Re: forged cancels (Re: Entrust Technologies's Solo - free download)

[dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)]

? the Platypus {aka David Formosa} <dformosa@st.nepean.uws.edu.au> writes:

> On Thu, 31 Jul 1997, Adam Back wrote:
>
> > Some people have been arguing that cancelling other peoples posts
> > based on their own subjective views is a good thing.
>
> Nno one is arugeing that.  Both sides in this debait aggry that that is a
> REAL BAD thing.  Spam cancelers use an objective rules.  The world would
> be a better place if this didn't happen and everybody was on NoCeM.  But
> yet this is not true.

Let me clarify two things:

1. "Spam cancellers" are not generally news admins. They are plain old
users who get kicked off of their ISPs for forging cancels. For examples,
see Net.Scum pages of Rick Buchanan, David Ritz, et al.

2. Once a cancel-forger builds a "reputation" as a "spam canceller",
s/he often diversifies into "retromodetration" - forgng cancels for
singly-postd articles whose contents they don't like and claiming that
they were "spam". For examples, see the Net.Scum pages for Guy Macon
(the retromoderator on soc.religion.quaker), Chris Lewis, et al.

> > It's censorship.  If you didn't write it, you have no business
> > cancelling it.
>
> Not even forgeries in my name?  Not even out of the control spews from
> fidonet?

Correct.

---

<a href="mailto:dlv@bwalk.dm.com">Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM</a>
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps