Moderator Q

In article <0001HW.C39EE13F02A5EFB3F04906D8 DeleteThis @newsgroups.comcast.net>,
J.J. O'Shea <try.not.to DeleteThis @but.see.sig> wrote:

> On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 17:21:31 -0500, Jack wrote
> (in article
> <9c6161b0-8faa-43ae-ab45-dba7ec99a778 DeleteThis @e4g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>):
>
> > Is c.s.m.s. moderated?
>
> No.
>
> > Can all the spurious garbage be dumped?
>
> Yes, if you have:
>
> 1 a good newsfeed
>
> 2 a good newsreader
>
> 3 both

How do you do it with just a good newsreader? I've looked at the
headers of some of the sporge, and there doesn't seem to be anything
unique that they share, so there's nothing to filter on.

--
Barry Margolin, barmar DeleteThis @alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***
*** PLEASE don't copy me on replies, I'll read them in the group ***

In article <barmar-880F80.02090901012008.RemoveThis@comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
Barry Margolin <barmar.RemoveThis@alum.mit.edu> wrote:

> In article <0001HW.C39EE13F02A5EFB3F04906D8.RemoveThis@newsgroups.comcast.net>,
> J.J. O'Shea <try.not.to.RemoveThis@but.see.sig> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 17:21:31 -0500, Jack wrote
> > (in article
> > <9c6161b0-8faa-43ae-ab45-dba7ec99a778.RemoveThis@e4g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>):
> >
> > > Is c.s.m.s. moderated?
> >
> > No.
> >
> > > Can all the spurious garbage be dumped?
> >
> > Yes, if you have:
> >
> > 1 a good newsfeed
> >
> > 2 a good newsreader
> >
> > 3 both
>
> How do you do it with just a good newsreader? I've looked at the
> headers of some of the sporge, and there doesn't seem to be anything
> unique that they share, so there's nothing to filter on.

Keep looking. There are certain things you can filter. ; )

--
Note: Please send all responses to the relevant news group. If you
must contact me through e-mail, let me know when you send email to
this address so that your email doesn't get eaten by my SPAM filter.

JR

On Tue, 1 Jan 2008 02:09:09 -0500, Barry Margolin wrote
(in article <barmar-880F80.02090901012008.TakeThisOut@comcast.dca.giganews.com>):

> In article <0001HW.C39EE13F02A5EFB3F04906D8.TakeThisOut@newsgroups.comcast.net>,
> J.J. O'Shea <try.not.to.TakeThisOut@but.see.sig> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 17:21:31 -0500, Jack wrote
>> (in article
>> <9c6161b0-8faa-43ae-ab45-dba7ec99a778.TakeThisOut@e4g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>):
>>
>>> Is c.s.m.s. moderated?
>>
>> No.
>>
>>> Can all the spurious garbage be dumped?
>>
>> Yes, if you have:
>>
>> 1 a good newsfeed
>>
>> 2 a good newsreader
>>
>> 3 both
>
> How do you do it with just a good newsreader? I've looked at the
> headers of some of the sporge, and there doesn't seem to be anything
> unique that they share, so there's nothing to filter on.
>
>

He keeps changing the NNTP posting host, but typically he drops between 50
and 100 sporges per host. Filtering on the host will kill 'em 50 to 100 at a
time. He also hates RoadRunner; filtering on RoadRunner nails large numbers
of sporges. Also, he was using quotes from Orwell's _1984_ to sporge; the
full text of _1984_ is available at, among other places,
<http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks01/0100021.txt> and proved most useful in
designing anti-sporge filters. Finally, there is a distinct European cast to
his attack; filtering on French and Polish and Czech and Ukrainian posts gets
rid of not only his sporges, but a lot of spam as well.

This gentleman, or someone like him, has been mounting sporge attacks since
at least August 2007, including on several other newsgroups that I read. I've
merely updated my old filters. This took less than five minutes.


--
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.

On 2008-01-01, J.J O'Shea <try.not.to DeleteThis @but.see.sig> wrote:
> He keeps changing the NNTP posting host, but typically he drops between 50
> and 100 sporges per host. Filtering on the host will kill 'em 50 to 100 at a
> time. He also hates RoadRunner; filtering on RoadRunner nails large numbers
> of sporges. Also, he was using quotes from Orwell's _1984_ to sporge; the
> full text of _1984_ is available at, among other places,
><http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks01/0100021.txt> and proved most useful in
> designing anti-sporge filters. Finally, there is a distinct European cast to
> his attack; filtering on French and Polish and Czech and Ukrainian posts gets
> rid of not only his sporges, but a lot of spam as well.


All true, but constantly updating filters is an annoyance, and
filtering by body or by headers that aren't in the overview is much
too slow. Both of these, regular updating and slow filtering, would
be necessary for the recent sporge. If the point of filtering is to
avoid wasting time with garbage posts, how is it a win if
reconfiguring and running the filters wastes just as much or even more
time?

