I've got back to the 9th November 2023 marking all the spam advertising regulated goods and service. Google will probably get around to deleting all of it.
The flood seems to have started on the 24th October 2023, so I've still got a way to go, but the end is in sight.
Darius the particularly Dumb is a different kind of problem.
John Larkin has been just as reliably wrong for a lot longer, and we haven't been able to either educate him or get him to shut up in twenty years.
On 20/01/2024 3:35 pm, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
I've got back to the 9th November 2023 marking all the spam advertising regulated goods and service. Google will probably get around to deleting all of it.
The flood seems to have started on the 24th October 2023, so I've still got a way to go, but the end is in sight.
Darius the particularly Dumb is a different kind of problem.
John Larkin has been just as reliably wrong for a lot longer, and we haven't been able to either educate him or get him to shut up in twenty years.
I've now got back to the 24th October 2023, marking all the spam on the
way. That involved marking some stuff that I'm pretty sure that I'd
marked on previous passes, so it may need to be repeated more than once.
The flood did seems to start the 24th October, and there were quite a
lot of call girls, fake drivers licenses, fake term papers, psychodelics
and pharmaceuticals in the mix - it wasn't all on=line gambling.
On Sunday, January 21, 2024 at 3:21:49?AM UTC+11, legg wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 00:50:26 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill....@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 20/01/2024 3:35 pm, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
I've got back to the 9th November 2023 marking all the spam advertising regulated goods and service. Google will probably get around to deleting all of it.
The flood seems to have started on the 24th October 2023, so I've still got a way to go, but the end is in sight.
Darius the particularly Dumb is a different kind of problem.
John Larkin has been just as reliably wrong for a lot longer, and we haven't been able to either educate him or get him to shut up in twenty years.
I've now got back to the 24th October 2023, marking all the spam on the
way. That involved marking some stuff that I'm pretty sure that I'd
marked on previous passes, so it may need to be repeated more than once.
The flood did seems to start the 24th October, and there were quite a
lot of call girls, fake drivers licenses, fake term papers, psychodelics
and pharmaceuticals in the mix - it wasn't all on=line gambling.
If you're using two compromised addresses, you'll get double the flak.
I use exactly the same address - my ieee e-mail alias - for everything I post. Google - who now provides the IEEE e-mail aliasing service - gets me to log in with my ieee membership about once a fortnight.
Eternal September doesn't.
It's about as uncompromised as an e-mail address gets. It tracks backs back to my IEEE membership number, and fact that Google insists in using my full name reflects the fact that they got me to back up my identity with a scan of my passport.
On Sunday, January 21, 2024 at 8:51:18?PM UTC+11, Cursitor Doom wrote:the IEEE insists on using my full name.
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:33:31 -0800 (PST), Anthony William Sloman
<bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
On Sunday, January 21, 2024 at 3:21:49?AM UTC+11, legg wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 00:50:26 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill....@ieee.org>
wrote:
On 20/01/2024 3:35 pm, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
I've got back to the 9th November 2023 marking all the spam advertising regulated goods and service. Google will probably get around to deleting all of it.
The flood seems to have started on the 24th October 2023, so I've still got a way to go, but the end is in sight.
Darius the particularly Dumb is a different kind of problem.
John Larkin has been just as reliably wrong for a lot longer, and we haven't been able to either educate him or get him to shut up in twenty years.
I've now got back to the 24th October 2023, marking all the spam on the >> >> >way. That involved marking some stuff that I'm pretty sure that I'd
marked on previous passes, so it may need to be repeated more than once. >> >> >
The flood did seems to start the 24th October, and there were quite a
lot of call girls, fake drivers licenses, fake term papers, psychodelics >> >> >and pharmaceuticals in the mix - it wasn't all on=line gambling.
If you're using two compromised addresses, you'll get double the flak.
I use exactly the same address - my ieee e-mail alias - for everything I post. Google - who now provides the IEEE e-mail aliasing service - gets me to log in with my ieee membership about once a fortnight.
Eternal September doesn't.
It's about as uncompromised as an e-mail address gets. It tracks backs back to my IEEE membership number, and fact that Google insists in using my full name reflects the fact that they got me to back up my identity with a scan of my passport.
I guess it's time to say goodbye then, Bill. I'm not sure exactly when
GG is ending, but I'll miss you posting your contemptuous nonsense
here.
You have certainly earned a lot of contempt here - you are little too dim to understand why, so you may feel able to shrug it off as nonsense.
However, there are alternatives available at very modest cost.
If you weren't such a complete twit you would have noticed that I've resumed posting via Eternal September (which doesn't cost me anything).
I know you're just a poor pensioner and don't have much cash to spare,
I do get a couple of different pensions, but they aren't my only source of income. I'm not short of money, not that I need to spend all that much
Unlike you, I haven't had to emigrate to mininimise my tax bill.
but even so, a sub to Giganews (to take just one example) doesn't cost
a fortune.
