"Pan" > wrote in message
news
> On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 17:46:57 -0400, "cybercat" >
> wrote:
>
>
>>I am so glad you are enjoying my opinions. I think it's hilarious how
>>whenever I express an opinion with which you disagree, it is a "meltdown."
>>You can't counter with anything productive, so I'm melting down. I'm just
>>a
>>puddle now. Asswipe.
>>
>>
>>** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
>
> Perhaps if you were not so rude and crude, and respected other
> opinions, your opinions would be better received or considered.

Did someone hear something? It kind of sounded like gass passing.

On Sun, 7 Sep 2008 17:39:51 -0400, "cybercat" >
wrote:

>
>"Pan" > wrote in message
>news

>>
>> Perhaps if you were not so rude and crude, and respected other
>> opinions, your opinions would be better received or considered.
>
>Did someone hear something? It kind of sounded like gass passing.
>
thanks for proving my point.

Gregory Morrow wrote:
> Omelet wrote:

>> Is that bad? <g> Been off this list for around 9 months.
>
>
> Actually, *nothing* has much changed here, Om...
>
> ;-P
>
>

For some reason, I am not seeing Om's messages. I wonder what is
causing that?

Becca

On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 11:53:05 -0500, Becca >
wrote:

>Gregory Morrow wrote:
>> Omelet wrote:
>
>>> Is that bad? <g> Been off this list for around 9 months.
>>
>>
>> Actually, *nothing* has much changed here, Om...
>>
>> ;-P
>>
>>
>
>For some reason, I am not seeing Om's messages. I wonder what is
>causing that?
>
Have you looked for her or her domain in your kill file?



--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

sf wrote:
> On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 11:53:05 -0500, Becca >
> wrote:

>> For some reason, I am not seeing Om's messages. I wonder what is
>> causing that?
>>
> Have you looked for her or her domain in your kill file?

Om is not in my killfile. This makes me wonder, what other messages I
may not be seeing. Before she left the group I could see her, and now I
can't. It is just one of life's little puzzles.

Becca

On Sat, 13 Sep 2008 15:25:48 -0500, Becca wrote:

> sf wrote:
>> On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 11:53:05 -0500, Becca >
>> wrote:
>
>>> For some reason, I am not seeing Om's messages. I wonder what is
>>> causing that?
>>>
>> Have you looked for her or her domain in your kill file?
>
> Om is not in my killfile. This makes me wonder, what other messages I
> may not be seeing. Before she left the group I could see her, and now I
> can't. It is just one of life's little puzzles.
>
> Becca

i see you're using thunderbird. i'm not sure how filtering works there,
but using 40tude dialog, i inadvertently filtered 'maxine in ri' when i
killed 'max.' maybe it's something like that.

just a thought.

your pal,
blake

In article >,
blake murphy > wrote:

> On Sat, 13 Sep 2008 15:25:48 -0500, Becca wrote:
>
> > sf wrote:
> >> On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 11:53:05 -0500, Becca >
> >> wrote:
> >
> >>> For some reason, I am not seeing Om's messages. I wonder what is
> >>> causing that?
> >>>
> >> Have you looked for her or her domain in your kill file?
> >
> > Om is not in my killfile. This makes me wonder, what other messages I
> > may not be seeing. Before she left the group I could see her, and now I
> > can't. It is just one of life's little puzzles.
> >
> > Becca
>
> i see you're using thunderbird. i'm not sure how filtering works there,
> but using 40tude dialog, i inadvertently filtered 'maxine in ri' when i
> killed 'max.' maybe it's something like that.
>
> just a thought.
>
> your pal,
> blake

Picked up on this thread late, but do you by any chance have gmail
filtered? I can't see Om (and others, Wayne for one) cause I killed
gmail in an attempt to avoid spammers selling "fake" name brand purses,
watches, and widgets. Some of theses folks had munged their addy at one
time, but now they're gone again. :-(

Regards,
Dave W.

blake murphy wrote:

>> Om is not in my killfile. This makes me wonder, what other messages I
>> may not be seeing. Before she left the group I could see her, and now I
>> can't. It is just one of life's little puzzles.
>>
>> Becca
>
> i see you're using thunderbird. i'm not sure how filtering works there,
> but using 40tude dialog, i inadvertently filtered 'maxine in ri' when i
> killed 'max.' maybe it's something like that.
>
> just a thought.
>
> your pal,
> blake

Thanks for mentioning that, I will double check my settings.

Becca

On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 10:43:06 -0500, Dave W wrote:

> In article >,
> blake murphy > wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 13 Sep 2008 15:25:48 -0500, Becca wrote:
>>
>>> sf wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 11:53:05 -0500, Becca >
>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> For some reason, I am not seeing Om's messages. I wonder what is
>>>>> causing that?
>>>>>
>>>> Have you looked for her or her domain in your kill file?
>>>
>>> Om is not in my killfile. This makes me wonder, what other messages I
>>> may not be seeing. Before she left the group I could see her, and now I
>>> can't. It is just one of life's little puzzles.
>>>
>>> Becca
>>
>> i see you're using thunderbird. i'm not sure how filtering works there,
>> but using 40tude dialog, i inadvertently filtered 'maxine in ri' when i
>> killed 'max.' maybe it's something like that.
>>
>> just a thought.
>>
>> your pal,
>> blake
>
> Picked up on this thread late, but do you by any chance have gmail
> filtered? I can't see Om (and others, Wayne for one) cause I killed
> gmail in an attempt to avoid spammers selling "fake" name brand purses,
> watches, and widgets. Some of theses folks had munged their addy at one
> time, but now they're gone again. :-(
>
> Regards,
> Dave W.

i'm not familiar with newswatcher, but most filters have a way you can
'pass' favored names from a filter on gmail or other sources, by putting
them at the top and assigning them an action that doesn't 'kill' them, and
when that condition is satisfied, filtering stops and the rest of the
filters have no effect. when my list of names to be passed got to fifty or
so, i gave up that idea.

that having been said, gmail is not so spam-infested as it used to be.
maybe they're policing their users a little bit, unlikely as that may seem.
kill-filing all of gmail seems to be a little too much of a shotgun
approach to me. after a while, filtering on subject keywords (or
individuals you find objectionable) will take care of most of the problems.

your mileage, etc.

your pal,
blake

In article >,
blake murphy > wrote:

> On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 10:43:06 -0500, Dave W wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > blake murphy > wrote:
> >
<snip
> >
> > Picked up on this thread late, but do you by any chance have gmail
> > filtered? I can't see Om (and others, Wayne for one) cause I killed
> > gmail in an attempt to avoid spammers selling "fake" name brand purses,
> > watches, and widgets. Some of theses folks had munged their addy at one
> > time, but now they're gone again. :-(
> >
> > Regards,
> > Dave W.
>
> i'm not familiar with newswatcher, but most filters have a way you can
> 'pass' favored names from a filter on gmail or other sources, by putting
> them at the top and assigning them an action that doesn't 'kill' them, and
> when that condition is satisfied, filtering stops and the rest of the
> filters have no effect. when my list of names to be passed got to fifty or
> so, i gave up that idea.
>
> that having been said, gmail is not so spam-infested as it used to be.
> maybe they're policing their users a little bit, unlikely as that may seem.
> kill-filing all of gmail seems to be a little too much of a shotgun
> approach to me. after a while, filtering on subject keywords (or
> individuals you find objectionable) will take care of most of the problems.
>
> your mileage, etc.
>
> your pal,
> blake

Well, I'm going to "un-kill-filter" gmail. When I checked in on RFC this
morning there were 700 articles, 326 of which were killed! Pretty
extreme I'd say! (Not all the killed files were gmail files, I'm sure.)

