or in a new thread you
> >> start, or in a thread branch you start....
> >
> > So, not USENET unmoderated, but an ownership model for each thread or
> > subthread? Not really workable, unless you have a server at each node
> > that can become a subthread owner.

> Gibberish, as usual...

Not gibberish, English. An owner's block list has to be served to any and all
subsequent nodes which might add blocklists... and the subsequent
blocklists also have to be served out. The technical details are
impractical in a large-scale public forum.

On 2022-05-23, John Doe <always.look@message.header> wrote:
> Mutual blocking would give everybody the exact same opportunity to express
> themselves. Readers can decide for themselves who they want to read and
> who they don't want to read. It's nothing to do with censorship. It's more
> like self-defense.

So I set up two!!! anonymous accounts "silent reader" and "dope reposter"

Silent reader reads your posts and forwards them to "dope reposter"
dope reposter has blocked you. it reposts your posts so the voices you
dislike can read them. They can then respond to your silly ideas
and you can't prevent them, or post your zero content responses..

If you're worried that dope resposter is violting your copyright, thats
easily fixed too, just augment the reader software so that it can use
a different account to read than it uses to post. Then every uses can
have their own silent reader account to see your posts, and their
responses will almost certainly be considrerd "fair use".

You're going to have to try harder if you want to turn usenet into a
safe space for youe idiocies, snowflake.

--
Jasen.

Problem is, cannibal leftists object to self-defense.
Just like this cannibal leftist objects to defending our own border.
That is not coincidence.

whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday, May 23, 2022 at 9:11:18 AM UTC-7, John Doe wrote:
>
>> whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Sunday, May 22, 2022 at 4:50:24 PM UTC-7, John Doe wrote:
>> >> A simple implementation of mutual blocking for USENET...
>> >>
>> >> No one who is blocked can reply to your post, or in a new thread you
>> >> start, or in a thread branch you start....
>> >
>> > So, not USENET unmoderated, but an ownership model for each thread or
>> > subthread? Not really workable, unless you have a server at each node
>> > that can become a subthread owner.
>
>> Gibberish, as usual...
>
> Not gibberish, English. An owner's block list has to be served to any and all
> subsequent nodes which might add blocklists... and the subsequent
> blocklists also have to be served out. The technical details are
> impractical in a large-scale public forum.

Whether someone is anonymous is irrelevant, unless they are trying to sell
something. Being anonymous and having multiple personas are two different
things. Protection against multiple accounts, that is nym-shifting, is
important. How that's done is another issue. I have been flushing out
nym-shifters here on USENET for decades. Maybe if Twitter/others provided
header information, those users could do that too.

Mutual blocking is for nuking stalkers and trolls, like Bill "Bozo" Sloman
and Edward "Porn Sucking" Hernandez.

Mutual blocking has nothing to do with preventing others from
seeing/reading your posts. See the prior description.

Whether posts are seen may as well be up to users since they can be seen
when a user is signed out.

There might be an option like "hide blocked posts" with the sub option "if
blocked posts are not hidden, mark them read". Most people would at least
want blocked posts marked read. But since blocked post(er)s would not be in
the way, like so much misplaced garbage, they wouldn't necessarily need to
be hidden...

--

Jasen Betts <usenet@revmaps.no-ip.org> wrote:

> On 2022-05-23, John Doe <always.look@message.header> wrote:
>> Mutual blocking would give everybody the exact same opportunity to express
>> themselves. Readers can decide for themselves who they want to read and
>> who they don't want to read. It's nothing to do with censorship. It's more
>> like self-defense.
>
> So I set up two!!! anonymous accounts "silent reader" and "dope reposter"
>
> Silent reader reads your posts and forwards them to "dope reposter"
> dope reposter has blocked you. it reposts your posts so the voices you
> dislike can read them. They can then respond to your silly ideas
> and you can't prevent them, or post your zero content responses..
>
> If you're worried that dope resposter is violting your copyright, thats
> easily fixed too, just augment the reader software so that it can use
> a different account to read than it uses to post. Then every uses can
> have their own silent reader account to see your posts, and their
> responses will almost certainly be considrerd "fair use".
>
>
> You're going to have to try harder if you want to turn usenet into a
> safe space for youe idiocies, snowflake.
>

It's not complex. The server keeps track of who is blocked. If Jack and
Jill are blocked (meaning Jack or Jill has blocked the other), then
neither Jack nor Jill can reply to the other (in the other's thread or in
the other's thread branch).

Why is "an echo-chamber of like-minded people" a problem? There's plenty
of room for everybody on the Internet. Since when is like-mindedness a
problem? Isn't like-mindedness what groups are about?

Most people don't mind a little bit of trolling. It's just when somebody
is CONSTANTLY getting in the way.

Mutual blocking is for nuking stalkers and trolls, like Bill "Bozo" Sloman
and Edward "Porn Sucking" Hernandez.

I like this argument.

It's not a coincidence that cannibal leftists object to mutual blocking.
Mutual blocking is a defensive apparatus. Cannibal leftists object to
self-defense.

Mutual blocking has nothing to do with preventing others from
seeing/reading your posts. See the prior description.

Whether posts are seen (not to be confused with the ability to reply) may
as well be up to users since they can be seen when a user is signed out.

There might be an option like "hide blocked posts" with the sub option "if
blocked posts are not hidden, mark them read". Most people would at least
want blocked posts marked read. But since blocked post(er)s would not be
in the way, like so much misplaced garbage, they wouldn't necessarily need
to be hidden.

Bill "Bozo" Sloman is a textbook cannibal leftist...

--

Anthony William Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:

> On Tuesday, May 24, 2022 at 3:17:59 PM UTC+10, John Doe wrote:
>> whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Monday, May 23, 2022 at 9:11:18 AM UTC-7, John Doe wrote:
>> >> whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > On Sunday, May 22, 2022 at 4:50:24 PM UTC-7, John Doe wrote:
>> >> >> A simple implementation of mutual blocking for USENET...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> No one who is blocked can reply to your post, or in a new thread you
>> >> >> start, or in a thread branch you start....
>> >> >
>> >> > So, not USENET unmoderated, but an ownership model for each thread or
>> >> > subthread? Not really workable, unless you have a server at each node
>> >> > that can become a subthread owner.
>> >
>> >> Gibberish, as usual...
>> >
>> > Not gibberish, English. An owner's block list has to be served to any and all
>> > subsequent nodes which might add blocklists... and the subsequent
>> > blocklists also have to be served out. The technical details are
>> > impractical in a large-scale public forum.
>>
>> Problem is, cannibal leftists object to self-defense.
>
> Anybody who points out that John Doe is an idiot is labelled a "cannibal leftist".
>
>> Just like this "cannibal leftist" objects to defending our own border. That is not coincidence.
>
> John Doe doesn't like anybody who has pointed how stupid any of his posts are. That's not a coincidence, but a predictable - if stupid - form of "self-defense".
>

No point in discussing anything with Bill "Bozo" Sloman, the Australian
troll. Bozo is a chronic liar who cannot be reasoned with. Its fiction
never ends.

"the user has posted under the same name in other places, so not
nym-shifting" (Bozo sucks at logic)

"the Mueller investigation was about Trump only because Trump made it so"
(Bozo being Bozo)

"the concepts "male" and "female" are essentially social constructions"
(Bozo is a textbook cannibal leftist)

--
Anthony William Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:

