key ID B73CAF1B

[Chris Jacobs]

Where can I get a copy of pubkey B73CAF1B signed with CA57AD7C ?

[Adam H. Kerman]

us.arts General discussion of US fine & performing arts.
us.arts.poetry US poetry; poets; original poems.
us.config Planning a USA national network news hierarchy.
us.issues National social, economic, environmental issues.
us.issues.abortion Abortion and birth control in the USA.
us.legal Q & A about US law and legal issues.
us.legal.self-represent Representing oneself in legal affairs.
us.military General topics related to the US Military.
us.military.army Life and work in the US Army.
us.military.history History of military forces in the USA.
us.military.national-guard National Guard issues, concerns & information.
us.military.navy Life and work in the US Navy.
us.misc US topics not covered by other newsgroups.
us.org.bicycle-greenways.nbg Building a national bicycle greenways system.
us.politics General discussion of US politics.
us.politics.elections Elections of national interest in the USA.
us.talk.constitution The US Constitution & its impact on our lives.
us.talk.headline-news Discussion of major US-related non-political events.
us.taxes Pros and cons of the US tax system.
us.test Test group for the us.* hierarchy.

So one of you is capable of sending checkgroups, but not newgroup messages?

Just what exactly is going on here?

[Chris Jacobs]

Post by Adam H. Kerman
So one of you is capable of sending checkgroups, but not newgroup messages?

Are you sure?

If I interpret the control.ctl correctly both checkgroups and newgroup
from us-***@lists.killfile.org are set to 'mail'

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by Chris Jacobs

Post by Adam H. Kerman
So one of you is capable of sending checkgroups, but not newgroup messages?

Are you sure?

They are having inexplicable problems. Guess there's another hierarchy
ready for you to annex.

[Chris Jacobs]

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by Chris Jacobs

Post by Adam H. Kerman
So one of you is capable of sending checkgroups, but not newgroup messages?

Are you sure?

They are having inexplicable problems. Guess there's another hierarchy
ready for you to annex.

No need for me to annex us.*

If you miss a newgroup you can catch up when the next checkgroups comes.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by Chris Jacobs

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by Chris Jacobs

Post by Adam H. Kerman
So one of you is capable of sending checkgroups, but not newgroup messages?

Are you sure?

They are having inexplicable problems. Guess there's another hierarchy
ready for you to annex.

No need for me to annex us.*

How would its pointlessness compare to the value of your other control
messages?

Post by Chris Jacobs
If you miss a newgroup you can catch up when the next checkgroups comes.

The point would be that no one had sent a checkgroups in some time and
that they aren't issued chronically.

[Brian Mailman]

[...]

Post by Adam H. Kerman
Just what exactly is going on here?

Take a look at the domain. That should inform you that there's some
form of malfeasance involved.

B/

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by Brian Mailman

Post by Adam H. Kerman
Just what exactly is going on here?

Take a look at the domain. That should inform you that there's some
form of malfeasance involved.

In another message in us.config, Edward O'Hare stated that the us.*
committee asked Tim to hold the key. So what's going on here is exactly
what it looks like: another power grab.

[K. A. Cannon]

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by Brian Mailman

Post by Adam H. Kerman
Just what exactly is going on here?

Take a look at the domain. That should inform you that there's some
form of malfeasance involved.

In another message in us.config, Edward O'Hare stated that the us.*
committee asked Tim to hold the key. So what's going on here is exactly
what it looks like: another power grab.

Tim's done such a fine job with the Big-8.

What bothers me is that none of the interim committee was clueful
enough to know how to use the PGP key and how to send check groups.

So they turned to Tim....

Anybody for usa.*???
--
K. A. Cannon
kevin.a.cannon at gmail.com.

COOSN-266-06-02374
Hammer of Thor, April 2005
PIERRE SALINGER MEMORIAL HOOK, LINE & SINKER June 2007
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle X 2
#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine

[Geoff Berrow]

Post by K. A. Cannon
What bothers me is that none of the interim committee was clueful
enough to know how to use the PGP key and how to send check groups.
So they turned to Tim....

It was my idea. I reasoned that it was pretty pointless going to the
trouble of setting up a control for us.* since the amount of activity
would be negligible. Besides, Dave was busy, I was busy, ed has enough
to do already and no one else was minded to do it.

Tim has everything in place to do the job such that it is without any
trouble. He seemed a natural choice. If you feel so strongly about it,
you shouldn't have quit.

us.config only.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by K. A. Cannon
What bothers me is that none of the interim committee was clueful
enough to know how to use the PGP key and how to send check groups.
So they turned to Tim....

It was my idea. I reasoned that it was pretty pointless going to the
trouble of setting up a control for us.* since the amount of activity
would be negligible. Besides, Dave was busy, I was busy, ed has enough
to do already and no one else was minded to do it.
Tim has everything in place to do the job such that it is without any
trouble. He seemed a natural choice. If you feel so strongly about it,
you shouldn't have quit.

Geoff, you should have asked Tim to wait till the sample control.ctl got
updated.

My question about why it is that the committee can't decide to send a
newgroup message on behalf of a justified proposal remains unanswered.

ed has enough to do?

[RTO Trainer]

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by K. A. Cannon
What bothers me is that none of the interim committee was clueful
enough to know how to use the PGP key and how to send check groups.
So they turned to Tim....

It was my idea.  I reasoned that it was pretty pointless going to the
trouble of setting up a control for us.* since the amount of activity
would be negligible.  Besides, Dave was busy, I was busy, ed has enough
to do already and no one else was minded to do it.
Tim has everything in place to do the job such that it is without any
trouble.  He seemed a natural choice.  If you feel so strongly about it,
you shouldn't have quit.

Geoff, you should have asked Tim to wait till the sample control.ctl got
updated.
My question about why it is that the committee can't decide to send a
newgroup message on behalf of a justified proposal remains unanswered.
ed has enough to do?

What justified proposal are you refering to?

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman
My question about why it is that the committee can't decide to send a
newgroup message on behalf of a justified proposal remains unanswered.

What justified proposal are you refering to?

I always believe there will be a justified proposal some day. In the
meantime, a few of us in the configging business would happily steer
non-clue-resistant proponents your way, as appropriate, if not for the
Committee refusing proposals. Really, this is pointless and tiresome and
utterly inexplicable. It's not like Henrietta left a huge mess.

[RTO Trainer]

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman
My question about why it is that the committee can't decide to send a
newgroup message on behalf of a justified proposal remains unanswered.

What justified proposal are you refering to?

I always believe there will be a justified proposal some day. In the
meantime, a few of us in the configging business would happily steer
non-clue-resistant proponents your way, as appropriate, if not for the
Committee refusing proposals. Really, this is pointless and tiresome and
utterly inexplicable. It's not like Henrietta left a huge mess.

I'm not clear on what it s you need explanation, but I'm happy to help
if I can.

Henrietta did not leave a mess, quite the opposite. She left
virtually nothing in the way of supporting documentation that any
hierarchy management coule effectively use, be it an individual or a
committee, but especially a committee.

I was the one, and at that time I was the committee chair, who
suggested a moratorium on new groups until we could get established.
I did not imagine teh lenght of time itowuld take, but I'm not
surprised by it either--no one is doing this full time. As an
example, I've even been to Afghanistan and back in the meantime.

One bit of mess has been that with Henrietta simply falling off the
radar, more or less, there has been no one who was recognized as being
able to send valid chekgroup messages and the like. That's been a
whole drama on it's own and one which Ed has even explained in his
various communiations. No point in accepting a new group proposal if
you then cannot create the group.

Now, to my point, from teh way you worded your lament, it seemed that
there either was a new group propsal, or that you know of someone with
one waiting in the wings. I'm sorryt hat you were just being
provocative, though I suppose that can be a remedy for tiresome but
still seems pointless to me.

Seriously, assistance would be welcome, but it's not much good without
a better attitude. The major work has been accomplished, and only a
few details remain to get things running again. Why isn't this
positive?

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman
My question about why it is that the committee can't decide to send a
newgroup message on behalf of a justified proposal remains unanswered.

What justified proposal are you refering to?

I always believe there will be a justified proposal some day. In the
meantime, a few of us in the configging business would happily steer
non-clue-resistant proponents your way, as appropriate, if not for the
Committee refusing proposals. Really, this is pointless and tiresome and
utterly inexplicable. It's not like Henrietta left a huge mess.

I'm not clear on what it s you need explanation, but I'm happy to help
if I can.
Henrietta did not leave a mess, quite the opposite. She left
virtually nothing in the way of supporting documentation that any
hierarchy management coule effectively use, be it an individual or a
committee, but especially a committee.

What documentation would you expect there to be?

Post by RTO Trainer
I was the one, and at that time I was the committee chair, who
suggested a moratorium on new groups until we could get established.

I was referring to the moratorium. Isn't it now pointless?

Post by RTO Trainer
One bit of mess has been that with Henrietta simply falling off the
radar, more or less, there has been no one who was recognized as being
able to send valid chekgroup messages and the like.

As I've pointed out, you just had to announce new management and new key
if Henrietta hadn't sent it. I still question if key signing is actually
necessary or implemented on all that many servers that take us groups.

Post by RTO Trainer
Now, to my point, from teh way you worded your lament, it seemed that
there either was a new group propsal, or that you know of someone with
one waiting in the wings. I'm sorryt hat you were just being
provocative, though I suppose that can be a remedy for tiresome but
still seems pointless to me.

It wasn't especially provocative, no. There have been times over the
years that certain proponents with potentially viable proposals would
have been encouraged to propose us groups, except for the futility of
the matter. The several of us who keep saying this over and over and
over are quite serious about it, so tone down the paranoia.

Post by RTO Trainer
Seriously, assistance would be welcome, but it's not much good without
a better attitude. The major work has been accomplished, and only a
few details remain to get things running again. Why isn't this
positive?

Work? What work? You all chose NOT to make the minimum effort and
instead asked Tim to take over, who needs little encouragement on
grabbing more power.

How much trouble is it to send out a monthly checkgroups?

[Geoff Berrow]

Post by Adam H. Kerman
Work? What work? You all chose NOT to make the minimum effort and
instead asked Tim to take over, who needs little encouragement on
grabbing more power.

LOL, you can have full control of the 747, but if it has no fuel, you
ain't going nowhere. Usenet is out of gas.

Post by Adam H. Kerman
How much trouble is it to send out a monthly checkgroups?

The main problem has been apathy and it's a feeling I can well
understand. Who, in their right mind, would want to deal with the kind
of shit you and Kevin have been kicking up? Especially with the waning
popularity of Usenet in general? I think that is the main reason the
committee was so reluctant to get anything done. No one wanted to deal
with the inevitable negativity that wouold ensue.

The job for us.* was simple - keep things ticking over, remove dead
groups, possible (but likely to be a rare event) add new groups. A
simple problem which needed a simple solution and the simplest was to
involve Tim. (I could have suggested one of the uk.* guys but felt that
really would have been more than you could bear). But Tim is appointed,
it doesn't have to be forever so you can quit the hyperbole.

I've been kicking round newsgroups long enough to know that you guys
love a good knockabout however trivial the cause, and this really is
trivial.

I am pleased that your tone does seem to have changed somewhat. We need
more people prepared to be constructive. Pick fault with the
Committee/Interim Committee all you like - at the end of the day you
still got more than you paid for.

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.config on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 10:13:00 +0100, Geoff Berrow

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Adam H. Kerman
Work? What work? You all chose NOT to make the minimum effort and
instead asked Tim to take over, who needs little encouragement on
grabbing more power.

LOL, you can have full control of the 747, but if it has no fuel, you
ain't going nowhere. Usenet is out of gas.

Post by Adam H. Kerman
How much trouble is it to send out a monthly checkgroups?

The main problem has been apathy and it's a feeling I can well
understand. Who, in their right mind, would want to deal with the kind
of shit you and Kevin have been kicking up?

If they have nothing to say that's worth reading, I assume that all
us.* committee members know how to use a killfile.

Post by Geoff Berrow
Especially with the waning
popularity of Usenet in general? I think that is the main reason the
committee was so reluctant to get anything done. No one wanted to deal
with the inevitable negativity that wouold ensue.

It seems to me that much of the negativitiy at present is the result
of nobody having been told what was happening.

Post by Geoff Berrow
The job for us.* was simple - keep things ticking over, remove dead
groups, possible (but likely to be a rare event) add new groups. A
simple problem which needed a simple solution and the simplest was to
involve Tim. (I could have suggested one of the uk.* guys but felt that
really would have been more than you could bear). But Tim is appointed,
it doesn't have to be forever so you can quit the hyperbole.

Why would there have been objections to "one of the uk.* guys"? I'm
not aware of complaints about mismanagement in uk.*.

If I'd been looking for somebody to help with hierarchy management,
Tim Skirvin would have been just about the last person I'd have asked,
given his appalling record in the Big 8. The fact that you approached
somebody who's renowned for incompetence, dishonesty and
self-aggrandisement suggests to me that you're a little out of touch
with what's been going on on Usenet in the past few years.

Post by Geoff Berrow
I've been kicking round newsgroups long enough to know that you guys
love a good knockabout however trivial the cause, and this really is
trivial.

"The devil is in the details."

Taking off in your 747 is a *bad* idea if some of the little bolts
holding it together are loose.

Post by Geoff Berrow
I am pleased that your tone does seem to have changed somewhat. We need
more people prepared to be constructive. Pick fault with the
Committee/Interim Committee all you like - at the end of the day you
still got more than you paid for.

So when is something, other than checkgroups to perpetuate the status
quo, likely to happen? If I want to direct a proponent from alt.config
or news.groups to us.config because the proposed group would fit
better in us.*, what information about us.* group creation policies
and procedures is available?

Let's suppose I've proposed alt.usa.politics.climate-change and I've
been advised to try us.config instead. What happens next?

[Geoff Berrow]

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by Geoff Berrow
The main problem has been apathy and it's a feeling I can well
understand. Who, in their right mind, would want to deal with the kind
of shit you and Kevin have been kicking up?

If they have nothing to say that's worth reading, I assume that all
us.* committee members know how to use a killfile.

I've always felt that was a blunt tool.

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by Geoff Berrow
Especially with the waning
popularity of Usenet in general? I think that is the main reason the
committee was so reluctant to get anything done. No one wanted to deal
with the inevitable negativity that wouold ensue.

It seems to me that much of the negativitiy at present is the result
of nobody having been told what was happening.

Well, until this recent flurry, no one seemed to care. A call for
volunteers resulted in an application from one kook who with drew it
once his bluff was called.

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by Geoff Berrow
The job for us.* was simple - keep things ticking over, remove dead
groups, possible (but likely to be a rare event) add new groups. A
simple problem which needed a simple solution and the simplest was to
involve Tim. (I could have suggested one of the uk.* guys but felt that
really would have been more than you could bear). But Tim is appointed,
it doesn't have to be forever so you can quit the hyperbole.

Why would there have been objections to "one of the uk.* guys"? I'm
not aware of complaints about mismanagement in uk.*.

You're cleverer than that Peter. I get told to bugger off at regular
intervals and I keep a relatively low profile.

...

Post by Peter J Ross
So when is something, other than checkgroups to perpetuate the status
quo, likely to happen? If I want to direct a proponent from alt.config
or news.groups to us.config because the proposed group would fit
better in us.*, what information about us.* group creation policies
and procedures is available?

Don't expect any kind of elaborate setup. We did a lot of work on
documents that was pretty futile. Much of it was done just trying to
placate HKT who was very obstructive. We're trying to trim away all the
useless stuff and come up with a simple, yet effective system.

The committee is the hierarchy maintainer. Basically, a well founded,
well supported, non-controversial and legal proposal should result in a
group being formed. Do we really need any more than that?

Post by Peter J Ross
Let's suppose I've proposed alt.usa.politics.climate-change and I've
been advised to try us.config instead. What happens next?

I'd tell them to post an RFD in us.config

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.config on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 11:50:57 +0100, Geoff Berrow
<...>

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by Geoff Berrow
The job for us.* was simple - keep things ticking over, remove dead
groups, possible (but likely to be a rare event) add new groups. A
simple problem which needed a simple solution and the simplest was to
involve Tim. (I could have suggested one of the uk.* guys but felt that
really would have been more than you could bear). But Tim is appointed,
it doesn't have to be forever so you can quit the hyperbole.

Why would there have been objections to "one of the uk.* guys"? I'm
not aware of complaints about mismanagement in uk.*.

You're cleverer than that Peter. I get told to bugger off at regular
intervals and I keep a relatively low profile.

I've just taken a look at uk.net.news.config. It seems to be full of
friendly discussions about chocolate biscuits and the plural of
"haggis". Perhaps I'm not clever enough to detect some underlying
hatred?

Compare the trench warfare conducted in news.groups, largely as a
result of Skirvin's actions and other people's reactions to them. You
couldn't have chosen somebody more controversial than Skirvin.

Post by Geoff Berrow
...

Post by Peter J Ross
So when is something, other than checkgroups to perpetuate the status
quo, likely to happen? If I want to direct a proponent from alt.config
or news.groups to us.config because the proposed group would fit
better in us.*, what information about us.* group creation policies
and procedures is available?

Don't expect any kind of elaborate setup. We did a lot of work on
documents that was pretty futile. Much of it was done just trying to
placate HKT who was very obstructive. We're trying to trim away all the
useless stuff and come up with a simple, yet effective system.

I think you need *some* documentation, though perhaps it can develop
as well from practical experience as from predetermined principles.

Post by Geoff Berrow
The committee is the hierarchy maintainer. Basically, a well founded,
well supported, non-controversial and legal proposal should result in a
group being formed. Do we really need any more than that?

I don't think you do, as long as the simple system works in practice.

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Peter J Ross
Let's suppose I've proposed alt.usa.politics.climate-change and I've
been advised to try us.config instead. What happens next?

I'd tell them to post an RFD in us.config

<dons putative-proponent hat>

What's an acceptable format for an RFD? And where do I learn more
about this mysterious "us.*" hierarchy that the kindly, polite
alt.configgers have mentioned to me?

[Geoff Berrow]

Post by Peter J Ross
In alt.config on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 11:50:57 +0100, Geoff Berrow

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Peter J Ross
Why would there have been objections to "one of the uk.* guys"? I'm
not aware of complaints about mismanagement in uk.*.

You're cleverer than that Peter. I get told to bugger off at regular
intervals and I keep a relatively low profile.

I've just taken a look at uk.net.news.config. It seems to be full of
friendly discussions about chocolate biscuits and the plural of
"haggis".

Yeah, apart from that most discussions are about trivia...

Post by Peter J Ross
Perhaps I'm not clever enough to detect some underlying
hatred?

Not from there, from here.

Post by Peter J Ross
Compare the trench warfare conducted in news.groups, largely as a
result of Skirvin's actions and other people's reactions to them. You
couldn't have chosen somebody more controversial than Skirvin.

I stopped reading news.groups a while back. But while I was reading it
I reluctantly came to the conclusion that there was little else the B8MB
could do. For many years I have had a sig which reads 'It's only
Usenet, no one dies.'. Sadly, far too many people take this waaay too
seriously.

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by Geoff Berrow
...

Post by Peter J Ross
So when is something, other than checkgroups to perpetuate the status
quo, likely to happen? If I want to direct a proponent from alt.config
or news.groups to us.config because the proposed group would fit
better in us.*, what information about us.* group creation policies
and procedures is available?

Don't expect any kind of elaborate setup. We did a lot of work on
documents that was pretty futile. Much of it was done just trying to
placate HKT who was very obstructive. We're trying to trim away all the
useless stuff and come up with a simple, yet effective system.

I think you need *some* documentation, though perhaps it can develop
as well from practical experience as from predetermined principles.

There will be.

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by Geoff Berrow
The committee is the hierarchy maintainer. Basically, a well founded,
well supported, non-controversial and legal proposal should result in a
group being formed. Do we really need any more than that?

I don't think you do, as long as the simple system works in practice.

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Peter J Ross
Let's suppose I've proposed alt.usa.politics.climate-change and I've
been advised to try us.config instead. What happens next?

I'd tell them to post an RFD in us.config

<dons putative-proponent hat>
What's an acceptable format for an RFD? And where do I learn more
about this mysterious "us.*" hierarchy that the kindly, polite
alt.configgers have mentioned to me?

Please use this handy form.

http://www.ckdog.co.uk/us/rfdmaker.php

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Peter J Ross
Why would there have been objections to "one of the uk.* guys"? I'm
not aware of complaints about mismanagement in uk.*.

You're cleverer than that Peter. I get told to bugger off at regular
intervals and I keep a relatively low profile.

I've just taken a look at uk.net.news.config. It seems to be full of
friendly discussions about chocolate biscuits and the plural of
"haggis".

Yeah, apart from that most discussions are about trivia...

Post by Peter J Ross
Perhaps I'm not clever enough to detect some underlying
hatred?

Not from there, from here.

So you're admitting to back pedalling and misrepresenting problems in
uk.net.news.config? Lovely.

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Peter J Ross
So when is something, other than checkgroups to perpetuate the status
quo, likely to happen? If I want to direct a proponent from alt.config
or news.groups to us.config because the proposed group would fit
better in us.*, what information about us.* group creation policies
and procedures is available?

Don't expect any kind of elaborate setup. We did a lot of work on
documents that was pretty futile. Much of it was done just trying to
placate HKT who was very obstructive. We're trying to trim away all the
useless stuff and come up with a simple, yet effective system.

I think you need *some* documentation, though perhaps it can develop
as well from practical experience as from predetermined principles.

There will be.

Do you really, really, really, really mean it?

[RTO Trainer]

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by Peter J Ross
Why would there have been objections to "one of the uk.* guys"? I'm
not aware of complaints about mismanagement in uk.*.

You're cleverer than that Peter.  I get told to bugger off at regular
intervals and I keep a relatively low profile.

I've just taken a look at uk.net.news.config. It seems to be full of
friendly discussions about chocolate biscuits and the plural of
"haggis".

Yeah, apart from that most discussions are about trivia...

Post by Peter J Ross
Perhaps I'm not clever enough to detect some underlying
hatred?

Not from there, from here.

So you're admitting to back pedalling and misrepresenting problems in
uk.net.news.config? Lovely.

Geeze. I've been wasting time on a garden-variety troll?

Bye-bye, Adam.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by Peter J Ross
Why would there have been objections to "one of the uk.* guys"? I'm
not aware of complaints about mismanagement in uk.*.

You're cleverer than that Peter.  I get told to bugger off at regular
intervals and I keep a relatively low profile.

I've just taken a look at uk.net.news.config. It seems to be full of
friendly discussions about chocolate biscuits and the plural of
"haggis".

Yeah, apart from that most discussions are about trivia...

Post by Peter J Ross
Perhaps I'm not clever enough to detect some underlying
hatred?

Not from there, from here.

So you're admitting to back pedalling and misrepresenting problems in
uk.net.news.config? Lovely.

Geeze. I've been wasting time on a garden-variety troll?
Bye-bye, Adam.

Geoff was utterly misrepresenting that there were serious problems in
another configging newsgroup. Peter called him on it.

Drop the bullshit.

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.config on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 16:11:34 -0500, Adam H. Kerman

Post by Adam H. Kerman
Geoff was utterly misrepresenting that there were serious problems in
another configging newsgroup. Peter called him on it.

Geoff clarified what he meant to my satisfaction. He meant that uk.*
people like himself might be flamed if they involved themselves in
us.*. I think he's mistaken, that's all.

[RTO Trainer]

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by Peter J Ross
Why would there have been objections to "one of the uk.* guys"? I'm
not aware of complaints about mismanagement in uk.*.

You're cleverer than that Peter.  I get told to bugger off at regular
intervals and I keep a relatively low profile.

I've just taken a look at uk.net.news.config. It seems to be full of
friendly discussions about chocolate biscuits and the plural of
"haggis".

Yeah, apart from that most discussions are about trivia...

Post by Peter J Ross
Perhaps I'm not clever enough to detect some underlying
hatred?

Not from there, from here.

So you're admitting to back pedalling and misrepresenting problems in
uk.net.news.config? Lovely.

Geeze.  I've been wasting time on a garden-variety troll?
Bye-bye, Adam.

Geoff was utterly misrepresenting that there were serious problems in
another configging newsgroup. Peter called him on it.
Drop the bullshit.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

No. You and Peter want to play silly bastards.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by Peter J Ross
Why would there have been objections to "one of the uk.* guys"? I'm
not aware of complaints about mismanagement in uk.*.

You're cleverer than that Peter.  I get told to bugger off at regular
intervals and I keep a relatively low profile.

I've just taken a look at uk.net.news.config. It seems to be full of
friendly discussions about chocolate biscuits and the plural of
"haggis".

Yeah, apart from that most discussions are about trivia...

Post by Peter J Ross
Perhaps I'm not clever enough to detect some underlying
hatred?

Not from there, from here.

So you're admitting to back pedalling and misrepresenting problems in
uk.net.news.config? Lovely.

Geeze.  I've been wasting time on a garden-variety troll?
Bye-bye, Adam.

