XPost: sci.lang, alt.comp.software.thunderbird, alt.usage.english
XPost: alt.english.usage
On Wed, 9/4/2024 8:29 PM, HenHanna wrote:
On 9/4/2024 2:53 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
On 9/3/2024 6:52 PM, HenHanna wrote:
;Â (Thunderbird won't let me cross-post.)
really?     (my TB lets me Xpost alot.)
TB recently had a problem of dropped posts (from earlier this year)
E-S is killing a lot of cross posts as spam.
Lynn
but this Thread is unaffected, apparently.
Servers usually have a global limit, as to how many
newsgroups maximum can be in the Newsgroup list.
But there are also crosspost rules, designed for
certain "abuse patterns".
Let's make an example:
alt.cowboys
alt.indians
Subject: Cowboys suck
Newsgroups: alt.cowboys, alt.indians
The purpose of trolling messages, is to make 500 message threads,
where the cowboys say naughty things about the indians, and
the indians respond in fashion. This technique is used in soc.* for example. Find two groups that have been fighting with one another
since the year 1066, say something incendiary, walk away.
Crosspost rules then, are crafted to stop that. "No crosspost in soc.* ".
This reduces off-topic trolling. "No crosspost in comp.os.linux.advocacy " (COLA trolling).
If messages are being discarded, and they have not exceeded the
global crosspost limit, chances are one of the groups in the list has
a "reputation as troll fodder", and crossposting is not allowed.
USENET administrators do not micromanage the server. But if, say,
20% of the server bandwidth was being used for a fixed troll pattern,
an administrator may choose to "fix" the issue.
And not all server rules need be published. Neither does the
status of the rules need to be updated on a minute-by-minute basis.
Say for example, the administrator removes the soc.* trolling rule.
Would you tell the soc.* trolls that ? No :-) Don't expect the
server status page, to make the life of the trolls easier, by
explaining everything to them.
When AIOE was still running, some of the status messages were
a bit terse. For example, people receiving "Banlist" used to freak
out when that word appeared after an attempt to post. They would
write into the support page and ask "Am I blocked?" as if the
administrator goes around individually slapping fingers. well,
that wasn't what the message meant. The banlist may have been
certain keywords. Sometimes the custom status messages, leave
something to be desired, because the poster takes the status
"personally" as an affront. when that's not what the rule is
doing. If someone doesn't want you on their server, they can
just disable your account, and that has a different set of symptoms
than the Post rules do.
Paul
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)