> X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:64c:b0:2f9:a4c:b4f0 with SMTP id a12-20020a05622a064c00b002f90a4cb4f0mr19425628qtb.380.1653384525941; Tue, 24 May 2022 02:28:45 -0700 (PDT)
> X-Received: by 2002:a05:690c:3a1:b0:2ff:1377:3b9 with SMTP id bh33-20020a05690c03a100b002ff137703b9mr27367121ywb.340.1653384525695; Tue, 24 May 2022 02:28:45 -0700 (PDT)
> Path: eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
> Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
> Date: Tue, 24 May 2022 02:28:45 -0700 (PDT)
> In-Reply-To: <t6hus8$kq3$1@dont-email.me>
> Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=81.145.206.43; posting-account=SJ46pgoAAABuUDuHc5uDiXN30ATE-zi-
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 81.145.206.43
> References: <t487dv$mdj$3@dont-email.me> <t6ei7q$tb0$5@dont-email.me> <2cbcbd01-08fa-45e2-9b87-f0db7389045an@googlegroups.com> <t6gc3h$or8$2@dont-email.me> <1d165e0d-c4c5-4a57-b88e-883bce3d00fcn@googlegroups.com> <t6hus8$kq3$1@dont-email.me>
> User-Agent: G2/1.0
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Message-ID: <79131eec-28d2-4b0a-96b7-65bd967d20den@googlegroups.com>
> Subject: Re: OT: Mutual blocking = Kinder gentler Internet
> From: Anthony William Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
> Injection-Date: Tue, 24 May 2022 09:28:45 +0000
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> X-Received-Bytes: 2793
> Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:669809
>
> On Tuesday, May 24, 2022 at 4:44:31 PM UTC+10, John Doe wrote:
>> It's not complex. The server keeps track of who is blocked.
>
> Which server? Usernet posts are copied to any number of servers. Google groups is just one of them.
>
>> If Jack and Jill are blocked (meaning Jack or Jill has blocked the other), then
>> neither Jack nor Jill can reply to the other (in the other's thread or in
>> the other's thread branch).
>>
>> Why is "an echo-chamber of like-minded people" a problem? There's plenty
>> of room for everybody on the Internet. Since when is like-mindedness a
>> problem? Isn't like-mindedness what groups are about?
>>
>> Most people don't mind a little bit of trolling. It's just when somebody
>> is CONSTANTLY getting in the way.
>
> Like John Doe.
>
>> Mutual blocking is for nuking stalkers and trolls, like Bill Sloman and Edward Hernandez and John "half-wit" Doe.
>> I like this argument.
>
> John Doe doesn't understand argument. He likes assertions, and makes them in non-stop, but producing a reasoned response to an argument is quite beyond him.
>
>> It's not a coincidence that cannibal leftists object to mutual blocking.
>> Mutual blocking is a defensive apparatus. Cannibal leftists object to
>> self-defense.
>> Mutual blocking has nothing to do with preventing others from
>> seeing/reading your posts. See the prior description.
>
> Just preventing other from pointing out how silly your posts are.
>
> <snip>
>
> --
> Bill Sloman, Sydney
>

No point in discussing anything with Bill "Bozo" Sloman, the Australian
troll. Bozo is a chronic liar who cannot be reasoned with. Its fiction
never ends.

"the user has posted under the same name in other places, so not
nym-shifting" (Bozo sucks at logic)

"the Mueller investigation was about Trump only because Trump made it so"
(Bozo being Bozo)

"the concepts "male" and "female" are essentially social constructions"
(Bozo is a textbook cannibal leftist)

--
Anthony William Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:

> X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:2a87:b0:461:e7cf:6ec6 with SMTP id jr7-20020a0562142a8700b00461e7cf6ec6mr20374686qvb.82.1653383957192; Tue, 24 May 2022 02:19:17 -0700 (PDT)
> X-Received: by 2002:a25:86cd:0:b0:652:1f3a:2414 with SMTP id y13-20020a2586cd000000b006521f3a2414mr2205947ybm.358.1653383956535; Tue, 24 May 2022 02:19:16 -0700 (PDT)
> Path: eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!news-out.netnews.com!news.alt.net!fdc2.netnews.com!peer03.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
> Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
> Date: Tue, 24 May 2022 02:19:16 -0700 (PDT)
> In-Reply-To: <t6htco$c6n$1@dont-email.me>
> Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=81.145.206.43; posting-account=SJ46pgoAAABuUDuHc5uDiXN30ATE-zi-
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 81.145.206.43
> References: <t487dv$mdj$3@dont-email.me> <t6ei7q$tb0$5@dont-email.me> <t6g4bp$1nea$1@gioia.aioe.org> <t6gcof$or8$3@dont-email.me> <t6hkpg$18f$1@gonzo.revmaps.no-ip.org> <t6htco$c6n$1@dont-email.me>
> User-Agent: G2/1.0
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Message-ID: <7bb804a8-a437-41b9-b881-6b522d921b6en@googlegroups.com>
> Subject: Re: OT: Mutual blocking = Kinder gentler Internet
> From: Anthony William Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
> Injection-Date: Tue, 24 May 2022 09:19:16 +0000
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> X-Received-Bytes: 2940
> Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:669808
>
> On Tuesday, May 24, 2022 at 4:19:11 PM UTC+10, John Doe wrote:
>> Whether someone is anonymous is irrelevant, unless they are trying to sell
>> something. Being anonymous and having multiple personas are two different
>> things. Protection against multiple accounts, that is nym-shifting, is
>> important. How that's done is another issue. I have been flushing out
>> nym-shifters here on USENET for decades. Maybe if Twitter/others provided
>> header information, those users could do that too.
>>
>> Mutual blocking is for nuking stalkers and trolls, like Bill Sloman
>> and Edward Hernandez.
>
> John half-wit Doe is an actual troll and stalker, and doesn't seem to realise that he'd be nuked by all the people who find him irritating.
>
>> Mutual blocking has nothing to do with preventing others from
>> seeing/reading your posts. See the prior description.
>
> It just prevents some people from pointing out how absurd the post you've just made really is, or in John Doe's case reacting to a post wit his usual recycled abuse.
>
>> Whether posts are seen may as well be up to users since they can be seen
>> when a user is signed out.
>>
>> There might be an option like "hide blocked posts" with the sub option "if
>> blocked posts are not hidden, mark them read". Most people would at least
>> want blocked posts marked read. But since blocked post(er)s would not be in
>> the way, like so much misplaced garbage, they wouldn't necessarily need to
>> be hidden...
>
> John Doe has all kinds of delusions about his half-baked scheme.
>
> --
> Bill Sloman, Sydney
>
>