Geoff was utterly misrepresenting that there were serious problems in
another configging newsgroup. Peter called him on it.
Drop the bullshit.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

No. You and Peter want to play silly bastards.

Peter clarified what he meant, and you still want to call him names?

I didn't care for what Geoff said and that there was no basis for his
hostility toward those who comment on proposals.

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.config on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 15:25:50 +0100, Geoff Berrow

Post by Geoff Berrow
Please use this handy form.
http://www.ckdog.co.uk/us/rfdmaker.php

What does "Newsgroup host" mean?

Does the script check for errors?

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Peter J Ross
It seems to me that much of the negativitiy at present is the result
of nobody having been told what was happening.

Well, until this recent flurry, no one seemed to care.

I didn't care either, not until two of the committee members, you and
edward, started patting yourselves on the back for the fine job you were
doing sitting on your collective asses.

Post by Geoff Berrow
Don't expect any kind of elaborate setup. We did a lot of work on
documents that was pretty futile. Much of it was done just trying to
placate HKT who was very obstructive. We're trying to trim away all the
useless stuff and come up with a simple, yet effective system.

Hahahahahaha. Nothing ever changes in us. It was Henrietta's fault, it
is Henrietta's fault, it will always be Henrietta's fault.

Post by Geoff Berrow
The committee is the hierarchy maintainer. Basically, a well founded,
well supported, non-controversial and legal proposal should result in a
group being formed. Do we really need any more than that?

Justification is necessary and so is consensus for a split, and someone
to figure out if the proponent is known for discussing the topic (and
therefore likely to promote the group) and it isn't redundant of several
other groups and if it's really regional in nature. Configging 101 stuff.

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Peter J Ross
Let's suppose I've proposed alt.usa.politics.climate-change and I've
been advised to try us.config instead. What happens next?

I'd tell them to post an RFD in us.config

Get rid of RFD's; that's a bit of Big 8 cruft.

[RTO Trainer]

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Peter J Ross
It seems to me that much of the negativitiy at present is the result
of nobody having been told what was happening.

Well, until this recent flurry, no one seemed to care.

I didn't care either, not until two of the committee members, you and
edward, started patting yourselves on the back for the fine job you were
doing sitting on your collective asses.

Post by Geoff Berrow
Don't expect any kind of elaborate setup.  We did a lot of work on
documents that was pretty futile.  Much of it was done just trying to
placate HKT who was very obstructive.  We're trying to trim away all the
useless stuff and come up with a simple, yet effective system.

Hahahahahaha. Nothing ever changes in us. It was Henrietta's fault, it
is Henrietta's fault, it will always be Henrietta's fault.

Post by Geoff Berrow
The committee is the hierarchy maintainer.  Basically, a well founded,
well supported, non-controversial and legal proposal should result in a
group being formed.  Do we really need any more than that?

Justification is necessary and so is consensus for a split, and someone
to figure out if the proponent is known for discussing the topic (and
therefore likely to promote the group) and it isn't redundant of several
other groups and if it's really regional in nature. Configging 101 stuff.

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Peter J Ross
Let's suppose I've proposed alt.usa.politics.climate-change and I've
been advised to try us.config instead. What happens next?

I'd tell them to post an RFD in us.config

Get rid of RFD's; that's a bit of Big 8 cruft.

Oh. NOW we get suggestions and input.

Where the f**k have you been the last 18 months or so?

Sorry, you're too late. We've written a charter and decided on
procedures, without your help no less. If you're committed to a
change like this, there are ways to do that, but you'll have to follow
the procedures that exist to do it.

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.config on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 13:26:13 -0700 (PDT), RTO Trainer

Post by RTO Trainer
We've written a charter

Where is it?

Post by RTO Trainer
and decided on procedures,

What are they?

Post by RTO Trainer
without your help no less.

When, from March to August inclusive, have you asked for help?

Post by RTO Trainer
If you're committed to a
change like this, there are ways to do that, but you'll have to follow
the procedures that exist to do it.

Do we get twenty questions to try and guess what "the procedures that
exist" are, or is somebody eventually going to *tell* us?

[RTO Trainer]

Post by Peter J Ross
In alt.config on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 13:26:13 -0700 (PDT), RTO Trainer

Post by RTO Trainer
We've written a charter

Where is it?

Post by RTO Trainer
and decided on procedures,

What are they?

Post by RTO Trainer
without your help no less.

When, from March to August inclusive, have you asked for help?

I don't know. Maybe in that specifc timeframe, never. But several
calls for assistance, members and so forth were made. I'm sure you
know this.

Or you've just not been paying attention.

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by RTO Trainer
If you're committed to a
change like this, there are ways to do that, but you'll have to follow
the procedures that exist to do it.

Do we get twenty questions to try and guess what "the procedures that
exist" are, or is somebody eventually going to *tell* us?

*I* will not tell you. You'll have to look it up. If you're so much
smarter than teh rest of us it should be no problem for you.

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.config on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 14:44:17 -0700 (PDT), RTO Trainer

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Peter J Ross
In alt.config on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 13:26:13 -0700 (PDT), RTO Trainer

Post by RTO Trainer
We've written a charter

Where is it?

Note: no response.

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by RTO Trainer
and decided on procedures,

What are they?

Note: no response.

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by RTO Trainer
without your help no less.

When, from March to August inclusive, have you asked for help?

I don't know. Maybe in that specifc timeframe, never. But several
calls for assistance, members and so forth were made. I'm sure you
know this.

I know that there were no announcements of any kind for six months.

I know that I offered assistance as soon as evidence appeared that
us.* might not be dead.

Post by RTO Trainer
Or you've just not been paying attention.

There has been nothing to pay attention to.

If I'm wrong, please cite the Message-IDs.

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by RTO Trainer
If you're committed to a
change like this, there are ways to do that, but you'll have to follow
the procedures that exist to do it.

Do we get twenty questions to try and guess what "the procedures that
exist" are, or is somebody eventually going to *tell* us?

*I* will not tell you.

Are you sure that hierarchy administration is the right hobby for you?
Even after years of experience of the Bambies, your attitude still
amazes me.

Post by RTO Trainer
You'll have to look it up.

There isn't anything to look up. I know this because I *have* been
paying attention.

Post by RTO Trainer
If you're so much
smarter than teh rest of us it should be no problem for you.

Thanks for your help in deciding how much interest us.* merits.

Now hurry along: there may be some well-informed, well-intentioned
posters in this thread whom you haven't comprehensively alienated yet.

[Brian Mailman]

Post by Peter J Ross
In alt.config on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 13:26:13 -0700 (PDT), RTO Trainer

Post by RTO Trainer
We've written a charter

Where is it?

Post by RTO Trainer
and decided on procedures,

What are they?

Post by RTO Trainer
without your help no less.

When, from March to August inclusive, have you asked for help?

Post by RTO Trainer
If you're committed to a
change like this, there are ways to do that, but you'll have to follow
the procedures that exist to do it.

Do we get twenty questions to try and guess what "the procedures that
exist" are, or is somebody eventually going to *tell* us?

It all sounds awfully familiar. Maybe Tim Skirvin *is* a good fit for them.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Peter J Ross
It seems to me that much of the negativitiy at present is the result
of nobody having been told what was happening.

Well, until this recent flurry, no one seemed to care.

I didn't care either, not until two of the committee members, you and
edward, started patting yourselves on the back for the fine job you were
doing sitting on your collective asses.

Post by Geoff Berrow
Don't expect any kind of elaborate setup. We did a lot of work on
documents that was pretty futile. Much of it was done just trying to
placate HKT who was very obstructive. We're trying to trim away all the
useless stuff and come up with a simple, yet effective system.

Hahahahahaha. Nothing ever changes in us. It was Henrietta's fault, it
is Henrietta's fault, it will always be Henrietta's fault.

Post by Geoff Berrow
The committee is the hierarchy maintainer. Basically, a well founded,
well supported, non-controversial and legal proposal should result in a
group being formed. Do we really need any more than that?

Justification is necessary and so is consensus for a split, and someone
to figure out if the proponent is known for discussing the topic (and
therefore likely to promote the group) and it isn't redundant of several
other groups and if it's really regional in nature. Configging 101 stuff.

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Peter J Ross
Let's suppose I've proposed alt.usa.politics.climate-change and I've
been advised to try us.config instead. What happens next?

I'd tell them to post an RFD in us.config

Get rid of RFD's; that's a bit of Big 8 cruft.

Oh. NOW we get suggestions and input.
Where the f**k have you been the last 18 months or so?
Sorry, you're too late. We've written a charter and decided on
procedures, without your help no less. If you're committed to a
change like this, there are ways to do that, but you'll have to follow
the procedures that exist to do it.

It took you assholes longer to come up with nothing useful that the
Bambies did. Unbelievable.

Any suggestions I made in the last few days were made years ago in
us.config. I'd argue for justified proposals and consensus in splits and
no redundant groups, same as I'd argue for in alt.config. It should have
taken you guys no more than a couple of hours to come up with the
necessary draft documents, then the rest of us could have commented.
This stuff is very basic.

Quite frankly, I assumed you were all dead. Sorry 'bout that.

[RTO Trainer]

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Peter J Ross
It seems to me that much of the negativitiy at present is the result
of nobody having been told what was happening.

Well, until this recent flurry, no one seemed to care.

I didn't care either, not until two of the committee members, you and
edward, started patting yourselves on the back for the fine job you were
doing sitting on your collective asses.

Post by Geoff Berrow
Don't expect any kind of elaborate setup. We did a lot of work on
documents that was pretty futile. Much of it was done just trying to
placate HKT who was very obstructive. We're trying to trim away all the
useless stuff and come up with a simple, yet effective system.

Hahahahahaha. Nothing ever changes in us. It was Henrietta's fault, it
is Henrietta's fault, it will always be Henrietta's fault.

Post by Geoff Berrow
The committee is the hierarchy maintainer. Basically, a well founded,
well supported, non-controversial and legal proposal should result in a
group being formed. Do we really need any more than that?

Justification is necessary and so is consensus for a split, and someone
to figure out if the proponent is known for discussing the topic (and
therefore likely to promote the group) and it isn't redundant of several
other groups and if it's really regional in nature. Configging 101 stuff.

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Peter J Ross
Let's suppose I've proposed alt.usa.politics.climate-change and I've
been advised to try us.config instead. What happens next?

I'd tell them to post an RFD in us.config

Get rid of RFD's; that's a bit of Big 8 cruft.

Oh.  NOW we get suggestions and input.
Where the f**k have you been the last 18 months or so?
Sorry, you're too late.  We've written a charter and decided on
procedures, without your help no less.  If you're committed to a
change like this, there are ways to do that, but you'll have to follow
the procedures that exist to do it.

It took you assholes longer to come up with nothing useful that the
Bambies did. Unbelievable.
Any suggestions I made in the last few days were made years ago in
us.config. I'd argue for justified proposals and consensus in splits and
no redundant groups, same as I'd argue for in alt.config. It should have
taken you guys no more than a couple of hours to come up with the
necessary draft documents, then the rest of us could have commented.
This stuff is very basic.
Quite frankly, I assumed you were all dead. Sorry 'bout that.- Hide quoted text -

Piss on you.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Peter J Ross
It seems to me that much of the negativitiy at present is the result
of nobody having been told what was happening.

Well, until this recent flurry, no one seemed to care.

I didn't care either, not until two of the committee members, you and
edward, started patting yourselves on the back for the fine job you were
doing sitting on your collective asses.

Post by Geoff Berrow
Don't expect any kind of elaborate setup. We did a lot of work on
documents that was pretty futile. Much of it was done just trying to
placate HKT who was very obstructive. We're trying to trim away all the
useless stuff and come up with a simple, yet effective system.

Hahahahahaha. Nothing ever changes in us. It was Henrietta's fault, it
is Henrietta's fault, it will always be Henrietta's fault.

Post by Geoff Berrow
The committee is the hierarchy maintainer. Basically, a well founded,
well supported, non-controversial and legal proposal should result in a
group being formed. Do we really need any more than that?

Justification is necessary and so is consensus for a split, and someone
to figure out if the proponent is known for discussing the topic (and
therefore likely to promote the group) and it isn't redundant of several
other groups and if it's really regional in nature. Configging 101 stuff.

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Peter J Ross
Let's suppose I've proposed alt.usa.politics.climate-change and I've
been advised to try us.config instead. What happens next?

I'd tell them to post an RFD in us.config

Get rid of RFD's; that's a bit of Big 8 cruft.

Oh.  NOW we get suggestions and input.
Where the f**k have you been the last 18 months or so?
Sorry, you're too late.  We've written a charter and decided on
procedures, without your help no less.  If you're committed to a
change like this, there are ways to do that, but you'll have to follow
the procedures that exist to do it.

