Re: Apologies To Stan and Sylvia

Ray Haddad <rhaddad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 04:25:01 -0600, I said, "Pick a card, any card"
and boots <no@xxxxx> instead replied:

Ray Haddad <rhaddad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 02:52:46 -0600, I said, "Pick a card, any card"
and boots <no@xxxxx> instead replied:

Josh Hill <usereplyto@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sat, 09 Jun 2007 06:07:25 -0600, boots <no@xxxxx> wrote:

Ray Haddad <rhaddad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sat, 09 Jun 2007 01:02:45 GMT, I said, "Pick a card, any card"
and Me <"Me, I said, Not you "@somethinghere.com> instead replied:

Ray Haddad wrote:
Regarding any relationship outside of MW that may or may not have
occurred.

It was, indeed, a line crossed which shall not be mentioned again by
me. Too many could be hurt.

I'm sorry. Truly.

If you feel that this was a line that should not have been crossed, why
don't you nuke the posts?

Not possible on USENET. Never has been.

I believe that is incorrect.

You can issue a cancel, but I don't think they're very widely honored.

The interface exists and it is "possible" that the cancel will be
widely honored. Ray said it was "not possible". It isn't "not
possible" as far as I know, though it may be unlikely that all copies
everywhere will disappear.

Then it's not possible. It simply cannot be done on USENET.

Also used to be able to wipe a post from the archives, not sure if
Google Groups still does that.

Last time I nuked a post, it disappeared from google groups.

Google is part of the World Wide Web, not USENET.

I don't care enough to nuke one now and see what happens.

Protocols can be defined until the cows come home, yet every dipwit
implements them differently... to a certain extent because protocols
tend to be specified by people who can't write clearly (90% of all
programmers are after all still illiterate). Some browsers still
ignore caching and other directives that have been in the http spec
for some time now. Regardless of what those who promote standards
would have you believe, it still really is the "wild west" out there.

Propagation rules and protocols for USENET do not guarantee a cancel
will be honored.

A guarantee that you will take another breath is not required for it
to be possible. Play your dip*** word games with others until you
become better at it. Thankew, thenkewverymush.

You know, Boots, you can be ignorant without meaning to be so and
then you can also be ignorant because you choose to remain so.

You know, Ray, you can play games because you're smart or because
you're stupid, but they always make you look stupid. You're jerking
off with word meanings and I don't care to play your bull*** game.
The ability to cancel messages has existed in usenet since 1987 at the
latest, see RFC1036 "Standard for USENET Messages", December 1987,
section 3.1.

You're back on my "ignore this fucktard" list of people I don't reply
to, have a nice day, and when you're jerking your word meanings try
not to get it on you.

--
The sane answer to insanity is madness.
.