Further, Troll Doe stated the following in message-id
<svsh05$lbh$5@dont-email.me> posted Fri, 4 Mar 2022 08:01:09 -0000
(UTC):

> Compared to other regulars, Bozo contributes practically nothing
> except insults to this group.

Yet, since Wed, 5 Jan 2022 04:10:38 -0000 (UTC) Troll Doe's post ratio
to USENET (**) has been 60.2% of its posts contributing "nothing except
insults" to USENET.

** Since Wed, 5 Jan 2022 04:10:38 -0000 (UTC) Troll Doe has posted at
least 1501 articles to USENET. Of which 155 have been pure insults and
748 have been Troll Doe "troll format" postings.

The John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
<sdhn7c$pkp$4@dont-email.me>:

> The troll doesn't even know how to format a USENET post...

And the John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
<sg3kr7$qt5$1@dont-email.me>:

> The reason Bozo cannot figure out how to get Google to keep from
> breaking its lines in inappropriate places is because Bozo is
> CLUELESS...

And yet, the clueless John Doe troll has itself posted yet another
incorrectly formatted USENET posting on Tue, 24 May 2022 10:21:42 -0000
(UTC) in message-id <t6ibjm$9ml$1@dont-email.me>.

2NiXa5pUgJaj

Further, Troll Doe stated the following in message-id
<svsh05$lbh$5@dont-email.me> posted Fri, 4 Mar 2022 08:01:09 -0000
(UTC):

> Compared to other regulars, Bozo contributes practically nothing
> except insults to this group.

Yet, since Wed, 5 Jan 2022 04:10:38 -0000 (UTC) Troll Doe's post ratio
to USENET (**) has been 60.2% of its posts contributing "nothing except
insults" to USENET.

** Since Wed, 5 Jan 2022 04:10:38 -0000 (UTC) Troll Doe has posted at
least 1501 articles to USENET. Of which 155 have been pure insults and
748 have been Troll Doe "troll format" postings.

The John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
<sdhn7c$pkp$4@dont-email.me>:

> The troll doesn't even know how to format a USENET post...

And the John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
<sg3kr7$qt5$1@dont-email.me>:

> The reason Bozo cannot figure out how to get Google to keep from
> breaking its lines in inappropriate places is because Bozo is
> CLUELESS...

And yet, the clueless John Doe troll has continued to post incorrectly
formatted USENET articles that are devoid of content (latest example on
Tue, 24 May 2022 10:22:26 -0000 (UTC) in message-id
<t6ibl2$9ml$2@dont-email.me>).

NOBODY likes the John Doe troll's contentless spam.

This posting is a public service announcement for any google groups
readers who happen by to point out that the John Doe troll does not even
follow the rules it uses to troll other posters.

OTiPlEcRbuLk

This porn-sucking retard wants so badly to nym-shift.

Eddie has never posted anything NORMAL except when it got a spanking...

https://groups.google.com/g/sci.electronics.repair/c/MesPLcGU4BE

See also...
John Doe <always.look@message.header> (Astraweb, Aioe.org)
Peter Weiner <dtgamer99@gmail.com>
Edward H. <dtgamer99@gmail.com>
Edward Hernandez <dtgamer99@gmail.com>

Eddie is an example for all newbies. Don't get spanked!

Spanked Eddie...

