Sick Postings From Sick Minds

We seem are suffering an unwelcome spate of sick postings from 'people'
with sick minds: presumably we can do no more than avoid responding to
them?

wrote:

We seem are suffering an unwelcome spate of sick postings from 'people'
with sick minds: presumably we can do no more than avoid responding to
them?

I mark them 'ignore' in agent and do a refresh on my view of 'not
ignored'. It helps keep the urge to respond to them down to a
manageable level.

Wes

--
Reply to:
Whiskey Echo Sierra Sierra AT Gee Tee EYE EYE dot COM
Lycos address is a spam trap.

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 15:06:04 -0500, wrote:

I mark them 'ignore' in agent and do a refresh on my view of 'not
ignored'. It helps keep the urge to respond to them down to a
manageable level.

I only have a couple of the worst trolls marked 'delete'. If I'm
ever interested in seeing what they might have said based on a
followup, Agent can retrieve the missing message. Just type H to
show headers and double click on the last Msg. ID shown under
"References:" The message will be pulled up into a new browser
window within a couple of seconds.

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 15:06:04 -0500, wrote:

I mark them 'ignore' in agent and do a refresh on my view of 'not
ignored'. It helps keep the urge to respond to them down to a
manageable level.

I only have a couple of the worst trolls marked 'delete'. If I'm
ever interested in seeing what they might have said based on a
followup, Agent can retrieve the missing message. Just type H to
show headers and double click on the last Msg. ID shown under
"References:" The message will be pulled up into a new browser
window within a couple of seconds.

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 15:06:04 -0500, wrote:

I mark them 'ignore' in agent and do a refresh on my view of 'not
ignored'. It helps keep the urge to respond to them down to a
manageable level.

I only have a couple of the worst trolls marked 'delete'. If I'm
ever interested in seeing what they might have said based on a
followup, Agent can retrieve the missing message. Just type H to
show headers and double click on the last Msg. ID shown under
"References:" The message will be pulled up into a new browser
window within a couple of seconds.

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 17:16:26 -0800, ASAAR wrote
(in article ):

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 15:06:04 -0500, wrote:

I mark them 'ignore' in agent and do a refresh on my view of 'not
ignored'. It helps keep the urge to respond to them down to a
manageable level.

I only have a couple of the worst trolls marked 'delete'. If I'm
ever interested in seeing what they might have said based on a
followup, Agent can retrieve the missing message. Just type H to
show headers and double click on the last Msg. ID shown under
"References:" The message will be pulled up into a new browser
window within a couple of seconds.



Since people inevitably respond, I just kill the thread so I don't have to
bother with any responses either.

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 18:09:27 -0800, Paul Revere wrote:

Since people inevitably respond, I just kill the thread so I don't
have to bother with any responses either.

Killing the thread may not mean the same thing to Agent and
Hogwasher users. (Hogwasher???) In Agent I guess that would be
equivalent to marking the thread with the "Ignore" setting.
"Killing" the thread might be taken to mean simply deleting it,
which would prevent newer messages in the thread from being
retrieved. Is that the real name of your newsreader or was it just
some more hogwash?

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 19:03:25 -0800, ASAAR wrote
(in article ):

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 18:09:27 -0800, Paul Revere wrote:

Since people inevitably respond, I just kill the thread so I don't
have to bother with any responses either.

Killing the thread may not mean the same thing to Agent and
Hogwasher users. (Hogwasher???) In Agent I guess that would be
equivalent to marking the thread with the "Ignore" setting.
"Killing" the thread might be taken to mean simply deleting it,
which would prevent newer messages in the thread from being
retrieved. Is that the real name of your newsreader or was it just
some more hogwash?


Hogwasher is a newsreader for the Mac.

According to Hogwasher, I am "filtering" the thread which means I'm deleting
it. I also "filter" (killfile) the troll.

I don't know why others filter trolls, but I do it because I use newsgroups
to gather interesting information (and to share what information I may have
that another may fine interesting).

Trolls simply waste my time. I am NOT interested in ANYTHING a troll may
post, and responding just encourages more of the same.

I check out 7 newsgroups daily. I wade through hundreds and hundreds of
posts.

Filtering out Trolls eliminates the original posting but my monitor still
fills up with responses to the troll forcing me to wade through even MORE
posts in my search for nuggets of wisdom/information.

Those who feed trolls by responding to them, whether done out of ignorance,
good intentions, or for whatever reason, also waste my time so I filter them
as well. I don't filter the INDIVIDUALS who respond to trolls, just their
responses TO THE TROLL.

I am unconcerned that I may not retrieve any future posts made in response to
a troll. I barely have time to read the posts I search for.

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 19:03:25 -0800, ASAAR wrote
(in article ):

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 18:09:27 -0800, Paul Revere wrote:

Since people inevitably respond, I just kill the thread so I don't
have to bother with any responses either.

Killing the thread may not mean the same thing to Agent and
Hogwasher users. (Hogwasher???) In Agent I guess that would be
equivalent to marking the thread with the "Ignore" setting.
"Killing" the thread might be taken to mean simply deleting it,
which would prevent newer messages in the thread from being
retrieved. Is that the real name of your newsreader or was it just
some more hogwash?


Hogwasher is a newsreader for the Mac.

According to Hogwasher, I am "filtering" the thread which means I'm deleting
it. I also "filter" (killfile) the troll.

I don't know why others filter trolls, but I do it because I use newsgroups
to gather interesting information (and to share what information I may have
that another may fine interesting).

Trolls simply waste my time. I am NOT interested in ANYTHING a troll may
post, and responding just encourages more of the same.

I check out 7 newsgroups daily. I wade through hundreds and hundreds of
posts.

Filtering out Trolls eliminates the original posting but my monitor still
fills up with responses to the troll forcing me to wade through even MORE
posts in my search for nuggets of wisdom/information.

Those who feed trolls by responding to them, whether done out of ignorance,
good intentions, or for whatever reason, also waste my time so I filter them
as well. I don't filter the INDIVIDUALS who respond to trolls, just their
responses TO THE TROLL.

I am unconcerned that I may not retrieve any future posts made in response to
a troll. I barely have time to read the posts I search for.

On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:43:40 -0800, Paul Revere wrote:

According to Hogwasher, I am "filtering" the thread which means
I'm deleting it. I also "filter" (killfile) the troll.

Ok, thanks. I once thought it best to kill nothing, but I now KF
a couple of the worst in two NGs. It really makes for a much more
pleasant experience. I don't KF anyone in this NG, but I do delete
a large number of thread headers (before retrieving the message
contents) of obviously offensive troll posts, spam and anything that
might be an eBay ad.