Anyway, thanks for the clue re. gmail's improved behavior. I'll put away
the shotgun and see what happens. I checked newswatcher's on line
documentation and saw a comment which implied that you can 'pass'
favored names through a kill filter. But it may take time for me to find
out how to do it and right now I'm hard pressed to read the manual for
my new programmable thermostat so it can turn on the heat when the
weather changes. (God, I hate reading manuals, documentation, and such!)

Regards,
Dave W.

Dave W wrote:

> In article >,
> blake murphy > wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 10:43:06 -0500, Dave W wrote:
>>
>> > In article >,
>> > blake murphy > wrote:
>> >
> <snip
>> >
>> > Picked up on this thread late, but do you by any chance have gmail
>> > filtered? I can't see Om (and others, Wayne for one) cause I killed
>> > gmail in an attempt to avoid spammers selling "fake" name brand purses,
>> > watches, and widgets. Some of theses folks had munged their addy at one
>> > time, but now they're gone again. :-(
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Dave W.
>>
>> i'm not familiar with newswatcher, but most filters have a way you can
>> 'pass' favored names from a filter on gmail or other sources, by putting
>> them at the top and assigning them an action that doesn't 'kill' them, and
>> when that condition is satisfied, filtering stops and the rest of the
>> filters have no effect. when my list of names to be passed got to fifty or
>> so, i gave up that idea.
>>
>> that having been said, gmail is not so spam-infested as it used to be.
>> maybe they're policing their users a little bit, unlikely as that may seem.
>> kill-filing all of gmail seems to be a little too much of a shotgun
>> approach to me. after a while, filtering on subject keywords (or
>> individuals you find objectionable) will take care of most of the problems.
>>
>> your mileage, etc.
>>
>> your pal,
>> blake
>
> Well, I'm going to "un-kill-filter" gmail. When I checked in on RFC this
> morning there were 700 articles, 326 of which were killed! Pretty
> extreme I'd say! (Not all the killed files were gmail files, I'm sure.)
>
> Anyway, thanks for the clue re. gmail's improved behavior. I'll put away
> the shotgun and see what happens. I checked newswatcher's on line
> documentation and saw a comment which implied that you can 'pass'
> favored names through a kill filter. But it may take time for me to find
> out how to do it and right now I'm hard pressed to read the manual for
> my new programmable thermostat so it can turn on the heat when the
> weather changes. (God, I hate reading manuals, documentation, and such!)

Some people confuse "gmail posts" with posts coming from Google Groups.
Not the same thing. See my sig for clues.

--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org

In article .net>,
Blinky the Shark > wrote:

> Dave W wrote:
>
<snip>
> > Well, I'm going to "un-kill-filter" gmail. When I checked in on RFC this
> > morning there were 700 articles, 326 of which were killed! Pretty
> > extreme I'd say! (Not all the killed files were gmail files, I'm sure.)
> >
> > Anyway, thanks for the clue re. gmail's improved behavior. I'll put away
> > the shotgun and see what happens. I checked newswatcher's on line
> > documentation and saw a comment which implied that you can 'pass'
> > favored names through a kill filter. But it may take time for me to find
> > out how to do it and right now I'm hard pressed to read the manual for
> > my new programmable thermostat so it can turn on the heat when the
> > weather changes. (God, I hate reading manuals, documentation, and such!)
>
> Some people confuse "gmail posts" with posts coming from Google Groups.
> Not the same thing. See my sig for clues.

Yes. I left my Google Groups kill filter in place and removed the gmail
filter. This morning's count: 323 articles, 87 killed. Still pretty
extreme. I'll check the clues in your sig.

Thanks Blinky,
Dave W.