--
Edward Hernandez <dtgamer99@gmail.com> wrote:

> Path: eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!peer03.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer01.ams4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx10.ams4.POSTED!not-for-mail
> From: Edward Hernandez <dtgamer99@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: OT: Mutual blocking = Kinder gentler Internet
> Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,free.spam
> References: <t487dv$mdj$3@dont-email.me> <t6ei7q$tb0$5@dont-email.me> <2cbcbd01-08fa-45e2-9b87-f0db7389045an@googlegroups.com> <t6gc3h$or8$2@dont-email.me> <1d165e0d-c4c5-4a57-b88e-883bce3d00fcn@googlegroups.com> <t6hus8$kq3$1@dont-email.me> <79131eec-28d2-4b0a-96b7-65bd967d20den@googlegroups.com> <t6ibjm$9ml$1@dont-email.me>
> Lines: 33
> Message-ID: <tx2jK.1122052$an1.989261@usenetxs.com>
> X-Complaints-To: https://www.astraweb.com/aup
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 24 May 2022 10:35:05 UTC
> Date: Tue, 24 May 2022 10:35:05 GMT
> X-Received-Bytes: 2074
> Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:669814 free.spam:18456
>
> Further, Troll Doe stated the following in message-id
> <svsh05$lbh$5@dont-email.me> posted Fri, 4 Mar 2022 08:01:09 -0000
> (UTC):
>
>> Compared to other regulars, Bozo contributes practically nothing
>> except insults to this group.
>
> Yet, since Wed, 5 Jan 2022 04:10:38 -0000 (UTC) Troll Doe's post ratio
> to USENET (**) has been 60.2% of its posts contributing "nothing except
> insults" to USENET.
>
> ** Since Wed, 5 Jan 2022 04:10:38 -0000 (UTC) Troll Doe has posted at
> least 1501 articles to USENET. Of which 155 have been pure insults and
> 748 have been Troll Doe "troll format" postings.
>
> The John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
> <sdhn7c$pkp$4@dont-email.me>:
>
>> The troll doesn't even know how to format a USENET post...
>
> And the John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
> <sg3kr7$qt5$1@dont-email.me>:
>
>> The reason Bozo cannot figure out how to get Google to keep from
>> breaking its lines in inappropriate places is because Bozo is
>> CLUELESS...
>
> And yet, the clueless John Doe troll has itself posted yet another
> incorrectly formatted USENET posting on Tue, 24 May 2022 10:21:42 -0000
> (UTC) in message-id <t6ibjm$9ml$1@dont-email.me>.
>
> 2NiXa5pUgJaj
>
>

This porn-sucking retard wants so badly to nym-shift.

Eddie has never posted anything NORMAL except when it got a spanking...

https://groups.google.com/g/sci.electronics.repair/c/MesPLcGU4BE

See also...
John Doe <always.look@message.header> (Astraweb, Aioe.org)
Peter Weiner <dtgamer99@gmail.com>
Edward H. <dtgamer99@gmail.com>
Edward Hernandez <dtgamer99@gmail.com>

Eddie is an example for all newbies. Don't get spanked!

Spanked Eddie...

--
Edward Hernandez <dtgamer99@gmail.com> wrote:

