Mi5 douchebag

Mi5 douchebag

can't anybody block this douche? he is spamming all the NG's. Notice how he
is changing the spelling to decieve filters? What a Douche.

--
marx404

Re: Mi5 douchebag

In article <477a61b3$0$9538$4c368faf@roadrunner,com >, "marx404" <404@404,com > wrote:
>can't anybody block this douche?

Yes. You can. Google "Outlook Express" "Block Sender".

>he is spamming all the NG's. Notice how he
>is changing the spelling to decieve filters? What a Douche.

He didn't get through *my* filters... looks like you need to update yours.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

Re: Mi5 ******bag

You must be the Alpha Geek there Doug. Just when I thought that I had
effectively blocked this idiot, he starts using modified subject and email
addresses. How did you filter it?

Oppie (demi geek)

"Doug Miller" <spambait@milmac,com > wrote in message
news:m9uej.60064$eY.12247@newssvr13.news.prodigy,net ...
> In article <477a61b3$0$9538$4c368faf@roadrunner,com >, "marx404"
> <404@404,com > wrote:
>>can't anybody block this douche?
>
> Yes. You can. Google "Outlook Express" "Block Sender".
>
>>he is spamming all the NG's. Notice how he
>>is changing the spelling to decieve filters? What a Douche.
>
> He didn't get through *my* filters... looks like you need to update yours.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
>
> It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

Re: Mi5 ******bag

In article <_8Oej.2872$yv5.26@trndny07>, "Oppie" <boppie@nospam,com > wrote:
>You must be the Alpha Geek there Doug. Just when I thought that I had
>effectively blocked this idiot, he starts using modified subject and email
>addresses. How did you filter it?

I'm not sure which of several filters is removing his posts -- but I imagine
it's probably the one that drops anything crossposted to more than three
groups.

Re: Mi5 ******bag

"Doug Miller" <spambait@milmac,com > wrote in message
news:VLPej.2818$se5.1940@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc,com ...
> In article <_8Oej.2872$yv5.26@trndny07>, "Oppie" <boppie@nospam,com >
> wrote:
>>You must be the Alpha Geek there Doug. Just when I thought that I had
>>effectively blocked this idiot, he starts using modified subject and email
>>addresses. How did you filter it?
>
> I'm not sure which of several filters is removing his posts -- but I
> imagine
> it's probably the one that drops anything crossposted to more than three
> groups.

Hmmm.... Creative technique. Hadn't thought of that one.
The nut may start posting to single groups since it appears to be an
automated sending system.

Re: Mi5 ******bag

In article <xmSej.2209$Xe5.1608@trndny09>, "Oppie" <boppie@nospam,com > wrote:
>"Doug Miller" <spambait@milmac,com > wrote in message
>news:VLPej.2818$se5.1940@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc,com ...
>> In article <_8Oej.2872$yv5.26@trndny07>, "Oppie" <boppie@nospam,com >
>> wrote:
>>>You must be the Alpha Geek there Doug. Just when I thought that I had
>>>effectively blocked this idiot, he starts using modified subject and email
>>>addresses. How did you filter it?
>>
>> I'm not sure which of several filters is removing his posts -- but I imagine
>> it's probably the one that drops anything crossposted to more than three
>> groups.
>
>Hmmm.... Creative technique. Hadn't thought of that one.

It's useful for removing a lot of other crap, too. Seems to me that it would
be fairly rare for a post to be legitimately on-topic in four or more
groups.

>The nut may start posting to single groups since it appears to be an
>automated sending system.

If so, and he starts coming through my filters, then I'll tweak them as needed
til I don't see him any more -- then post a copy of what worked here.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

Re: Mi5 ******bag

On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 15:33:14 GMT, Oppie wrote:

> You must be the Alpha Geek there Doug. Just when I thought that I had
> effectively blocked this idiot, he starts using modified subject and email
> addresses. How did you filter it?
>

Apparently it's been going on for years. I don't know of any effective way
to block it in OE without resorting to hundreds of rules.

Other newsreaders employ better techniques for rule creation, regular
expressions for instance. Unfortunately it takes some study.... I'm working
on that approach now. Let you know if I succeed.

Re: Mi5 ******bag

Can't we make a rule for the number 5 and, voilà?

