From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20412 invoked by alias); 25 May 2006 15:20:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 20403 invoked by uid 22791); 25 May 2006 15:20:23 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from main.gmane.org (HELO ciao.gmane.org) (80.91.229.2) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 25 May 2006 15:20:19 +0000 Received: from root by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1FjHd4-00009Q-5H for cygwin-talk@cygwin.com; Thu, 25 May 2006 17:20:02 +0200 Received: from 65.207.213.226 ([65.207.213.226]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 17:20:02 +0200 Received: from mwoehlke by 65.207.213.226 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 17:20:02 +0200 To: cygwin-talk@cygwin.com From: mwoehlke Subject: Re: No postnews or other Usenet news utilities? Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 15:20:00 -0000 Message-ID: References: <007c01c67f9e$1eef7e10$3100000a@microline.mtc> <002901c67fa5$a6557e70$020aa8c0@DFW5RB41> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (X11/20060420) In-Reply-To: <002901c67fa5$a6557e70$020aa8c0@DFW5RB41> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-talk-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-talk-owner@cygwin.com Reply-To: The Cygwin-Talk Maiming List X-SW-Source: 2006-q2/txt/msg00340.txt.bz2 Gary R. Van Sickle wrote: >> From: Bruce Wehr > [Holy snip] ^^^^^^^^^^^ :-) > 2. What you claim you want to do is spamming, pure and simple, by anybody's > definition. BTW: Anybody's definition is: "Sending unsolicited email, > usually in an effort to get money from somebody legally or otherwise, en > masse to a bajillion newsgroups and/or email addresses." I shan't mention that he is not sending *e-mail*... :-) but I think "unsolicited" is at best debatable, if not outright false. > 3. Dave Korn hates Pokemons and becomes enraged at the very mention of > them, hence his ranting against you. But who amongst us here can blame him? Oops, I was wrong... *that* was your first mistake. :-D Can't say I'm too fond of them either. > 4. If you are in fact a filthy spammer, well, then I'll save you a seat in > Hell. ...Mind the hippos. -- Matthew ...Ruthlessly beating Windows with a hammer until it looks like POSIX.