> Path: eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!news.uzoreto.com!peer03.ams4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx10.ams4.POSTED!not-for-mail
> From: Edward Hernandez <dtgamer99@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: OT: Mutual blocking = Kinder gentler Internet
> Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,free.spam
> References: <t487dv$mdj$3@dont-email.me> <t6ei7q$tb0$5@dont-email.me> <t6g4bp$1nea$1@gioia.aioe.org> <t6gcof$or8$3@dont-email.me> <t6hkpg$18f$1@gonzo.revmaps.no-ip.org> <t6htco$c6n$1@dont-email.me> <7bb804a8-a437-41b9-b881-6b522d921b6en@googlegroups.com> <t6ibl2$9ml$2@dont-email.me>
> Lines: 40
> Message-ID: <vx2jK.1122053$an1.659624@usenetxs.com>
> X-Complaints-To: https://www.astraweb.com/aup
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 24 May 2022 10:35:07 UTC
> Date: Tue, 24 May 2022 10:35:07 GMT
> X-Received-Bytes: 2181
> Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:669815 free.spam:18457
>
> Further, Troll Doe stated the following in message-id
> <svsh05$lbh$5@dont-email.me> posted Fri, 4 Mar 2022 08:01:09 -0000
> (UTC):
>
>> Compared to other regulars, Bozo contributes practically nothing
>> except insults to this group.
>
> Yet, since Wed, 5 Jan 2022 04:10:38 -0000 (UTC) Troll Doe's post ratio
> to USENET (**) has been 60.2% of its posts contributing "nothing except
> insults" to USENET.
>
> ** Since Wed, 5 Jan 2022 04:10:38 -0000 (UTC) Troll Doe has posted at
> least 1501 articles to USENET. Of which 155 have been pure insults and
> 748 have been Troll Doe "troll format" postings.
>
> The John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
> <sdhn7c$pkp$4@dont-email.me>:
>
>> The troll doesn't even know how to format a USENET post...
>
> And the John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
> <sg3kr7$qt5$1@dont-email.me>:
>
>> The reason Bozo cannot figure out how to get Google to keep from
>> breaking its lines in inappropriate places is because Bozo is
>> CLUELESS...
>
> And yet, the clueless John Doe troll has continued to post incorrectly
> formatted USENET articles that are devoid of content (latest example on
> Tue, 24 May 2022 10:22:26 -0000 (UTC) in message-id
> <t6ibl2$9ml$2@dont-email.me>).
>
> NOBODY likes the John Doe troll's contentless spam.
>
> This posting is a public service announcement for any google groups
> readers who happen by to point out that the John Doe troll does not even
> follow the rules it uses to troll other posters.
>
> OTiPlEcRbuLk
>
>
>

Further, John Doe stated the following in message-id
<svsh05$lbh$5@dont-email.me> posted Fri, 4 Mar 2022 08:01:09 -0000
(UTC):

> Compared to other regulars, Bozo contributes practically nothing
> except insults to this group.

Yet, since Wed, 5 Jan 2022 04:10:38 -0000 (UTC) John Doe's post ratio to
USENET (**) has been 60.2% of its posts contributing "nothing except
insults" to USENET.

** Since Wed, 5 Jan 2022 04:10:38 -0000 (UTC) John Doe has posted at
least 1503 articles to USENET. Of which 155 have been pure insults and
750 have been John Doe "troll format" postings.

The John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
<sdhn7c$pkp$4@dont-email.me>:

> The troll doesn't even know how to format a USENET post...

And the John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
<sg3kr7$qt5$1@dont-email.me>:

> The reason Bozo cannot figure out how to get Google to keep from
> breaking its lines in inappropriate places is because Bozo is
> CLUELESS...

And yet, the clueless John Doe troll has itself posted yet another
incorrectly formatted USENET posting on Tue, 24 May 2022 10:36:57 -0000
(UTC) in message-id <t6icg9$9ml$5@dont-email.me>.

Y/fcR+NgF7hm

Further, John Doe stated the following in message-id
<svsh05$lbh$5@dont-email.me> posted Fri, 4 Mar 2022 08:01:09 -0000
(UTC):

> Compared to other regulars, Bozo contributes practically nothing
> except insults to this group.

Yet, since Wed, 5 Jan 2022 04:10:38 -0000 (UTC) John Doe's post ratio to
USENET (**) has been 60.2% of its posts contributing "nothing except
insults" to USENET.

** Since Wed, 5 Jan 2022 04:10:38 -0000 (UTC) John Doe has posted at
least 1503 articles to USENET. Of which 155 have been pure insults and
750 have been John Doe "troll format" postings.

The John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
<sdhn7c$pkp$4@dont-email.me>:

> The troll doesn't even know how to format a USENET post...

And the John Doe troll stated the following in message-id
<sg3kr7$qt5$1@dont-email.me>:

> The reason Bozo cannot figure out how to get Google to keep from
> breaking its lines in inappropriate places is because Bozo is
> CLUELESS...

And yet, the clueless John Doe troll has itself posted yet another
incorrectly formatted USENET posting on Tue, 24 May 2022 10:37:08 -0000
(UTC) in message-id <t6icgk$9ml$6@dont-email.me>.

This posting is a public service announcement for any google groups
readers who happen by to point out that the John Doe troll does not even
follow the rules it uses to troll other posters.

fpKcJ4dmW1IW

John Dope <always.look@message.header> wrote in
news:t6hus8$kq3$1@dont-email.me:

> It's not complex. The server keeps track of who is blocked. If
> Jack and Jill are blocked (meaning Jack or Jill has blocked the
> other), then neither Jack nor Jill can reply to the other (in the
> other's thread or in the other's thread branch).
>

You really are stupid about how Usenet works.