"Father Mike" <fmike@thevat,com > wrote in message
news:1qz878gmd5iwc.9oold1urpra4.dlg@40tude,net ...
> On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 15:33:14 GMT, Oppie wrote:
>
>> You must be the Alpha Geek there Doug. Just when I thought that I had
>> effectively blocked this idiot, he starts using modified subject and
>> email
>> addresses. How did you filter it?
>>
>
> Apparently it's been going on for years. I don't know of any effective way
> to block it in OE without resorting to hundreds of rules.
>
> Other newsreaders employ better techniques for rule creation, regular
> expressions for instance. Unfortunately it takes some study.... I'm
> working
> on that approach now. Let you know if I succeed.

Re: Mi5 ******bag

On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 21:30:40 -0400, Bassplayer12 wrote:

> Can't we make a rule for the number 5 and, voilà?
>
> "Father Mike" <fmike@thevat,com > wrote in message
> news:1qz878gmd5iwc.9oold1urpra4.dlg@40tude,net ...
>> On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 15:33:14 GMT, Oppie wrote:
>>

Yes, you can, and it would probably work. The problem is you might flag
many posts unintentionally. If someone said in the subject line their SL2
has 125,000 miles on the odometer, that message would be flagged too. So
ideally you'd like to make the rule more specific. But if you're willing to
possibly miss a few posts, it's OK.

Re: Mi5 ******bag

On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 20:57:06 -0600, Father Mike wrote:

> On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 21:30:40 -0400, Bassplayer12 wrote:
>
>> Can't we make a rule for the number 5 and, voilà?
>>
>> "Father Mike" <fmike@thevat,com > wrote in message
>> news:1qz878gmd5iwc.9oold1urpra4.dlg@40tude,net ...
>>> On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 15:33:14 GMT, Oppie wrote:
>>>
>
> Yes, you can, and it would probably work. The problem is you might flag
> many posts unintentionally. If someone said in the subject line their SL2
> has 125,000 miles on the odometer, that message would be flagged too. So
> ideally you'd like to make the rule more specific. But if you're willing to
> possibly miss a few posts, it's OK.

I wasn't thinking clearly. If, for instance, you made a rule that included
"M" and "I" and "5" it should catch all the MI5 posts with very little
chance of flagging posts unintentionally.

Re: Mi5 ******bag

My identity was stolen, along with that of others as I can see.

"Bassplayer12" <perettij@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message
news:244a0ee5-5%12442_4e289e0c@news.aliant,net ...
> are not certain. Nemo facit virtutem in nomine meo, et cito possit de
> me male loqui.191
>
> But we have not to draw this distinction. Here is a sacred relic. Here is
> a
> thorn from the crown of the Saviour of the world, over whom the prince of
> this world has no power, which works miracles by the peculiar power of the
> blood shed for us. Now God Himself chooses this house in order to display
> conspicuously therein His power.
>
> These are not men who do miracles by an unknown and doubtful virtue, which
> makes a decision difficult for us. It is God Himself. It is the instrument
> of the Passion of His only Son, who, being in many places, chooses this,
> and
> makes men come from all quarters there to receive these miraculous
> alleviations in their weaknesses.
>
> 840. The Church has three kinds of enemies: the Jews, who have never been
> of
> her body; the heretics, who have withdrawn from it; and the evil
> Christians,
> who rend her from within.
>
> These three kinds of different adversaries usually attack her in different
> ways. But here they attack her in one and the same way. As they are all
> without miracles, and as the Church has always had miracles against them,
> they have all had the same interest in evading them; and they all make use
> of this excuse, that doctrine must not be judged by miracles, but miracles
> by doctrine. There were two parties among those who heard Jesus Christ:
> those who followed His teaching on account of His miracles; others who
> said.
> There were two parties in the time of Calvin... There are now the Jesuits,
> etc.
>
> 841. Miracles furnish the test in matters of doubt, between Jews and
> heathens, Jews and Christians, Catholics and heretics, the slandered and
> slanderers, between the two crosses.
>
> But miracles would be useless to heretics; for the Church, authorised by
> miracles which have already o
>
>

Re: Mi5 ******bag


"Bassplayer12" <perettij@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message
news:4799276e$0$4045$9a566e8b@news.aliant,net ...
> My identity was stolen, along with that of others as I can see.
>
Don't sweat it. He seems to have gone away and it appeared was only doing
the BS on this NG.

Re: Mi5 ******bag

In article <bIlmj.4311$uB6.3956@trndny05>, "Oppie" <boppie@nospam,com > wrote:
>
>"Bassplayer12" <perettij@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message
>news:4799276e$0$4045$9a566e8b@news.aliant,net ...
>> My identity was stolen, along with that of others as I can see.
>>
>Don't sweat it. He seems to have gone away and it appeared was only doing
>the BS on this NG.

Oh, no, it was on many, many others, too.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.