It took you assholes longer to come up with nothing useful that the
Bambies did. Unbelievable.
Any suggestions I made in the last few days were made years ago in
us.config. I'd argue for justified proposals and consensus in splits and
no redundant groups, same as I'd argue for in alt.config. It should have
taken you guys no more than a couple of hours to come up with the
necessary draft documents, then the rest of us could have commented.
This stuff is very basic.
Quite frankly, I assumed you were all dead. Sorry 'bout that.- Hide

quoted text -
Piss on you.

Kisses

[RTO Trainer]

Post by Peter J Ross
In alt.config on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 10:13:00 +0100, Geoff Berrow

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Adam H. Kerman
Work? What work? You all chose NOT to make the minimum effort and
instead asked Tim to take over, who needs little encouragement on
grabbing more power.

LOL, you can have full control of the 747, but if it has no fuel, you
ain't going nowhere.  Usenet is out of gas.

Post by Adam H. Kerman
How much trouble is it to send out a monthly checkgroups?

The main problem has been apathy and it's a feeling I can well
understand.  Who, in their right mind, would want to deal with the kind
of shit you and Kevin have been kicking up?

If they have nothing to say that's worth reading, I assume that all
us.* committee members know how to use a killfile.

And then get kicked in the teeth for not being responsive when they
actually say something constructive? No thanks.

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by Geoff Berrow
Especially with the waning
popularity  of Usenet in general?  I think that is the main reason the
committee was so reluctant to get anything done. No one wanted to deal
with the inevitable negativity that wouold ensue.

It seems to me that much of the negativitiy at present is the result
of nobody having been told what was happening.

We've kept everyone infomred of our actions. If you mean, the updates
on that were not as frequent as you'd have liked, well, sorry.

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by Geoff Berrow
The job for us.* was simple - keep things ticking over, remove dead
groups, possible (but likely to be a rare event) add new groups.  A
simple problem which needed a simple solution and the simplest was to
involve Tim.  (I could have suggested one of the uk.* guys but felt that
really would have been more than you could bear). But Tim is appointed,
it doesn't have to be forever so you can quit the hyperbole.

Why would there have been objections to "one of the uk.* guys"? I'm
not aware of complaints about mismanagement in uk.*.

It's us.*. Someone would have objected. Same same had it been a
Canadian or a Romanian suggested.

How fun. We avoid a fight only to have a fight over it.

Post by Peter J Ross
If I'd been looking for somebody to help with hierarchy management,
Tim Skirvin would have been just about the last person I'd have asked,
given his appalling record in the Big 8. The fact that you approached
somebody who's renowned for incompetence, dishonesty and
self-aggrandisement suggests to me that you're a little out of touch
with what's been going on on Usenet in the past few years.

Post by Geoff Berrow
I've been kicking round newsgroups long enough to know that you guys
love a good knockabout however trivial the cause, and this really is
trivial.

"The devil is in the details."

And here you are.

Post by Peter J Ross
Taking off in your 747 is a *bad* idea if some of the little bolts
holding it together are loose.

Here's a USENET spanner (left-handed). You are now appointed the
official us.* USENET Bolt Tightener.

See you when you're done.

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by Geoff Berrow
I am pleased that your tone does seem to have changed somewhat.  We need
more people prepared to be constructive.  Pick fault with the
Committee/Interim Committee all you like - at the end of the day you
still got more than you paid for.

So when is something, other than checkgroups to perpetuate the status
quo, likely to happen? If I want to direct a proponent from alt.config
or news.groups to us.config because the proposed group would fit
better in us.*, what information about us.* group creation policies
and procedures is available?

All of the stuff that we generated in Committee and posted out here.

Once we know that checkgroups are being accepted we'll lift the
moratorium and we can start working on the massive backlog that you
and Adam have been holding back......

Post by Peter J Ross
Let's suppose I've proposed alt.usa.politics.climate-change and I've
been advised to try us.config instead. What happens next?

Were this real, I'd point you to the correct documentation and find
out if you understood it. Since you're playing stupid hypothetical
games, I'll tell you to go look it up.

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.config on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 13:21:19 -0700 (PDT), RTO Trainer
<...>

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Peter J Ross
It seems to me that much of the negativitiy at present is the result
of nobody having been told what was happening.

We've kept everyone infomred of our actions. If you mean, the updates
on that were not as frequent as you'd have liked, well, sorry.

On February 28th, there was an announcement that the interim committee
was now the committee. The next relevant post appeared in us.config
about two weeks ago. Six months of silence doesn't count as keeping
everyone informed.

I'd actually forgotten about the February 28th announcement until I
just looked it up, and I gave up reading us.config months ago because
absolutely nothing was happening there.

<...>

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Peter J Ross
Why would there have been objections to "one of the uk.* guys"? I'm
not aware of complaints about mismanagement in uk.*.

It's us.*. Someone would have objected. Same same had it been a
Canadian or a Romanian suggested.

And yet Geoff is a committee member and I don't see any complaints
about his nationality or involvement in uk.*.

<...>

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Peter J Ross
So when is something, other than checkgroups to perpetuate the status
quo, likely to happen? If I want to direct a proponent from alt.config
or news.groups to us.config because the proposed group would fit
better in us.*, what information about us.* group creation policies
and procedures is available?

All of the stuff that we generated in Committee and posted out here.
Once we know that checkgroups are being accepted we'll lift the
moratorium and we can start working on the massive backlog that you
and Adam have been holding back......

All those proponents have long gone. What was the point of sending
them to an apparently dead config group?

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Peter J Ross
Let's suppose I've proposed alt.usa.politics.climate-change and I've
been advised to try us.config instead. What happens next?

Were this real, I'd point you to the correct documentation and find
out if you understood it. Since you're playing stupid hypothetical
games, I'll tell you to go look it up.

Aw, give me a little clue. Is the website where I can look it up in
*.us, in *.org or elsewhere? I certainly haven't seen your process
documented on Usenet.

[RTO Trainer]

Post by Peter J Ross
In alt.config on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 13:21:19 -0700 (PDT), RTO Trainer
<...>

Post by Peter J Ross
It seems to me that much of the negativitiy at present is the result
of nobody having been told what was happening.

We've kept everyone infomred of our actions.  If you mean, the updates
on that were not as frequent as you'd have liked, well, sorry.

On February 28th, there was an announcement that the interim committee
was now the committee. The next relevant post appeared in us.config
about two weeks ago. Six months of silence doesn't count as keeping
everyone informed.

So you mean, the updates were not as frequent as you'd have liked,
well, sorry.

Post by Peter J Ross
I'd actually forgotten about the February 28th announcement until I
just looked it up, and I gave up reading us.config months ago because
absolutely nothing was happening there.

*

Post by Peter J Ross
<...>

Post by Peter J Ross
Why would there have been objections to "one of the uk.* guys"? I'm
not aware of complaints about mismanagement in uk.*.

It's us.*.  Someone would have objected.  Same same had it been a
Canadian or a Romanian suggested.

And yet Geoff is a committee member and I don't see any complaints
about his nationality or involvement in uk.*.

You haven't been paying attention.

Post by Peter J Ross
<...>

Post by Peter J Ross
So when is something, other than checkgroups to perpetuate the status
quo, likely to happen? If I want to direct a proponent from alt.config
or news.groups to us.config because the proposed group would fit
better in us.*, what information about us.* group creation policies
and procedures is available?

All of the stuff that we generated in Committee and posted out here.
Once we know that checkgroups are being accepted we'll lift the
moratorium and we can start working on the massive backlog that you
and Adam have been holding back......

All those proponents have long gone. What was the point of sending
them to an apparently dead config group?

Nothing, back then. That was the point. What's your point?

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by Peter J Ross
Let's suppose I've proposed alt.usa.politics.climate-change and I've
been advised to try us.config instead. What happens next?

Were this real, I'd point you to the correct documentation and find
out if you understood it.  Since you're playing stupid hypothetical
games, I'll tell you to go look it up.

Aw, give me a little clue. Is the website where I can look it up in
*.us, in *.org or elsewhere? I certainly haven't seen your process
documented on Usenet.

You haven't been paying attention.

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.config on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 14:27:42 -0700 (PDT), RTO Trainer

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Peter J Ross
In alt.config on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 13:21:19 -0700 (PDT), RTO Trainer
<...>

Post by Peter J Ross
It seems to me that much of the negativitiy at present is the result
of nobody having been told what was happening.

We've kept everyone infomred of our actions.  If you mean, the updates
on that were not as frequent as you'd have liked, well, sorry.

On February 28th, there was an announcement that the interim committee
was now the committee. The next relevant post appeared in us.config
about two weeks ago. Six months of silence doesn't count as keeping
everyone informed.

So you mean, the updates were not as frequent as you'd have liked,
well, sorry.

To quote Adam: "I thought you were all dead."

Will the next update take another six months?

<...>

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Peter J Ross
And yet Geoff is a committee member and I don't see any complaints
about his nationality or involvement in uk.*.

You haven't been paying attention.

What haven't I been paying attention to? What public discussion has
there been, in us.config or elsewhere, from March to August inclusive,
that I could have paid attention to?

<...>

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Peter J Ross

Once we know that checkgroups are being accepted we'll lift the
moratorium and we can start working on the massive backlog that you
and Adam have been holding back......

All those proponents have long gone. What was the point of sending
them to an apparently dead config group?

Nothing, back then. That was the point. What's your point?

You haven't been paying attention.

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by Peter J Ross
Let's suppose I've proposed alt.usa.politics.climate-change and I've
been advised to try us.config instead. What happens next?

Were this real, I'd point you to the correct documentation and find
out if you understood it.  Since you're playing stupid hypothetical
games, I'll tell you to go look it up.

Aw, give me a little clue. Is the website where I can look it up in
*.us, in *.org or elsewhere? I certainly haven't seen your process
documented on Usenet.

You haven't been paying attention.

To what? I've just looked at every on-topic post in us.config from the
past year. It didn't take long.

[Brian Mailman]

Post by Peter J Ross
Aw, give me a little clue. Is the website where I can look it up in
*.us, in *.org or elsewhere?

You're purely evil.

B/

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Adam H. Kerman
Work? What work? You all chose NOT to make the minimum effort and
instead asked Tim to take over, who needs little encouragement on
grabbing more power.

LOL, you can have full control of the 747, but if it has no fuel, you
ain't going nowhere. Usenet is out of gas.

Geoff, why don't you just blame war in the Middle East or the way the
planets are aligned? If that was going to be your attitude, you had no
business being on the committee.

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Adam H. Kerman
How much trouble is it to send out a monthly checkgroups?

The main problem has been apathy and it's a feeling I can well
understand. Who, in their right mind, would want to deal with the kind
of shit you and Kevin have been kicking up?

What shit did I kick up, and who the hell is Kevin? You knew two years
ago that if you buried your head in the sand long enough I'd call you on
it, so that was also your excuse for doing nothing?

Post by Geoff Berrow
Especially with the waning popularity of Usenet in general? I think that
is the main reason the committee was so reluctant to get anything done. No
one wanted to deal with the inevitable negativity that wouold ensue.

Geoff, you are a totally irresponsible lame hack. Get your ass off the
committee and off Usenet. It's bad enough that you're completely
useless, but listening to you bitch and moan makes a bad situation much,
much worse.

[Geoff Berrow]

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by Geoff Berrow
Especially with the waning popularity of Usenet in general? I think that
is the main reason the committee was so reluctant to get anything done. No
one wanted to deal with the inevitable negativity that wouold ensue.

Geoff, you are a totally irresponsible lame hack. Get your ass off the
committee and off Usenet. It's bad enough that you're completely
useless, but listening to you bitch and moan makes a bad situation much,
much worse.

Casual observers might note that the only bitching and moaning is coming
from your direction.

No change there then.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by Geoff Berrow
Especially with the waning popularity of Usenet in general? I think that
is the main reason the committee was so reluctant to get anything done. No
one wanted to deal with the inevitable negativity that wouold ensue.

Geoff, you are a totally irresponsible lame hack. Get your ass off the
committee and off Usenet. It's bad enough that you're completely
useless, but listening to you bitch and moan makes a bad situation much,
much worse.

Casual observers might note that the only bitching and moaning is coming
from your direction.
No change there then.

"I know you are, but what am I?" noted.

Stop bitching and moaning about the death of Usenet. It has nothing
whatsoever to do with your fundamental uselessness. You took on a task
that you had no intention of performing. Now, resign.

[K. A. Cannon]

Post by Adam H. Kerman
who the hell is Kevin?

<sniff> All the successful trolling of you these long years and *this*
is the recognition I get?

