On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 15:44:44 +0000, cdba wrote:

> Jim <me@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>> Abstract
>
>> This document provides a minimum set of guidelines for Network
>> Etiquette (Netiquette) which organizations may take and adapt for
>> their own use.
>
>> A quideline is not policy.
>
> Usenet guidelines are a.o.l.s policy. We doubt anybody would
> dispute that.

Then you are wrong again. I dispute it.

>> Other specific information from the "guideline":
>
>> - Forging of news articles is generally censured. You can protect
>> yourself from forgeries by using software which generates a
>> manipulation detection "fingerprint", such as PGP (in the US).
>
> pgp does not protect anybody from forgeries because it is not
> mandatory to use pgp. The reason it is not mandatory to use pgp is
> because 99.9999999% of all internet users hate it.

Cite your source or you'll not be taken seriously.

> Furthermore, it was shown in an earlier post that only pgp in the
> form of a mime attachment is acceptable. Inline pgp is a
> netiquette violation.

Incorrect again. The quote you are using is from a discussion by
Scott Moynes. This is not the official RFC 1855 Netiquette guideline.

> Nice try, though.

I have cited facts. You have not. Thank you for playing.

Jim

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 2003-12-22, cdba@cdba.org <cdba@cdba.org> rambled:

>
> Usenet guidelines are a.o.l.s policy. We doubt anybody would
> dispute that.
>

I dispute it as well. I can post whatever I want in any newsgroup.
Whether or not anybody replies is up to them, I could just as easily be
killfiled for continually using OE in a linux newsgroup.

The other users of a newsgroup decide what is acceptable behaviour by
whether or not they reply to you, tell you about your misbehaviour or
just plain KF you.

Speaking of which, get back under your bridge troll.

PLONK

- --
Billy
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/55vLoOMCLVDeF1sRAjB9AJ0fx5eyLE48+GKGH1ZKFdygToAeTw CcCHQn
vIOvbx9oBNfI8V3gTEUc45Q=
=hdbM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Billy Watt <newsspam@cjwatt.plus.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1

pgp trash troll delete

> On 2003-12-22, cdba@cdba.org <cdba@cdba.org> rambled:

> > Usenet guidelines are a.o.l.s policy. We doubt anybody would
> > dispute that.

> I dispute it as well. I can post whatever I want in any newsgroup.

Sure you can. But it is always wiser to show consideration for
others. Now if you can't put your pgp in either the headers or a
mime attachment you might consider not using it at all. pgp makes
your posts harder to read, harder to respond to, and it is just
plain butt-ugly.

Even more, there is no _reason_ to use pgp in this group. It
doesn't prevent anybody from impersonating you, and even if it did,
so what?

We have been using usenet since about 1992 and we have never seen a
newsgroup where pgp has proliferated. Some of you seem to think it
is cool or something. A gadget. Who knows? But it interferes
with others enjoyment of the internet and it is there for no
reason.

Put pgp in a mime attachment. Put it in the headers. But get it
out of our faces. Please.

Thank you.

cordially, as always,

rm