On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 09:22:59 -0500, Dave W wrote:

> In article >,
> blake murphy > wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 10:43:06 -0500, Dave W wrote:
>>
>>> In article >,
>>> blake murphy > wrote:
>>>
> <snip
>>>
>>> Picked up on this thread late, but do you by any chance have gmail
>>> filtered? I can't see Om (and others, Wayne for one) cause I killed
>>> gmail in an attempt to avoid spammers selling "fake" name brand purses,
>>> watches, and widgets. Some of theses folks had munged their addy at one
>>> time, but now they're gone again. :-(
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dave W.
>>
>> i'm not familiar with newswatcher, but most filters have a way you can
>> 'pass' favored names from a filter on gmail or other sources, by putting
>> them at the top and assigning them an action that doesn't 'kill' them, and
>> when that condition is satisfied, filtering stops and the rest of the
>> filters have no effect. when my list of names to be passed got to fifty or
>> so, i gave up that idea.
>>
>> that having been said, gmail is not so spam-infested as it used to be.
>> maybe they're policing their users a little bit, unlikely as that may seem.
>> kill-filing all of gmail seems to be a little too much of a shotgun
>> approach to me. after a while, filtering on subject keywords (or
>> individuals you find objectionable) will take care of most of the problems.
>>
>> your mileage, etc.
>>
>> your pal,
>> blake
>
> Well, I'm going to "un-kill-filter" gmail. When I checked in on RFC this
> morning there were 700 articles, 326 of which were killed! Pretty
> extreme I'd say! (Not all the killed files were gmail files, I'm sure.)
>
> Anyway, thanks for the clue re. gmail's improved behavior. I'll put away
> the shotgun and see what happens. I checked newswatcher's on line
> documentation and saw a comment which implied that you can 'pass'
> favored names through a kill filter. But it may take time for me to find
> out how to do it and right now I'm hard pressed to read the manual for
> my new programmable thermostat so it can turn on the heat when the
> weather changes. (God, I hate reading manuals, documentation, and such!)
>
> Regards,
> Dave W.

it's not difficult, but it could be time-consuming if you tried to do it
all at once. after you learn the technique, you could include people one
by one as you see them quoted by others.

your pal,
blake

Dave W wrote:

> Well, I'm going to "un-kill-filter" gmail. When I checked in on RFC this
> morning there were 700 articles, 326 of which were killed! Pretty
> extreme I'd say! (Not all the killed files were gmail files, I'm sure.)
>
> Anyway, thanks for the clue re. gmail's improved behavior. I'll put away
> the shotgun and see what happens. I checked newswatcher's on line
> documentation and saw a comment which implied that you can 'pass'
> favored names through a kill filter. But it may take time for me to find
> out how to do it and right now I'm hard pressed to read the manual for
> my new programmable thermostat so it can turn on the heat when the
> weather changes. (God, I hate reading manuals, documentation, and such!)
>
> Regards,
> Dave W.

The messages posted by people who use gmail are not showing up. I just
noticed that I can not see Omelet's messages, among others. My news
reader or my ISP could be filtering them, but I am not.

If I do not respond to you, then I may not be seeing your message.

Becca

Dave W wrote:

> In article .net>,
> Blinky the Shark > wrote:
>
>> Dave W wrote:
>>
> <snip>
>> > Well, I'm going to "un-kill-filter" gmail. When I checked in on RFC this
>> > morning there were 700 articles, 326 of which were killed! Pretty
>> > extreme I'd say! (Not all the killed files were gmail files, I'm sure.)
>> >
>> > Anyway, thanks for the clue re. gmail's improved behavior. I'll put away
>> > the shotgun and see what happens. I checked newswatcher's on line
>> > documentation and saw a comment which implied that you can 'pass'
>> > favored names through a kill filter. But it may take time for me to find
>> > out how to do it and right now I'm hard pressed to read the manual for
>> > my new programmable thermostat so it can turn on the heat when the
>> > weather changes. (God, I hate reading manuals, documentation, and such!)
>>
>> Some people confuse "gmail posts" with posts coming from Google Groups.
>> Not the same thing. See my sig for clues.
>
> Yes. I left my Google Groups kill filter in place and removed the gmail
> filter. This morning's count: 323 articles, 87 killed. Still pretty
> extreme. I'll check the clues in your sig.

Nothing new there if you already have a real GG filter in place, Dave.

--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Need a new news feed? http://blinkynet.net/comp/newfeed.html