Bastard....
--
K. A. Cannon
kevin.a.cannon at gmail dot com

Don't worry about the world coming to an end today.
It's already tomorrow in Australia.
-Charles Schultz

COOSN-266-06-02374
Hammer of Thor, April 2005
PIERRE SALINGER MEMORIAL HOOK, LINE & SINKER June 2007
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle X 2
#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by K. A. Cannon

Post by Adam H. Kerman
who the hell is Kevin?

<sniff> All the successful trolling of you these long years and *this*
is the recognition I get?
Bastard....

Pardon me. Geoff was making a lot of whiney complaints and wild
accusations about someone named Kevin. I didn't associate them with you
for nothing you've written could have inspired Geoff's invective.

[K. A. Cannon]

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by K. A. Cannon

Post by Adam H. Kerman
who the hell is Kevin?

<sniff> All the successful trolling of you these long years and *this*
is the recognition I get?
Bastard....

Pardon me. Geoff was making a lot of whiney complaints and wild
accusations about someone named Kevin. I didn't associate them with you
for nothing you've written could have inspired Geoff's invective.

Oh...now that's just derogatory.

Are you implying that I lack the talents to inspire said whines from
Geoff? I'll have you know that my talents have driven people to make
death threats and arson threats against me. I am not some UseNet
piker...I am a troll of worthy repute.
--
K. A. Cannon
kevin.a.cannon at gmail dot com

Don't worry about the world coming to an end today.
It's already tomorrow in Australia.
-Charles Schultz

COOSN-266-06-02374
Hammer of Thor, April 2005
PIERRE SALINGER MEMORIAL HOOK, LINE & SINKER June 2007
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle X 2
#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by K. A. Cannon

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by K. A. Cannon

Post by Adam H. Kerman
who the hell is Kevin?

<sniff> All the successful trolling of you these long years and *this*
is the recognition I get?
Bastard....

Pardon me. Geoff was making a lot of whiney complaints and wild
accusations about someone named Kevin. I didn't associate them with you
for nothing you've written could have inspired Geoff's invective.

Oh...now that's just derogatory.
Are you implying that I lack the talents to inspire said whines from
Geoff? I'll have you know that my talents have driven people to make
death threats and arson threats against me. I am not some UseNet
piker...I am a troll of worthy repute.

Unless you are responsible for the Death of Usenet, Geoff's not whining
about anything you said. I guess you could view at as a general whine
about you not blowing sunshine up his ass.

Here, watch:

Heck of a job, Geoff.

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.config on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 11:33:27 -0400, K A Cannon

Post by K. A. Cannon

Post by Adam H. Kerman
who the hell is Kevin?

<sniff> All the successful trolling of you these long years and *this*
is the recognition I get?
Bastard....

Who the hell are you?

[K. A. Cannon]

Post by Peter J Ross
In alt.config on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 11:33:27 -0400, K A Cannon

Post by K. A. Cannon

Post by Adam H. Kerman
who the hell is Kevin?

<sniff> All the successful trolling of you these long years and *this*
is the recognition I get?
Bastard....

Who the hell are you?

One Big Eight vanity troll group and all of a sudden you are King
Troll.
--
K. A. Cannon
kevin.a.cannon at gmail dot com

Don't worry about the world coming to an end today.
It's already tomorrow in Australia.
-Charles Schultz

COOSN-266-06-02374
Hammer of Thor, April 2005
PIERRE SALINGER MEMORIAL HOOK, LINE & SINKER June 2007
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle X 2
#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine

[Aratzio]

On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 12:28:23 -0400, in the land of talk.troll.pjr, K.

Post by K. A. Cannon

Post by Peter J Ross
In alt.config on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 11:33:27 -0400, K A Cannon

Post by K. A. Cannon

Post by Adam H. Kerman
who the hell is Kevin?

<sniff> All the successful trolling of you these long years and *this*
is the recognition I get?
Bastard....

Who the hell are you?

One Big Eight vanity troll group and all of a sudden you are King
Troll.

Yabbut, it dropped from 6 servers to 5 the other day. Seems bubbanews
stopped carrying it.

[K. A. Cannon]

Post by Aratzio
On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 12:28:23 -0400, in the land of talk.troll.pjr, K.

Post by K. A. Cannon

Post by Peter J Ross
In alt.config on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 11:33:27 -0400, K A Cannon

Post by K. A. Cannon

Post by Adam H. Kerman
who the hell is Kevin?

<sniff> All the successful trolling of you these long years and *this*
is the recognition I get?
Bastard....

Who the hell are you?

One Big Eight vanity troll group and all of a sudden you are King
Troll.

Yabbut, it dropped from 6 servers to 5 the other day. Seems bubbanews
stopped carrying it.

That's because PJR ain't promoting it.
Ya can't have a newsgroup without promotion.

I am think a sandwitch board in Picadilla or something...
"Snuhscribe to talk.troll.pjr!!" on it....that'll work wonders
on the poast count.
--
K. A. Cannon
kevin.a.cannon at gmail.com.

COOSN-266-06-02374
Hammer of Thor, April 2005
PIERRE SALINGER MEMORIAL HOOK, LINE & SINKER June 2007
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle X 2
#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine

[RTO Trainer]

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Adam H. Kerman
Work? What work? You all chose NOT to make the minimum effort and
instead asked Tim to take over, who needs little encouragement on
grabbing more power.

LOL, you can have full control of the 747, but if it has no fuel, you
ain't going nowhere.  Usenet is out of gas.

Geoff, why don't you just blame war in the Middle East or the way the
planets are aligned? If that was going to be your attitude, you had no
business being on the committee.

Post by Geoff Berrow

Post by Adam H. Kerman
How much trouble is it to send out a monthly checkgroups?

The main problem has been apathy and it's a feeling I can well
understand.  Who, in their right mind, would want to deal with the kind
of shit you and Kevin have been kicking up?

What shit did I kick up, and who the hell is Kevin? You knew two years
ago that if you buried your head in the sand long enough I'd call you on
it, so that was also your excuse for doing nothing?

Post by Geoff Berrow
Especially with the waning popularity  of Usenet in general?  I think that
is the main reason the committee was so reluctant to get anything done. No
one wanted to deal with the inevitable negativity that wouold ensue.

Do you have anything substantive to say? Where are all your
proponents wait in the wings who need a new us.* group?

[K. A. Cannon]

Geoff Berrow <***@ckdog.co.uk> posted
<***@4ax.com> in alt.config on Tue, 16
Sep 2008 10:13:00 +0100:

<snip.

Post by Geoff Berrow
Usenet is out of gas.

Then leave.


<snip>
--
K. A. Cannon
kevin.a.cannon at gmail dot com

Don't worry about the world coming to an end today.
It's already tomorrow in Australia.
-Charles Schultz

COOSN-266-06-02374
Hammer of Thor, April 2005
PIERRE SALINGER MEMORIAL HOOK, LINE & SINKER June 2007
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle X 2
#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine

[RTO Trainer]

Post by K. A. Cannon
<snip.

Post by Geoff Berrow
Usenet is out of gas.

Then leave.

After you.

[K. A. Cannon]

On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 13:28:08 -0700 (PDT), RTO Trainer

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by K. A. Cannon
<snip.

Post by Geoff Berrow
Usenet is out of gas.

Then leave.

After you.

To make noise about how UseNet is dying while involved in helping a
moribund hierarchy with CPR, adrenaline shots and defibrillation as
UseNet kicks it's heels in the last of it's death throes.
C'mon...disingenuous ain't it?

It is that bad....

Someone in a communications MOS defending the lack of
communication...Puuuhhhhlllleeezzzeeee...
--
K. A. Cannon
kevin.a.cannon at gmail.com.

COOSN-266-06-02374
Hammer of Thor, April 2005
PIERRE SALINGER MEMORIAL HOOK, LINE & SINKER June 2007
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle X 2
#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine

[RTO Trainer]

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman
My question about why it is that the committee can't decide to send a
newgroup message on behalf of a justified proposal remains unanswered.

What justified proposal are you refering to?

I always believe there will be a justified proposal some day. In the
meantime, a few of us in the configging business would happily steer
non-clue-resistant proponents your way, as appropriate, if not for the
Committee refusing proposals. Really, this is pointless and tiresome and
utterly inexplicable. It's not like Henrietta left a huge mess.

I'm not clear on what it s you need explanation, but I'm happy to help
if I can.
Henrietta did not leave a mess, quite the opposite.  She left
virtually nothing in the way of supporting documentation that any
hierarchy management coule effectively use, be it an individual or a
committee, but especially a committee.

What documentation would you expect there to be?

A charter written to allow for and describe the duties of the
Committee, you know, for a start.

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer
I was the one, and at that time I was the committee chair, who
suggested a moratorium on new groups until we could get established.

I was referring to the moratorium. Isn't it now pointless?

Almost. Once we know that checkgroupos ans such are being honored,
then certainly. maybe it's coming form a hardware admin background,
but I'm a big beleiver in not flipping all the switches without a
reasonable expectaion of success first.

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer
One bit of mess has been that with Henrietta simply falling off the
radar, more or less, there has been no one who was recognized as being
able to send valid chekgroup messages and the like.

As I've pointed out, you just had to announce new management and new key
if Henrietta hadn't sent it. I still question if key signing is actually
necessary or implemented on all that many servers that take us groups.

So you say. It's not been the indication from others. Even had it
been, I'd still have asked for testing to be done first.

If it's really that eay, I question the effectiveness of it at all,
given that anyone could do it.

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer
Now, to my point, from teh way you worded your lament, it seemed that
there either was a new group propsal, or that you know of someone with
one waiting in the wings.  I'm sorryt hat you were just being
provocative, though I suppose that can be a remedy for tiresome but
still seems pointless to me.

It wasn't especially provocative, no. There have been times over the
years that certain proponents with potentially viable proposals would
have been encouraged to propose us groups, except for the futility of
the matter. The several of us who keep saying this over and over and
over are quite serious about it, so tone down the paranoia.

So you do know a specific case? I'm not going to debate
hypotheticals. Unless you know of a real person who has or had a real
proposal, I'm not interested--it's pointless.

Everyone on usenet is quite serious. I'm not paranoid--just having a
hard time taking this seriously if it's not a concrete problem.

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer
Seriously, assistance would be welcome, but it's not much good without
a better attitude.  The major work has been accomplished, and only a
few details remain to get things running again.  Why isn't this
positive?

Work? What work? You all chose NOT to make the minimum effort and
instead asked Tim to take over, who needs little encouragement on
grabbing more power.

You don't know what you're talking about, which is not enterily your
fault. We elected to do the work in private, away from the snipers.

Power? >chuckle< what power? It's only been a headache so far.
Seriously--this is the first expression of paranoia I've seen in this
conversation.

Post by Adam H. Kerman
How much trouble is it to send out a monthly checkgroups?

I have no way of knowing. I've never done it and those who do know
have never been interested in educating anyone else. Hell, I've been
told that I couldn't do it or even figure it out unless I had a UNIX
server in my home.

You seem to think Tim is a problem (oho, a personality conflict? on
usenet? Who'd have guessed?) so how about a fullairing. What has he
done before that would lead you to think he'd be a problem now.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Henrietta did not leave a mess, quite the opposite. She left
virtually nothing in the way of supporting documentation that any
hierarchy management coule effectively use, be it an individual or a
committee, but especially a committee.

What documentation would you expect there to be?

A charter written to allow for and describe the duties of the
Committee, you know, for a start.

I cannot imagine why Henrietta, working by herself, would have written
committee documentation.

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

I was the one, and at that time I was the committee chair, who
suggested a moratorium on new groups until we could get established.

I was referring to the moratorium. Isn't it now pointless?

Almost. Once we know that checkgroupos ans such are being honored,
then certainly. maybe it's coming form a hardware admin background,
but I'm a big beleiver in not flipping all the switches without a
reasonable expectaion of success first.

You changed the From line and Tim began issuing them before the default
control.ctl was amended. Don't do that.

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

One bit of mess has been that with Henrietta simply falling off the
radar, more or less, there has been no one who was recognized as being
able to send valid chekgroup messages and the like.

As I've pointed out, you just had to announce new management and new key
if Henrietta hadn't sent it. I still question if key signing is actually
necessary or implemented on all that many servers that take us groups.

So you say. It's not been the indication from others. Even had it
been, I'd still have asked for testing to be done first.

What you did doesn't work anyway.

Post by RTO Trainer
If it's really that eay, I question the effectiveness of it at all,
given that anyone could do it.

Yes, that would be the point. Anybody can send control messages.

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Now, to my point, from teh way you worded your lament, it seemed that
there either was a new group propsal, or that you know of someone with
one waiting in the wings. I'm sorryt hat you were just being
provocative, though I suppose that can be a remedy for tiresome but
still seems pointless to me.