Eternal September is free.
I think I can speak on behalf of *everyone* here when I say we'll miss you with the passing of GG if you don't find another routeto Usenet.
I've been using Eternal September quite often recently, It shows up clearly on the google groups forum where stuff I post via Eternal September is labelled "Bill Sloman" while google groups insists on labelling me as "Anthony William Sloman", because
I haven't made a secret of this, and jeered at Darius the dumb recently for being unaware of it. You seem to deserve an equal amount of derision.
On Monday, January 22, 2024 at 12:23:42?AM UTC+11, Cursitor Doom wrote:because the IEEE insists on using my full name.
On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 05:07:21 -0800 (PST), Anthony William Sloman
<bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
On Sunday, January 21, 2024 at 10:44:28?PM UTC+11, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 02:29:20 -0800 (PST), Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
On Sunday, January 21, 2024 at 8:51:18?PM UTC+11, Cursitor Doom wrote: >> >> >> On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:33:31 -0800 (PST), Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
On Sunday, January 21, 2024 at 3:21:49?AM UTC+11, legg wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 00:50:26 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
On 20/01/2024 3:35 pm, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
<snip>
I think I can speak on behalf of *everyone* here when I say we'll miss you with the passing of GG if you don't find another routeto Usenet.
I've been using Eternal September quite often recently, It shows up clearly on the google groups forum where stuff I post via Eternal September is labelled "Bill Sloman" while google groups insists on labelling me as "Anthony William Sloman",
I doubt that Cursitor Doom is the name on your passport. Anthony William Sloman is the name on mine. You are an anonymous troll, just like Darius the dumb, and just as unreliable - which is to say, frankly incredible.I don't have any aliases, Bill (unlike yourself)
I haven't made a secret of this, and jeered at Darius the dumb recently for being unaware of it. You seem to deserve an equal amount of derision.
Indeed. Well, I can't think of anyone better than your good self to deliver it, Bill.
Your grasp of reality leaves a lot to be desired. So does that of Darius the Dumb. Are you sure that he isn't one of your aliases?
On Sunday, January 21, 2024 at 10:44:28?PM UTC+11, Cursitor Doom wrote:the IEEE insists on using my full name.
On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 02:29:20 -0800 (PST), Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
On Sunday, January 21, 2024 at 8:51:18?PM UTC+11, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:33:31 -0800 (PST), Anthony William Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
On Sunday, January 21, 2024 at 3:21:49?AM UTC+11, legg wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 00:50:26 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
On 20/01/2024 3:35 pm, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
<snip>
I think I can speak on behalf of *everyone* here when I say we'll miss you with the passing of GG if you don't find another routeto Usenet.
I've been using Eternal September quite often recently, It shows up clearly on the google groups forum where stuff I post via Eternal September is labelled "Bill Sloman" while google groups insists on labelling me as "Anthony William Sloman", because
I haven't made a secret of this, and jeered at Darius the dumb recently for being unaware of it. You seem to deserve an equal amount of derision.
Indeed. Well, I can't think of anyone better than your good self to deliver it, Bill.
Your grasp of reality leaves a lot to be desired. So does that of Darius the Dumb. Are you sure that he isn't one of your aliases?
On Monday, January 22, 2024 at 12:35:53 PM UTC+11, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Monday, January 22, 2024 at 12:38:53 AM UTC+11, Cursitor Doom wrote: >>> On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 05:35:40 -0800 (PST), Anthony William Sloman
<bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
On Monday, January 22, 2024 at 12:23:42?AM UTC+11, Cursitor Doom wrote: >>>>> On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 05:07:21 -0800 (PST), Anthony William Sloman
<bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
On Sunday, January 21, 2024 at 10:44:28?PM UTC+11, Cursitor Doom wrote: >>>>>>> On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 02:29:20 -0800 (PST), Anthony William Sloman >>>>>>> <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
On Sunday, January 21, 2024 at 8:51:18?PM UTC+11, Cursitor Doom wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:33:31 -0800 (PST), Anthony William Sloman >>>>>>>>> <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
On Sunday, January 21, 2024 at 3:21:49?AM UTC+11, legg wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 00:50:26 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill....@ieee.org> wrote:
On 20/01/2024 3:35 pm, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
<snip>
I've managed to complete a second pass through back to the 24th October 2023, and a lot of the weeds had spouted back up again.
It may not be entirely futile, but it doesn't look as if it worth trying
to make a habit of doing it. Artificial intelligence could do it faster,
but Google clearly has more profitable ways if keeping that busy.
On Friday, January 19, 2024 at 9:35:41?PM UTC-7, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
John Larkin has been just as reliably wrong for a lot longer, and we haven't been able to either educate him or get him to shut up in twenty years.
--
Bill Sloman, sydhey
What is your obsession with this John Larkin?
