|
|
Posted by ah on 10/29/05 23:35
Phillip Kyle wrote:
> ah <splifingate@gmail.com> verbally sodomised in
> news:23e8f.31979$gF4.23048@trnddc07:
>
>> Phillip Kyle wrote:
>>> peterparsnip@gmail.com (Peter Parsnip) verbally sodomised in
>>> news:djmbqc$46j$6@blackhelicopter.databasix.com:
>>>
>>>> Be still! and revere Phillip Kyle, who blessed us with their presence
>>>> on 25 Oct 2005...
>>>>
>>>>> peterparsnip@gmail.com (Peter Parsnip) verbally sodomised in
>>>>> news:djlumc$set$1@blackhelicopter.databasix.com:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Be still! and revere Phillip Kyle, who blessed us with their
>>>>>> presence on 25 Oct 2005...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ted Capuano <lx3nwn7@kzhg6.com> verbally sodomised in
>>>>>>> news:ko0rl1tncp7t19943jqcndm65mj5ib0htb@4ax.com:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 17:23:52 +0000 (UTC), "Richard Dewsbery"
>>>>>>>> <richard@dewsbery.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Yes, it's that special time again. So please do not feed the
>>>>>>>>>trolls. Particularly the cross-posting variety.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Are you the Richard Dewsbery who wrote this to the now exposed
>>>>>>>> private mailing list "ng_abuse"?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <Quote>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ISPs have to tread warily where posters using their services are
>>>>>>>> libelling other people. Although I am not a media lawyer, I would
>>>>>>>> cite as authority for the proposition that an ISP can be liable
>>>>>>>> for acts of its subscribers the case of Godfrey vs Demon Internet.
>>>>>>>> Although the case was ultimately settled out of court by Demon, a
>>>>>>>> first instance ruling had held that they could be liable for
>>>>>>>> carrying posts authored by a third party if they didn't remove the
>>>>>>>> posts when asked from the servers.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The effect of this is to make all ISPs think carefully about
>>>>>>>> whether they want bloody nuisances as customers, as each time the
>>>>>>>> nuisance posts something insulting the victim can complain, and if
>>>>>>>> the message isn't deleted at source, the ISP gets to pay damages.
>>>>>>>> After a few complaints from different individuals, the ISP is well
>>>>>>>> advised to pull the account rather than risk missing a few
>>>>>>>> deletions and getting whacked by a High Court defamation suit.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I gather that some of the current crop of most virulent trolls may
>>>>>>>> be real people, with an academic access to the net. Either the
>>>>>>>> academic establishment is acting as its own ISP, or it has an
>>>>>>>> outside ISP - it matters not, a few cease and desist letters and
>>>>>>>> either ought to pull the offenders' net priveleges. Regardless of
>>>>>>>> what certain news server admins may think about it (letters
>>>>>>>> involving lawyers in suits usually end up on more important
>>>>>>>> desks).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What we need is concrete evidence of how the messages are being
>>>>>>>> posted, and by whom and to what servers; some innocent victims who
>>>>>>>> have been the subject of defamatory postings; and some sharply-
>>>>>>>> worded letters before action to the ISP or establishment through
>>>>>>>> which the abuse has been posted. Sledgehammer to crack a nut, but
>>>>>>>> it seems that the only other solutions require us to put up with
>>>>>>>> the little gits. I'll happily help out with any letters before
>>>>>>>> action - with the provisos that I'm not an expert on defamation,
>>>>>>>> nor will I be involved in any litigation either as claimant or
>>>>>>>> representative.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> </Quote>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, he's also the kind gentleman who sent me this nice email:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <Quote>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> From : Richard Dewsbery <richard@dewsbery.freeserve.co.uk>
>>>>>>> Sent : Saturday, January 3, 2004 1:07 PM
>>>>>>> To : <philkyle2003@hotmail.com>
>>>>>>> Subject : Crossposting Twats
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> MIME-Version: 1.0
>>>>>>> Received: from dswu232.btconnect.com ([193.113.154.43]) by
>>>>>>> mc11-f7.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Sat, 3
>>>>>>> Jan 2004 05:09:02 -0800 Received: from xpbox (actually host
>>>>>>> 242.116.120.213.in-addr.arpa) by dswu232 with SMTP-CUST (XT-PP);
>>>>>>> Sat, 3 Jan 2004 13:07:38 +0000 X-Message-Info:
>>>>>>> JGTYoYF78jExmRhYTKFgsFwAHHwYGw7B X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>>>>>>> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
>>>>>>> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
>>>>>>> Return-Path: richard@dewsbery.freeserve.co.uk
>>>>>>> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Jan 2004 13:09:03.0051 (UTC)
>>>>>>> FILETIME=[C26DC9B0:01C3D1FA]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
>>>>>>> boundary="----=_NextPart_000_008D_01C3D1FA.834FA550"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
>>>>>>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Are you the twat that is cross-posting all sorts of garbage to half
>>>>>>> the UK newsgroups, or an unwittin g victim of some other twat using
>>>>>>> your website address?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> R M Dewsbery
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> </Quote>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Looks like a clown we should go after :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>> Indeedy. Let's just say URC for good measure.
>>>>>
>>>>> Imagine if I was a completely innocent poster with that email address
>>>>> and that landed in it. Do you think I'd reply?
>>>>
>>>> I can't help but feel that I would be committing suicide if my name
>>>> was R M Dingleberry.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm sure he got teased at school. I bet he became a hall monitor so he
>>> could wreak his vengance by being a jobsworth.
>>
>> 'jobsworth' . . . I like that.
>>
>> We never had anything like that when I was growing up.
>
> COunt yourself lucky. Lots of adult jobsworths as well. Most of them seem
> to reside in uk.*
Hmmm . . . there might be something to this.
Are they all Catholic?
--
ah
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|