It wasn't especially provocative, no. There have been times over the
years that certain proponents with potentially viable proposals would
have been encouraged to propose us groups, except for the futility of
the matter. The several of us who keep saying this over and over and
over are quite serious about it, so tone down the paranoia.

So you do know a specific case?

Several. What have we all been telling you?

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Seriously, assistance would be welcome, but it's not much good without
a better attitude. The major work has been accomplished, and only a
few details remain to get things running again. Why isn't this
positive?

Work? What work? You all chose NOT to make the minimum effort and
instead asked Tim to take over, who needs little encouragement on
grabbing more power.

You don't know what you're talking about, which is not enterily your
fault. We elected to do the work in private, away from the snipers.

I don't know what you've been doing in private, but I cannot believe it
has anything to do with effective hierarchy administration, which is really
a nothing job.

Post by RTO Trainer
Power? >chuckle< what power? It's only been a headache so far.
Seriously--this is the first expression of paranoia I've seen in this
conversation.

It conflicts with Tim's hat as Bambie, where he's been actively
supporting Big 8 regional newsgroups. But I guess you're all willfully
blind to his antics. Even if Tim hadn't ruined his own reputation, it's
still a conflict of interest. Your committee should be able to see that.

This was a bad mistake.

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman
How much trouble is it to send out a monthly checkgroups?

I have no way of knowing. I've never done it and those who do know
have never been interested in educating anyone else.

Bullshit. Russ goes out of his way to help hierarchy administrators.

If Rob can figure it out, then anyone can.

Post by RTO Trainer
You seem to think Tim is a problem (oho, a personality conflict? on
usenet? Who'd have guessed?) so how about a fullairing. What has he
done before that would lead you to think he'd be a problem now.

You made your choice, so I guess you'll find out. Have fun.

[RTO Trainer]

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Henrietta did not leave a mess, quite the opposite. She left
virtually nothing in the way of supporting documentation that any
hierarchy management coule effectively use, be it an individual or a
committee, but especially a committee.

What documentation would you expect there to be?

A charter written to allow for and describe the duties of the
Committee, you know, for a start.

I cannot imagine why Henrietta, working by herself, would have written
committee documentation.

No kidding?

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

I was the one, and at that time I was the committee chair, who
suggested a moratorium on new groups until we could get established.

I was referring to the moratorium. Isn't it now pointless?

Almost.  Once we know that checkgroupos ans such are being honored,
then certainly.  maybe it's coming form a hardware admin background,
but I'm a big beleiver in not flipping all the switches without a
reasonable expectaion of success first.

You changed the From line and Tim began issuing them before the default
control.ctl was amended. Don't do that.

I don't know what youre talking about. Suggest you address Tim.

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

One bit of mess has been that with Henrietta simply falling off the
radar, more or less, there has been no one who was recognized as being
able to send valid chekgroup messages and the like.

As I've pointed out, you just had to announce new management and new key
if Henrietta hadn't sent it. I still question if key signing is actually
necessary or implemented on all that many servers that take us groups.

So you say.  It's not been the indication from others.  Even had it
been, I'd still have asked for testing to be done first.

What you did doesn't work anyway.

So we aren't done yet. Do you actually have point of your own or are
you just intent on proving mine?

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer
If it's really that eay, I question the effectiveness of it at all,
given that anyone could do it.

Yes, that would be the point. Anybody can send control messages.

The there is no point. It's not controllable. Why does any of this
matter anyway then? Why do we bother?

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Now, to my point, from teh way you worded your lament, it seemed that
there either was a new group propsal, or that you know of someone with
one waiting in the wings. I'm sorryt hat you were just being
provocative, though I suppose that can be a remedy for tiresome but
still seems pointless to me.

It wasn't especially provocative, no. There have been times over the
years that certain proponents with potentially viable proposals would
have been encouraged to propose us groups, except for the futility of
the matter. The several of us who keep saying this over and over and
over are quite serious about it, so tone down the paranoia.

So you do know a specific case?

Several. What have we all been telling you?

You've been feeding me a line unless you can answer the question:
"Where are they?"

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Seriously, assistance would be welcome, but it's not much good without
a better attitude. The major work has been accomplished, and only a
few details remain to get things running again. Why isn't this
positive?

Work? What work? You all chose NOT to make the minimum effort and
instead asked Tim to take over, who needs little encouragement on
grabbing more power.

You don't know what you're talking about, which is not enterily your
fault.  We elected to do the work in private, away from the snipers.

I don't know what you've been doing in private, but I cannot believe it
has anything to do with effective hierarchy administration, which is really
a nothing job.

And yet so powerful.

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer
Power?  >chuckle< what power?  It's only been a headache so far.
Seriously--this is the first expression of paranoia I've seen in this
conversation.

It conflicts with Tim's hat as Bambie, where he's been actively
supporting Big 8 regional newsgroups. But I guess you're all willfully
blind to his antics. Even if Tim hadn't ruined his own reputation, it's
still a conflict of interest. Your committee should be able to see that.
This was a bad mistake.

How?

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman
How much trouble is it to send out a monthly checkgroups?

I have no way of knowing.  I've never done it and those who do know
have never been interested in educating anyone else.

Bullshit. Russ goes out of his way to help hierarchy administrators.

Like you've ben helpful to me, no doubt.

Post by Adam H. Kerman
If Rob can figure it out, then anyone can.

I don't know who Rob it. Don't really care either.

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer
You seem to think Tim is a problem (oho, a personality conflict?  on
usenet?  Who'd have guessed?) so how about a fullairing.  What has he
done before that would lead you to think he'd be a problem now.

You made your choice, so I guess you'll find out. Have fun.

Piss on you.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Henrietta did not leave a mess, quite the opposite. She left
virtually nothing in the way of supporting documentation that any
hierarchy management coule effectively use, be it an individual or a
committee, but especially a committee.

What documentation would you expect there to be?

A charter written to allow for and describe the duties of the
Committee, you know, for a start.

I cannot imagine why Henrietta, working by herself, would have written
committee documentation.

No kidding?

No kidding. No individual, working by herself, would write documentation
for a non-existant committee.

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

I was the one, and at that time I was the committee chair, who
suggested a moratorium on new groups until we could get established.

I was referring to the moratorium. Isn't it now pointless?

Almost.  Once we know that checkgroupos ans such are being honored,
then certainly.  maybe it's coming form a hardware admin background,
but I'm a big beleiver in not flipping all the switches without a
reasonable expectaion of success first.

You changed the From line and Tim began issuing them before the default
control.ctl was amended. Don't do that.

I don't know what youre talking about. Suggest you address Tim.

I am addressing you, the person who expressed concern that checkgroups
might not be honored. This would be a reason why it won't be honored.

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

One bit of mess has been that with Henrietta simply falling off the
radar, more or less, there has been no one who was recognized as being
able to send valid chekgroup messages and the like.

As I've pointed out, you just had to announce new management and new key
if Henrietta hadn't sent it. I still question if key signing is actually
necessary or implemented on all that many servers that take us groups.

So you say. It's not been the indication from others. Even had it
been, I'd still have asked for testing to be done first.

What you did doesn't work anyway.

So we aren't done yet.

You'll never be done. Pathetic.

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer
If it's really that eay, I question the effectiveness of it at all,
given that anyone could do it.

Yes, that would be the point. Anybody can send control messages.

The there is no point. It's not controllable. Why does any of this
matter anyway then? Why do we bother?

You can't ask "why do we bother" not having made an effort.

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Now, to my point, from teh way you worded your lament, it seemed that
there either was a new group propsal, or that you know of someone with
one waiting in the wings. I'm sorryt hat you were just being
provocative, though I suppose that can be a remedy for tiresome but
still seems pointless to me.

It wasn't especially provocative, no. There have been times over the
years that certain proponents with potentially viable proposals would
have been encouraged to propose us groups, except for the futility of
the matter. The several of us who keep saying this over and over and
over are quite serious about it, so tone down the paranoia.

So you do know a specific case?

Several. What have we all been telling you?

"Where are they?"

They might have had an interest in the past. They do not at this time,
not being insane lunatics.

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer
Power? >chuckle< what power? It's only been a headache so far.
Seriously--this is the first expression of paranoia I've seen in this
conversation.

It conflicts with Tim's hat as Bambie, where he's been actively
supporting Big 8 regional newsgroups. But I guess you're all willfully
blind to his antics. Even if Tim hadn't ruined his own reputation, it's
still a conflict of interest. Your committee should be able to see that.
This was a bad mistake.

How?

Asked and answered.

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman
How much trouble is it to send out a monthly checkgroups?

I have no way of knowing.  I've never done it and those who do know
have never been interested in educating anyone else.

Bullshit. Russ goes out of his way to help hierarchy administrators.

Like you've ben helpful to me, no doubt.

How you're being an asshole. Most of the time, Russ is one of the most
helpful people on Usenet. If you don't know who he is, you're not
qualified to administer a hierarchy. Hint: You know that FAQ about
hierarchy administration you were supposed to have read? Look who wrote it.

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer
You seem to think Tim is a problem (oho, a personality conflict?  on
usenet?  Who'd have guessed?) so how about a fullairing.  What has he
done before that would lead you to think he'd be a problem now.

You made your choice, so I guess you'll find out. Have fun.

Piss on you.

Again, that would take effort you're not willing to make.

[Brian Mailman]

Post by Adam H. Kerman
Work? What work? You all chose NOT to make the minimum effort and
instead asked Tim to take over, who needs little encouragement on
grabbing more power.

Something g'ma said about reaping and sowing.

B/

[K. A. Cannon]

RTO Trainer <***@gmail.com> posted
<cc19f083-fcbf-486d-b14b-***@l42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com> in
alt.config on Mon, 15 Sep 2008 21:29:31 -0700 (PDT):

<snip>

Post by RTO Trainer
Seriously, assistance would be welcome, but it's not much good without
a better attitude. The major work has been accomplished, and only a
few details remain to get things running again. Why isn't this
positive?

Since nobody besides the select few of the committee knew any work or
any progress was made I can see why people would have some "attitude"
regarding the whole situation.

Communications have been sadly lacking or nonexistent.

When I was involved it seemed that making sure that people were
informed about what progress was being made was important.
Not now...you've taken a page from the Bambies.
--
K. A. Cannon
kevin.a.cannon at gmail dot com

Don't worry about the world coming to an end today.
It's already tomorrow in Australia.
-Charles Schultz

COOSN-266-06-02374
Hammer of Thor, April 2005
PIERRE SALINGER MEMORIAL HOOK, LINE & SINKER June 2007
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle X 2
#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by K. A. Cannon

Post by RTO Trainer
Seriously, assistance would be welcome, but it's not much good without
a better attitude. The major work has been accomplished, and only a
few details remain to get things running again. Why isn't this
positive?

Since nobody besides the select few of the committee knew any work or
any progress was made I can see why people would have some "attitude"
regarding the whole situation.
Communications have been sadly lacking or nonexistent.
When I was involved it seemed that making sure that people were
informed about what progress was being made was important.
Not now...you've taken a page from the Bambies.

If you were making no progress whatsoever because you were doing
nothing, would you fess up to it in public?

[K. A. Cannon]

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by K. A. Cannon

Post by RTO Trainer
Seriously, assistance would be welcome, but it's not much good without
a better attitude. The major work has been accomplished, and only a
few details remain to get things running again. Why isn't this
positive?

Since nobody besides the select few of the committee knew any work or
any progress was made I can see why people would have some "attitude"
regarding the whole situation.
Communications have been sadly lacking or nonexistent.
When I was involved it seemed that making sure that people were
informed about what progress was being made was important.
Not now...you've taken a page from the Bambies.

If you were making no progress whatsoever because you were doing
nothing, would you fess up to it in public?

Well...It would give one something to report on.
--
K. A. Cannon
kevin.a.cannon at gmail dot com

Don't worry about the world coming to an end today.
It's already tomorrow in Australia.
-Charles Schultz

COOSN-266-06-02374
Hammer of Thor, April 2005
PIERRE SALINGER MEMORIAL HOOK, LINE & SINKER June 2007
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle X 2
#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine

[RTO Trainer]

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by K. A. Cannon

Post by RTO Trainer
Seriously, assistance would be welcome, but it's not much good without
a better attitude.  The major work has been accomplished, and only a
few details remain to get things running again.  Why isn't this
positive?

Since nobody besides the select few of the committee knew any work or
any progress was made I can see why people would have some "attitude"
regarding the whole situation.
Communications have been sadly lacking or nonexistent.
When I was involved it seemed that making sure that people were
informed about what progress was being made was important.
Not now...you've taken a page from the Bambies.