It's like he hurt your feelings 2 decades ago and you have been following him around tossing insults at every opportunity for 20+ years now while he continues to ignore you.
Say what you want about his posts (I find him to be one of the more on-topic posters still hanging around here) but this is getting pretty pathetic at this point...I am embarrassed for you.
On Friday, January 26, 2024 at 2:09:18?PM UTC-7, john larkin wrote:
It's like he hurt your feelings 2 decades ago and you have been following him around tossing insults at every opportunity for 20+ years now while he continues to ignore you.He wanted me to hire him, and I didn't.
What a sad way to spend your twilight years.
Thanks for replying, John, I've seen him posting his piss and vinegar against you for all these years and I was always curious what initially set him off.
There are plenty of weirdos posting inane garbage here so it always made me wonder why he constantly singles you of all people out.
be available as a remote - electronic contact only - sub-contractor.He wanted me to hire him, and I didn't.
Not exactly. He posted that he needed help, and I suggested that I'd
His reaction as to copy the e-mail to Jim Thompson who promptlyposted posted a comment that he'd stopped John Larkin from making a huge mistake.
That not just "not hiring", but a gross violation of privacy. Icouldn't care less about not being hired - I would have liked to get the
I was mightily peeved about Jim Thompson getting a private e-mailfrom me to John Larkin, and that has - quite properly - coloured my
He's simply not to be trusted.<snip>
Pardon me if this is a dupe.
On 1/26/24 20:26, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
<snip>
He wanted me to hire him, and I didn't.
Not exactly. He posted that he needed help, and I suggested that I'dbe available as a remote - electronic contact only - sub-contractor.
His reaction as to copy the e-mail to Jim Thompson who promptlyposted posted a comment that he'd stopped John Larkin from making a huge >mistake.
That not just "not hiring", but a gross violation of privacy. Icouldn't care less about not being hired - I would have liked to get the >work, though the more John Larkin posts about his approach to design the
less confident I am about my capacity to offer him anything he'd want to
use.
I was mightily peeved about Jim Thompson getting a private e-mailfrom me to John Larkin, and that has - quite properly - coloured my >reactions to John Larkin ever since.
He's simply not to be trusted.<snip>
So, what I'm hearing you say is, you're upset because he tried to "check
your references".
Did you not think that would happen?
Want to blame someone? Blame JT for being public about it.
You on the other hand are attempting to do just what you claim JL did wrong?
Attempting to degrade someone publicly.
Just my 2cents worth. Feel free to blame me for something, if it makes
you feel better.
On Saturday, January 27, 2024 at 8:18:03?AM UTC-5, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
Anthony William Sloman's profile photo
Anthony William Sloman
Jan 27, 2024, 9:22:00?PM (3 hours ago)
to
On Saturday, January 27, 2024 at 4:12:44?PM UTC+11, jim whitby wrote:
Pardon me if this is a dupe.He wasn't trying to "check any references". Jim Thompson didn't know any more about me than John Larkin did - what they both knew was what I'd posted here, and nothing else.
On 1/26/24 20:26, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
<snip>
be available as a remote - electronic contact only - sub-contractor.He wanted me to hire him, and I didn't.
Not exactly. He posted that he needed help, and I suggested that I'd
posted posted a comment that he'd stopped John Larkin from making a huge >> > mistake.
His reaction as to copy the e-mail to Jim Thompson who promptly
couldn't care less about not being hired - I would have liked to get the >> > work, though the more John Larkin posts about his approach to design the >> > less confident I am about my capacity to offer him anything he'd want to >> > use.
That not just "not hiring", but a gross violation of privacy. I
from me to John Larkin, and that has - quite properly - coloured my
I was mightily peeved about Jim Thompson getting a private e-mail
reactions to John Larkin ever since.
He's simply not to be trusted.
<snip>
So, what I'm hearing you say is, you're upset because he tried to "check your references".
He did it because I wasn't fond of Jim Thompson and Jim Thompson wasn't fond of me - Jim once claimed to have reported me to the FBI for being dangerously anti-American, which was a bizarre misreading of my attitude,
Did you not think that would happen?Frankly, no. I knew that John Larkin was a jerk, but hadn't appreciated quite how much of a jerk he was.
Want to blame someone? Blame JT for being public about it.Jim Thompson was a total jerk - he seemed to think that his hill-billy antecedents made it obligatory for him to behave badly.
Thompson was another case of a certifiable imbecile, obsessing enough over single-purpose tasking, to become somewhat capable. His is not an isolated example of the defect.
He was a marginalized reject in life. No reasonable person gave him or his ignorant opinions the time of day.
On January 27, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
People who drink moderately live slightly longer than those who don't drink at all.
Dog owners have lower blood pressure than the canineless.
Therefore, if you adopt a dog, it will lower your blood pressure.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 300 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 86:52:37 |
| Calls: | 6,717 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 12,248 |
| Messages: | 5,358,464 |
| Posted today: | 1 |