"The server" you think you know so much about is THOUSANDS of servers
around the world. Usenet is a series of connected nodes. There is no
central server, you stupid putz.

Of course there are at least a few useful USENET servers. But the number
of USENET servers is irrelevant. I posted an EXAMPLE.

When writing about such a subject, as any sane person knows, there is no
need to specify the plural "servers". Of course the number of servers
involved can be problematic, but there are plenty of forums on the
Internet that can use mutual blocking, that run from a single server.
Whatever number of servers is irrelevant for explaining how mutual
blocking works.

At least part of Always Wrong's ID "decadent" is accurate...

DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

> John Dope <always.look@message.header> wrote in
> news:t6hus8$kq3$1@dont-email.me:
>
>> It's not complex. The server keeps track of who is blocked. If
>> Jack and Jill are blocked (meaning Jack or Jill has blocked the
>> other), then neither Jack nor Jill can reply to the other (in the
>> other's thread or in the other's thread branch).
>>
>
> You really are stupid about how Usenet works.
>
> "The server" you think you know so much about is THOUSANDS of servers
> around the world. Usenet is a series of connected nodes. There is no
> central server, you stupid putz.
>

John Dope <always.look@message.header> wrote in
news:t6j8eo$61v$1@dont-email.me:

> Of course there are at least a few useful USENET servers. But the
> number of USENET servers is irrelevant. I posted an EXAMPLE.
>

The number is not irrelevant. Your retarded block data would have to
propagate through ALL Usenet servers worldwide. The block data would be
larger than the posted texts, you retarded twerp.

So, your PATHETIC "example" is an example of just how syupid you are
about it.

Always Wrong being wrong as always...

DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

> John Dope <always.look@message.header> wrote in
> news:t6j8eo$61v$1@dont-email.me:
>
>> Of course there are at least a few useful USENET servers. But the
>> number of USENET servers is irrelevant. I posted an EXAMPLE.
>>
>
> The number is not irrelevant. Your retarded block data would have to
> propagate through ALL Usenet servers worldwide. The block data would be
> larger than the posted texts, you retarded twerp.
>
> So, your PATHETIC "example" is an example of just how syupid you are
> about it.
>

On Tuesday, May 24, 2022 at 12:16:35 AM UTC-7, John Doe wrote:
> Bill "Bozo" Sloman is a textbook cannibal leftist...

.... this, in a thread about a kinder, gentler internet?

I detect hypocrisy.

On 2022-05-24, John Doe <always.look@message.header> wrote:
> No point in discussing anything with Bill "Bozo" Sloman,

He made some good points and you have no answer to them, I see why
you want this fantasy, but desire can't make the impossible practical.
Usenet just doesn't swing that way. Pick a closed infrastructure
like parler or something.

--
Jasen.

When in Rome...

whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday, May 24, 2022 at 12:16:35 AM UTC-7, John Doe wrote:
>> Bill "Bozo" Sloman is a textbook cannibal leftist...
>
>
> ... this, in a thread about a kinder, gentler internet?
>
> I detect hypocrisy.
>

Jasen Betts <usenet@revmaps.no-ip.org> wrote:

> He made some good points

It's called "feigning".

> and you have no answer to them,

Actually I do, and have.

> I see why you want this fantasy, but desire can't make the impossible
> practical.

All it would require is sharing logged-in users' block requests. Highly
unlikely, but anything is possible.

> Usenet just doesn't swing that way. Pick a closed infrastructure like
> parler or something.

I and maybe others have tried. One forum was receptive, another forum
wasn't (with an illogical justification). Don't know whether it was
implemented, haven't been back to that forum, doubt it.

I was simply providing an example of how it would FUNCTION. Since USENET
posts are propagated around the Internet, group members are not the only
people who see these posts. A Google search sometimes finds USENET posts.

It might be wishful thinking. Anyone in control is unlikely to give up their
power of censorship. But you never know.

John Dope <always.look@message.header> wrote in news:t6ma5g$1r5$1@dont-
email.me:

> When in Rome...
>
>
> whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday, May 24, 2022 at 12:16:35 AM UTC-7, John Doe wrote:
>>> Bill "Bozo" Sloman is a textbook cannibal leftist...
>>
>>
>> ... this, in a thread about a kinder, gentler internet?
>>
>> I detect hypocrisy.
>>
>
>

Something a top posting, hypocritical Trump cult idiot would say.