If you were making no progress whatsoever because you were doing
nothing, would you fess up to it in public?

You're an ass. You want an admission? Okay, here it is--no one is
doing any of this as a full time thing. Have there been long
streteches of relative inactivity? You bet. That's life. No
appologies.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by K. A. Cannon

Post by RTO Trainer
Seriously, assistance would be welcome, but it's not much good without
a better attitude. The major work has been accomplished, and only a
few details remain to get things running again. Why isn't this
positive?

Since nobody besides the select few of the committee knew any work or
any progress was made I can see why people would have some "attitude"
regarding the whole situation.
Communications have been sadly lacking or nonexistent.
When I was involved it seemed that making sure that people were
informed about what progress was being made was important.
Not now...you've taken a page from the Bambies.

If you were making no progress whatsoever because you were doing
nothing, would you fess up to it in public?

You're an ass. You want an admission?

I want you to get with it and stop all the nonsense.

Post by RTO Trainer
Okay, here it is--no one is doing any of this as a full time thing.

Full time? Sending a monthly checkgroups without a cron job should take
just a few seconds. With a cron job, set it up once.

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.config on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 16:10:17 -0500, Adam H. Kerman

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer
Okay, here it is--no one is doing any of this as a full time thing.

Full time? Sending a monthly checkgroups without a cron job should take
just a few seconds. With a cron job, set it up once.

You're talking to a Google Grouper who uses Internet Explorer on
Windows Vista, Adam.

Of course, that doesn't necessarily make him unqualified to be a
hierarchy admin, though his short temper and thin skin might.

My delight at seeing signs of progress in us.* is beginning to fade,
as is my interest in offering help.

[RTO Trainer]

Post by Peter J Ross
In alt.config on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 16:10:17 -0500, Adam H. Kerman

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer
Okay, here it is--no one is doing any of this as a full time thing.

Full time? Sending a monthly checkgroups without a cron job should take
just a few seconds. With a cron job, set it up once.

You're talking to a Google Grouper who uses Internet Explorer on
Windows Vista, Adam.
Of course, that doesn't necessarily make him unqualified to be a
hierarchy admin, though his short temper and thin skin might.
My delight at seeing signs of progress in us.* is beginning to fade,
as is my interest in offering help.

Show me any evidence of delight you've displayed.

All I've seen is a couple of "Smartest Men in the F**king Universe"
trainees walk in tell us how stupid we are and then shit on
everything.

That kind of delight I can do without.

[Peter J Ross]

In alt.config on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 14:48:57 -0700 (PDT), RTO Trainer
<...>

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Peter J Ross
My delight at seeing signs of progress in us.* is beginning to fade,
as is my interest in offering help.

Show me any evidence of delight you've displayed.

See the sentence to which you've just responded.

I didn't realise how pleased I was about the revival of us.* until
disappointment began to set in, just after you started posting.

[K. A. Cannon]

On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 14:48:57 -0700 (PDT), RTO Trainer

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Peter J Ross
In alt.config on Tue, 16 Sep 2008 16:10:17 -0500, Adam H. Kerman

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer
Okay, here it is--no one is doing any of this as a full time thing.

Full time? Sending a monthly checkgroups without a cron job should take
just a few seconds. With a cron job, set it up once.

You're talking to a Google Grouper who uses Internet Explorer on
Windows Vista, Adam.
Of course, that doesn't necessarily make him unqualified to be a
hierarchy admin, though his short temper and thin skin might.
My delight at seeing signs of progress in us.* is beginning to fade,
as is my interest in offering help.

Show me any evidence of delight you've displayed.

You don't know PJR...do not make grandiose assumptions.

Post by RTO Trainer
All I've seen is a couple of "Smartest Men in the F**king Universe"
trainees walk in tell us how stupid we are and then shit on
everything.

PJR has completed that course. Top of his class.

You aren't being shit on...you are being asked semi-politely and you
became defensive. Try seeing it from an objective viewpoint....play
devils advocate.

Post by RTO Trainer
That kind of delight I can do without.

Okey Dokey.
--
K. A. Cannon
kevin.a.cannon at gmail.com.

COOSN-266-06-02374
Hammer of Thor, April 2005
PIERRE SALINGER MEMORIAL HOOK, LINE & SINKER June 2007
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle X 2
#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by Peter J Ross

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer
Okay, here it is--no one is doing any of this as a full time thing.

Full time? Sending a monthly checkgroups without a cron job should take
just a few seconds. With a cron job, set it up once.

You're talking to a Google Grouper who uses Internet Explorer on
Windows Vista, Adam.

I noticed he was googing but restrained myself from commenting.

[RTO Trainer]

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by K. A. Cannon

Post by RTO Trainer
Seriously, assistance would be welcome, but it's not much good without
a better attitude. The major work has been accomplished, and only a
few details remain to get things running again. Why isn't this
positive?

Since nobody besides the select few of the committee knew any work or
any progress was made I can see why people would have some "attitude"
regarding the whole situation.
Communications have been sadly lacking or nonexistent.
When I was involved it seemed that making sure that people were
informed about what progress was being made was important.
Not now...you've taken a page from the Bambies.

If you were making no progress whatsoever because you were doing
nothing, would you fess up to it in public?

You're an ass.  You want an admission?

I want you to get with it and stop all the nonsense.

You can't even articulate clearly what you think the "nonsense" is.

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Okay, here it is--no one is doing any of this as a full time thing.

Full time? Sending a monthly checkgroups without a cron job should take
just a few seconds. With a cron job, set it up once.- Hide quoted text -

Final refuge of the failed troll--deliberate obtuseness.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by RTO Trainer
Okay, here it is--no one is doing any of this as a full time thing.

Full time? Sending a monthly checkgroups without a cron job should take
just a few seconds. With a cron job, set it up once.- Hide quoted text -

Final refuge of the failed troll--deliberate obtuseness.

You made a seriously deranged comment about how you believe hierarchy
administration is a full-time job. I'm not pretending to understand your
thinking, no, not at all.

[K. A. Cannon]

On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 14:41:34 -0700 (PDT), RTO Trainer

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by K. A. Cannon

Post by RTO Trainer
Seriously, assistance would be welcome, but it's not much good without
a better attitude. The major work has been accomplished, and only a
few details remain to get things running again. Why isn't this
positive?

Since nobody besides the select few of the committee knew any work or
any progress was made I can see why people would have some "attitude"
regarding the whole situation.
Communications have been sadly lacking or nonexistent.
When I was involved it seemed that making sure that people were
informed about what progress was being made was important.
Not now...you've taken a page from the Bambies.

If you were making no progress whatsoever because you were doing
nothing, would you fess up to it in public?

You're an ass.  You want an admission?

I want you to get with it and stop all the nonsense.

You can't even articulate clearly what you think the "nonsense" is.

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Okay, here it is--no one is doing any of this as a full time thing.

Full time? Sending a monthly checkgroups without a cron job should take
just a few seconds. With a cron job, set it up once.- Hide quoted text -

Final refuge of the failed troll--deliberate obtuseness.

And you and the committee want to manage the hierarchy?

GIYF...google cron....cron is a nifty little tool used in linux/unix
OS's to run certain daily, weekly, monthly programs or utilities
automagically. Say...sending a check groups message.

I don't think you wanted to make yourself out in this way but you
have. It would be best if you were more familiar with understanding
UseNet and the stuff that makes it work.

Using google gropes....jeesh...
--
K. A. Cannon
kevin.a.cannon at gmail.com.

COOSN-266-06-02374
Hammer of Thor, April 2005
PIERRE SALINGER MEMORIAL HOOK, LINE & SINKER June 2007
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle X 2
#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine

[RTO Trainer]

Post by K. A. Cannon
<snip>

Post by RTO Trainer
Seriously, assistance would be welcome, but it's not much good without
a better attitude.  The major work has been accomplished, and only a
few details remain to get things running again.  Why isn't this
positive?

Since nobody besides the select few of the committee knew any work or
any progress was made I can see why people would have some "attitude"
regarding the whole situation.
Communications have been sadly lacking or nonexistent.
When I was involved it seemed that making sure that people were
informed about what progress was being made was important.
Not now...you've taken a page from the Bambies.

If you didn't know it's because you haven't been paying attention.

[K. A. Cannon]

On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 13:27:51 -0700 (PDT), RTO Trainer

Post by RTO Trainer

Post by K. A. Cannon
<snip>

Post by RTO Trainer
Seriously, assistance would be welcome, but it's not much good without
a better attitude.  The major work has been accomplished, and only a
few details remain to get things running again.  Why isn't this
positive?

Since nobody besides the select few of the committee knew any work or
any progress was made I can see why people would have some "attitude"
regarding the whole situation.
Communications have been sadly lacking or nonexistent.
When I was involved it seemed that making sure that people were
informed about what progress was being made was important.
Not now...you've taken a page from the Bambies.

If you didn't know it's because you haven't been paying attention.

Pating attention to what??? What should I have paid attention to?

All those updates poasted to us.config?
The onse like:
"We are making progress...this is what we are doing...sorry for the
delay in some concrete stuff but this is a part time gig for all of
us"

Oh yea...I saw all of those.....there was...gee....one in about an 8
month period.

Is it unreasonable to expect some form of update?
--
K. A. Cannon
kevin.a.cannon at gmail.com.

COOSN-266-06-02374
Hammer of Thor, April 2005
PIERRE SALINGER MEMORIAL HOOK, LINE & SINKER June 2007
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle X 2
#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine

[edward ohare]

On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 11:23:16 -0400, K. A. Cannon

Post by K. A. Cannon
Since nobody besides the select few of the committee knew any work or
any progress was made I can see why people would have some "attitude"
regarding the whole situation.

After HT stopped posting to us.config, it went dead quiet. If, back
in the old days, you took out the posts and threads where HT was
targeted, it was almost the same.

I said previously that had there been a group proposal, the Committee
would have acted. Multiple people denied the Committee could have
acted.

Now that Tim as sent a checkgroups, the complaint has changed to the
Committee not saying it could have acted. So the Committee shoots
down whatever the current complaint is and the complainer reflavors it
a bit and tries again... just to have it shot down again.

Post by K. A. Cannon
Communications have been sadly lacking or nonexistent.
When I was involved it seemed that making sure that people were
informed about what progress was being made was important.
Not now...you've taken a page from the Bambies.

Go back and read the IC reports. You'll find until the last one, not
much progress at all was being made. A last minute scramble got the
documents HT wanted produced... just in time for her to reject them.

And after multiple complaints that the Committee wasn't in a position
to do anything, now proof to the contrary has changed that to no body
was told this was the case, and the example of communication that
nothing was happening with the IC is being held up as an better
situation.

[Brian Mailman]

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by Brian Mailman

Post by Adam H. Kerman
Just what exactly is going on here?

Take a look at the domain. That should inform you that there's some
form of malfeasance involved.

In another message in us.config, Edward O'Hare stated that the us.*
committee asked Tim to hold the key. So what's going on here is exactly
what it looks like: another power grab.

Disgusting.

I don't remember Edward O'Hare being any too fond of the bamby's antics.

Oh well. The thing about soap operas is there's usually a simple
solution that no one employs so as to keep the melodrama going.

B/

[Chris Jacobs]

Post by Brian Mailman
Take a look at the domain. That should inform you that there's some
form of malfeasance involved.
B/

What form of malfeasance?

{entry}
## US (United States of America)
# Contact: ***@usenetnews.us
# URL: http://www.usenetnews.us/
# Admin group: us.config
checkgroups:***@usenetnews.us:us.*:doit
newgroup:***@usenetnews.us:us.*:doit
rmgroup:***@usenetnews.us:us.*:doit
{/entry}

It seems likely that the checkgroups by us-***@lists.killfile.org
was triggered by the domain @usenetnews.us not answering its email.

But even while not answering your email is bad behaviour I doubt if it
is severe enough to be called a malfeasance.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by Chris Jacobs

Post by Brian Mailman
Take a look at the domain. That should inform you that there's some
form of malfeasance involved.

What form of malfeasance?
## US (United States of America)
# URL: http://www.usenetnews.us/
# Admin group: us.config

Whoops! You and Brian have brought to my attention that my criticism
missed the mark. The US Committee is incapable of having checkgroups and
newgroup and rmgroup messages issued by its "technical authority".

My congratulations, Chris: You have proven yourself to be not as
incompetent as Tim Skirvin.

[Chris Jacobs]

Post by Adam H. Kerman
Whoops! You and Brian have brought to my attention that my criticism
missed the mark. The US Committee is incapable of having checkgroups and
newgroup and rmgroup messages issued by its "technical authority".