So my recommendation would be to use a reader that's very fast,
particularly at downloading and displaying headers. It's FAR more
efficient to download all the new headers with a fast reader and
simply ignore the sporge than it is to reconfigure and run effective
sporge filters.

Of course this is not to say that filters can't be useful. They're
great where relatively static filtering on standard headers is
effective, for example filtering posts from known idiots or xposts to
advocacy groups.

In article <0001HW.C39F9A4002C167E9F04906D8.TakeThisOut@newsgroups.comcast.net>,
J.J. O'Shea <try.not.to.TakeThisOut@but.see.sig> wrote:

> This <snip>, or something like him, has been mounting sporge attacks since
> at least August 2007, including on several other newsgroups that I read. I've
> merely updated my old filters. This took less than five minutes.

What I wonder is what this one and the MI5 thing are seeking to
accomplish. Are they trying to shut down newsgroups, attack google via
google groups with wasted volume, or do they simply get plasure out of
being a pain to others?

And since it is too easy for such trouble makers to move on to fresh
news hosts until they get bumped, what can we from the real world do to
people like this short of assassination?

jt

In article <starsabre-EA85C9.08004501012008.DeleteThis@inetnews.worldnet.att.net>,
jt august <starsabre.DeleteThis@net.att> wrote:

> What I wonder is what this one and the MI5 thing are seeking to
> accomplish. Are they trying to shut down newsgroups, attack google via
> google groups with wasted volume, or do they simply get plasure out of
> being a pain to others?

The MI5 guy is easy to filter out, and he's insane anyway. No sympathy
for the mentally ill when they trot their instabilities out on Usenet;
kneecapping is a fine practice.

The sporger is probably Zara, and he/she is probably mentally ill too.
We should all go visit her store.

Anyway, isn't it my turn to be moderator this year? Happy New Year.
--
W. Oates

This message is not archived

This message is not archived

This message is not archived

In article <no-52D7AC.22452401012008.DeleteThis@freenews.iinet.net.au>,
Andy <no.DeleteThis@spam.no> wrote:

> In article <barmar-880F80.02090901012008.DeleteThis@comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
> Barry Margolin <barmar.DeleteThis@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>
> > In article <0001HW.C39EE13F02A5EFB3F04906D8.DeleteThis@newsgroups.comcast.net>,
> > J.J. O'Shea <try.not.to.DeleteThis@but.see.sig> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 17:21:31 -0500, Jack wrote
> > > (in article
> > > <9c6161b0-8faa-43ae-ab45-dba7ec99a778.DeleteThis@e4g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>):
> > >
> > > > Is c.s.m.s. moderated?
> > >
> > > No.
> > >
> > > > Can all the spurious garbage be dumped?
> > >
> > > Yes, if you have:
> > >
> > > 1 a good newsfeed
> > >
> > > 2 a good newsreader
> > >
> > > 3 both
> >
> > How do you do it with just a good newsreader? I've looked at the
> > headers of some of the sporge, and there doesn't seem to be anything
> > unique that they share, so there's nothing to filter on.
>
> NNTP-Posting-host.

The last time I looked, they didn't come from the same host.

--
Barry Margolin, barmar.DeleteThis@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***
*** PLEASE don't copy me on replies, I'll read them in the group ***

Barry Margolin wrote:

> In article <0001HW.C39EE13F02A5EFB3F04906D8.RemoveThis@newsgroups.comcast.net>,
> J.J. O'Shea <try.not.to.RemoveThis@but.see.sig> wrote:
>
>
>>On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 17:21:31 -0500, Jack wrote
>>(in article
>><9c6161b0-8faa-43ae-ab45-dba7ec99a778.RemoveThis@e4g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>):
>>
>>
>>>Is c.s.m.s. moderated?
>>
>>No.
>>
>>
>>>Can all the spurious garbage be dumped?
>>
>>Yes, if you have:
>>
>>1 a good newsfeed
>>
>>2 a good newsreader
>>
>>3 both
>
>
> How do you do it with just a good newsreader? I've looked at the
> headers of some of the sporge, and there doesn't seem to be anything
> unique that they share, so there's nothing to filter on.

Berlin University have got the measure of him
only one post got through in a month

Ihad to go to groups.google.com to see what you lot are going on about

Hugh W


--
For genealogy and help with family and local history in Bristol and
district http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Brycgstow/

http://snaps4.blogspot.com/ photographs and walks

GENEALOGE http://hughw36.blogspot.com/ MAIN BLOG

On 2007-12-31, J.J O'Shea <try.not.to.TakeThisOut@but.see.sig> wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 17:21:31 -0500, Jack wrote

>> I get
>> digest feeds, but prefer to search and read on Google Groups.
>
> You're doomed. Google ain't a good newsfeed and does not provide anything
> even close to a good newsreader.

Granted it is very poor for reading (and terrible for posting),
but it is great for search. Usenet servers generally do not carry
all groups and expire articles after a certain time. Google carries
the complete Usenet archive and has a good search interface.

Ian

--
Ian Gregory
http://www.zenatode.org.uk/ian/

This message is not archived