🚀 go-pugleaf

system@codeworks.gen.nz (Wayne W. McDougall) writes:

[...]

>> May I suggest that unilaterally cancelling 450k of messages, without even
>> announcing your intentions in advance, is extreme in itself.

[...]

>I believe that once a poster has violated the rights of readers of a
>newsgroup to read messages in accordance with the parameters for that
>group, and blatantly abuses clear guidelines and complaints, then simple,
>reversible actions against their messages can be justified. I don't expect
>you to agree, but I hope you can see it is a valid alternative view.

Whould it be possable for you to use NoCeMs reather then cancels.  By the
use of NoCeMs you create an accountable and effecent way of noterfing
peaple that the posts should not be read.  Content based theard party
cancels should never be considered justerfied.

In addtion for you to clime that you have the support of the public, you
must act in public.


-- 
Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia see the url in my header. 
Never trust a country with more peaple then sheep.  /\ /\ /\  
Save the ABC Is $0.08 per day too much to pay?     (  X  X  )
I can't walk but I can fly. It's lucky to be ducky  \/ \/ \/