More or less.

They are indeed incapable of having those control messages acted upon
automatically.

However, they *are* capable of mailing them to the site operators, which
is quite a feat, given that the default for control.ctl is to add lines
which prevent this.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by Chris Jacobs

Post by Adam H. Kerman
Whoops! You and Brian have brought to my attention that my criticism
missed the mark. The US Committee is incapable of having checkgroups and
newgroup and rmgroup messages issued by its "technical authority".

More or less.
They are indeed incapable of having those control messages acted upon
automatically.

Chris, you were doing so well there for one message, pointing out
something obvious that I had missed.

You're wrong. If Tim Skirvin has issued a checkgroups message with a
different From address, then he's not issuing them on behalf of the US
Committee. My statement was unambiguous.

You're also wrong. Of course such messages can be acted upon
automatically with matching entries in control.ctl, a file meant to be
edited locally.

Post by Chris Jacobs
However, they *are* capable of mailing them to the site operators, which
is quite a feat, given that the default for control.ctl is to add lines
which prevent this.

If they mail it, it's no longer a control message. You're just being silly.

[Chris Jacobs]

Post by Adam H. Kerman
You're wrong. If Tim Skirvin has issued a checkgroups message with a
different From address, then he's not issuing them on behalf of the US
Committee. My statement was unambiguous.
You're also wrong. Of course such messages can be acted upon
automatically with matching entries in control.ctl, a file meant to be
edited locally.

Post by Chris Jacobs
However, they *are* capable of mailing them to the site operators, which
is quite a feat, given that the default for control.ctl is to add lines
which prevent this.

If they mail it, it's no longer a control message. You're just being silly.

You missed my point.

The site operators are surely capable enough to distinguish between mail
sent to them by their news utilities and mail sent to them by people who
try to impersonate those news utilities, and to silently discard the
former.

Tim was able to had his checkgroups newsmail mailed by these news
utilities.

Not anybody can do that.
Only people who can read and understand the control.ctl can do that.

If the entry of the US Committee says checkgroups from a different
address are to be mailed, not dropped, then surely checkgroups from a
different address can sometimes be on behalf of them.

As I understand the control.ctl it thusly has a built-in way to send
us.* checkgroups even when their standard address is unavailable.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by Chris Jacobs

Post by Adam H. Kerman
You're wrong. If Tim Skirvin has issued a checkgroups message with a
different From address, then he's not issuing them on behalf of the US
Committee. My statement was unambiguous.
You're also wrong. Of course such messages can be acted upon
automatically with matching entries in control.ctl, a file meant to be
edited locally.

Post by Chris Jacobs
However, they *are* capable of mailing them to the site operators, which
is quite a feat, given that the default for control.ctl is to add lines
which prevent this.

If they mail it, it's no longer a control message. You're just being silly.

You missed my point.

No, Chris, I didn't. Your point was silly. Hierarchies are not properly
managed in that manner. There's no reason for any News administrator to
pay any attention to that request sent in an email message.

Post by Chris Jacobs
The site operators are surely capable enough to distinguish between mail
sent to them by their news utilities and mail sent to them by people who
try to impersonate those news utilities, and to silently discard the
former.
Tim was able to had his checkgroups newsmail mailed by these news
utilities.

Your English is dreadful but I think you are talking about changing
settings in control.ctl locally, something that Tim is not able to do.

Post by Chris Jacobs
If the entry of the US Committee says checkgroups from a different
address are to be mailed, not dropped, then surely checkgroups from a
different address can sometimes be on behalf of them.

Why would any News administrator who doesn't want to see a checkgroups
message in a mailbox do that? It's not up to the hierarchy
administrator. What you suggest is simply not done because it leaves the
Mail system vulnerable to control message attacks. This abuse has
happened a number of time. Do you know what a Denial of Service attack
is? Bombarding Usenet with hundreds of thousands of control messages in
a short period of time is a way of shutting down News servers on small
networks. It will also shut down their Mail servers if any control
messages are gated to Mail.

No News administrator with any experience will allow any control message
to be gated to Mail.

Post by Chris Jacobs
As I understand the control.ctl it thusly has a built-in way to send
us.* checkgroups even when their standard address is unavailable.

Nope. It's a feature that should never be used.

Conclusion: Tim should have never sent that checkgroups before the
default control.ctl was changed. Your suggestion that control messages
be mailed to News administrators is bad advice due to system vulnerability.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Post by Adam H. Kerman

Post by Chris Jacobs

Post by Brian Mailman
Take a look at the domain. That should inform you that there's some
form of malfeasance involved.

What form of malfeasance?
## US (United States of America)
# URL: http://www.usenetnews.us/
# Admin group: us.config

Whoops! You and Brian have brought to my attention that my criticism
missed the mark. The US Committee is incapable of having checkgroups and
newgroup and rmgroup messages issued by its "technical authority".
My congratulations, Chris: You have proven yourself to be not as
incompetent as Tim Skirvin.

Looks like you got some action taken on this issue, Chris.

[K. A. Cannon]

On Fri, 12 Sep 2008 17:18:52 +0000 (UTC), Chris Jacobs

Post by Chris Jacobs

Post by Brian Mailman
Take a look at the domain. That should inform you that there's some
form of malfeasance involved.
B/

What form of malfeasance?
{entry}
## US (United States of America)

Final-Recipient: rfc822; ***@usenetnews.us
Action: failed
Status: 5.0.0
Diagnostic-Code: X-Postfix; Host or domain name not found. Name
service error

Post by Chris Jacobs
# URL: http://www.usenetnews.us/

404...

Post by Chris Jacobs
# Admin group: us.config
{/entry}

Yuh...right....

Post by Chris Jacobs
But even while not answering your email is bad behaviour I doubt if it
is severe enough to be called a malfeasance.

You do not get it.
--
K. A. Cannon
kevin.a.cannon at gmail.com.

COOSN-266-06-02374
Hammer of Thor, April 2005
PIERRE SALINGER MEMORIAL HOOK, LINE & SINKER June 2007
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle X 2
#9 People ruining UseNet lits.
#6 Top Assholes on the Net lits.
#5 Most hated Usenetizens of all time
#15 AUK psychos and felons lits
#5 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine

[Brian Mailman]

Post by Chris Jacobs

Post by Brian Mailman
Take a look at the domain. That should inform you that there's some
form of malfeasance involved.

What form of malfeasance?

Mischief, then.

[Russ Allbery]

Post by Chris Jacobs
Where can I get a copy of pubkey B73CAF1B signed with CA57AD7C ?

gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys B73CAF1B

Or your friendly neighborhood key server, such as http://pgpkeys.mit.edu/

[Julien ÉLIE]

Hi Russ,

Post by Russ Allbery

Post by Chris Jacobs
Where can I get a copy of pubkey B73CAF1B signed with CA57AD7C ?

gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys B73CAF1B
Or your friendly neighborhood key server, such as http://pgpkeys.mit.edu/

It looks as though there were some news regarding us.* and that control.ctl
needs to be updated with that (untraceable?) key:

<http://groups.google.fr/group/us.config/browse_frm/thread/2dbb0064fee82f0a#>


Tim, could you please provide it?

[Russ Allbery]

Post by Julien ÉLIE
It looks as though there were some news regarding us.* and that
<http://groups.google.fr/group/us.config/browse_frm/thread/2dbb0064fee82f0a#>
Tim, could you please provide it?

He's probably waiting on me to answer his e-mail, which I haven't done
just because I'm busy.

[Tim Skirvin]

Post by Julien ÉLIE
It looks as though there were some news regarding us.* and that control.ctl

Yes. I'm working with Russ on getting the key updated, and with
the rest of the us.* Committee to figure out where to put up the new
permanent web site, so we can get that added to the control.ctl as well.

In the short term, I'm going to be signing controls with the new
key 0xB73CAF1B (available from key servers everywhere). checkgroups will
be posted once a month or so, and newgroups/rmgroups whenever they're
appropriate.

- Tim Skirvin (***@killfile.org)
us.* Control

[Chris Jacobs]

Post by Tim Skirvin

Post by Julien ÉLIE
It looks as though there were some news regarding us.* and that control.ctl

Yes. I'm working with Russ on getting the key updated, and with
the rest of the us.* Committee to figure out where to put up the new
permanent web site, so we can get that added to the control.ctl as well.
In the short term, I'm going to be signing controls with the new
key 0xB73CAF1B (available from key servers everywhere). checkgroups will
be posted once a month or so, and newgroups/rmgroups whenever they're
appropriate.
us.* Control

Tim, this does not answer my question which I started this thread with.

The first thing you have to keep in mind if you want to verify is
to remember what you wanted to verify and not to verify something else
instead.

I saw a checkgroups claiming to be From: us-***@lists.killfile.org .
It was PGP-signed.
I wanted to verify, for whatever reason or maybe without reason (I am
not always reasonable) if it was indeed sent by someone who controled
the email address us-***@lists.killfile.org .

There is a keyserver which pings email addresses / userids of keys,
and signs the key if the ping returns.

This server is not generally trusted, but it happens that I trust it.

Can you provide a copy of key B73CAF1B signed by that server?

[Julien ÉLIE]

Hi Chris,

Post by Chris Jacobs
There is a keyserver which pings email addresses / userids of keys,
and signs the key if the ping returns.
This server is not generally trusted, but it happens that I trust it.
Can you provide a copy of key B73CAF1B signed by that server?

Why don't you just send an email to that address?
With only one line "Could you please send me your public PGP key
for us.*?" :)

How does the ping work? Is a MX server obliged to tell whether
a local address exist? (Otherwise, you need to effectively
send an e-mail!)

[Chris Jacobs]

Post by Julien ÉLIE
How does the ping work? Is a MX server obliged to tell whether
a local address exist? (Otherwise, you need to effectively
send an e-mail!)

The ping works by sending an email.

[Chris Jacobs]

Post by Julien ÉLIE
Why don't you just send an email to that address?

Ok. I'll try that too.

Post by Julien ÉLIE
With only one line "Could you please send me your public PGP key
for us.*?" :)

I make it two lines, the second is "And do please add an In-Reply-To: header."

[Ralf Döblitz]

Post by Chris Jacobs

Post by Julien ÉLIE
Why don't you just send an email to that address?

Ok. I'll try that too.

Post by Julien ÉLIE
With only one line "Could you please send me your public PGP key
for us.*?" :)

I make it two lines, the second is "And do please add an In-Reply-To: header."

Message-Ids can quite easily grabbed from logs. To check control of the
address it might be better to sedn a mail containing a unique token
to the questionable mail address and ask for a signed reply containg
that token. I know several people who use this method to verify control
of an email address before signing a key.

Ralf

[Chris Jacobs]

Post by Ralf Döblitz
and ask for a signed reply

Actually the reply I got was signed.

Unfortunately the sign did not check due to a bug in Windows Mail.

***@zhaum:~$ gpg --verify signature.asc ATT00007.txt
gpg: Signature made zo 14 sep 2008 19:46:19 CEST using DSA key ID 0C2EE21D
gpg: BAD signature from "Tim Skirvin <***@stanford.edu>"

That is due to Windows Mail saving the ATT00007.txt attachment without the headers:

{quote}
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
{/quote}

while the headers actually are part of the signed text.

[Tim Skirvin]

Post by Chris Jacobs
There is a keyserver which pings email addresses / userids of keys,
and signs the key if the ping returns.

Okay, I didn't understand this until just now. I've just had that
key service sign the key. You (or anybody else) can search for it at:

http://keyserver1.pgp.com/

Post by Chris Jacobs
Can you provide a copy of key B73CAF1B signed by that server?

Do you need me to specifically post it, or can you download it?

- Tim Skirvin (***@killfile.org)
Control, us.*

[Chris Jacobs]

Post by Tim Skirvin
Do you need me to specifically post it, or can you download it?

pub 1024D/B73CAF1B 2008-08-29
uid us.* Hierarchy Control <us-***@lists.killfile.org>
sig 0C2EE21D 2008-08-29 Tim Skirvin <***@stanford.edu>
sig 3 B73CAF1B 2008-08-29 us.* Hierarchy Control <us-***@lists.killfile.org>
sig CA57AD7C 2008-09-14 PGP Global Directory Verification Key
sub 4096g/6EF188A7 2008-08-29
sig B73CAF1B 2008-08-29 us.* Hierarchy Control <us-***@lists.killfile.org>

[edward ohare]

Post by Russ Allbery

Post by Chris Jacobs
Where can I get a copy of pubkey B73CAF1B signed with CA57AD7C ?

gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys B73CAF1B
Or your friendly neighborhood key server, such as http://pgpkeys.mit.edu/

Thank you for promptly providing this information!