On 27/04/2023 20:47, William Stickers wrote:
> What's a PFY?

"pimply-faced youth"

According to Wiktionary it means:

> Initialism of pimply-faced youth: the archetypical younger apprentice of the BOFH; a junior sysadmin.

Source: <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/PFY>

I have been called lots of names before. Kerman always blames me for
abuse going on in these news groups when he doesn't have any evidence to
support his claim. According to him it is guilty by association. I post
to these newsgroups from time to time so I am guilty according to him.

On Thu, 27 Apr 2023 12:06:59 +0200, Ivo Gandolfo <usenet@bofh.team> spurted out the following:
> On 27/04/2023 11:58, Snoopy wrote:
>>
>> Couldn't you have handled that in a better way? What if they start
>> abusing other groups, are you going to block those too till you have
>> nothing for anyone to post to? ?
>
> What do you propose? I accept any suggestion (as long as it makes sense)
>
Start with registering users.
Only allow certain email hosts i.e. No throwaway account hosts
24 hour registering wait might be an idea.

--
The Real Snoopy

Seamus Coleman <seamus.coleman@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 27/04/2023 20:47, William Stickers wrote:
> > What's a PFY?
>
> "pimply-faced youth"
>
> According to Wiktionary it means:
>
> > Initialism of pimply-faced youth: the archetypical younger apprentice
> > of the BOFH; a junior sysadmin.
>
> Source: <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/PFY>
>
> I have been called lots of names before. Kerman always blames me for
> abuse going on in these news groups when he doesn't have any evidence to
> support his claim. According to him it is guilty by association. I post
> to these newsgroups from time to time so I am guilty according to him.
>

AFAICS your first appearance in afn was three months ago in
Message-ID: <tr15sn$3nha1$1@paganini.bofh.team>
and in total you have made eight posts here.

As you post from Paganini, are you trustworthy?

As a courtesy to afn readers, this is what you posted in that article:-

-----8<-----
On 27/01/2023 12:52, SWD wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jan 2023 12:02:40 +0000, Sn!pe wrote:
>
>> The list of Paul's socks is endless:
>> Seamus MacRae
>> Tom Newton
>> FNVW of AUK numbers 1-3 (three quarters of "The Tetrarchy")
>> Nadegda
>> kensi
>> Libtard
>> Jim G.
>> And many, ~many~ more.
> That's remarkable, if it's true. Do you have any proof?
He's creative chap. He can make up names and accuse all sorts of people.
That's the beauty of these unmoderated newsgroups.
----->8-------

Do I detect a faint odour of Pembroke? No?... The jury is out.

--
^Ï^. – Sn!pe – My pet rock Gordon just is.

<https://youtu.be/_kqytf31a8E>

Seamus Coleman <seamus.coleman@gmail.com> wrote:

>. . .

>I have been called lots of names before. Kerman always blames me for
>abuse going on in these news groups when he doesn't have any evidence to
>support his claim. According to him it is guilty by association. I post
>to these newsgroups from time to time so I am guilty according to him.

You are an imitation fake sockpuppet in this instance. You've certainly
used numerous other sockpuppets over the years.

On 27/04/2023 21:46, William Stickers wrote:
> Okay, so you don't know if registered accounts are
> available. The admin doesn't publicise if they are. If
> they aren't, no one can post to the banned group. If his
> server wasn't open it wouldn't be abused to the extent it
> is. Banning posting to a group for everyone, abusers and
> non abusers, is like giving the whole class detention
> when only a couple of brats are misbehaving. Paolo ran
> his server the same way and it didn't stop his server
> from being abused more than a server that requires
> registration. Same goes for mixmin and the mail2news
> servers.

And here you are wrong, and even big. Paolo had a lot of closed groups,
both for anonymous users and for registered users. He made few
exceptions for registered users, and only for a handful of groups (eg
it.politica, which is a latrine of the Italian hierarchy).

You can see the full list of groups he closed (read-only) here:

http://web.archive.org/web/20220214143128/https://news.aioe.org/documentation/access-restrictions/

(Due to shutdown of him server I used latest version of webarchive)

--
Ivo Gandolfo

Ivo Gandolfo wrote:
>
> On 27/04/2023 21:46, William Stickers wrote:
> > Okay, so you don't know if registered accounts are
> > available. The admin doesn't publicise if they are. If
> > they aren't, no one can post to the banned group. If his
> > server wasn't open it wouldn't be abused to the extent it
> > is. Banning posting to a group for everyone, abusers and
> > non abusers, is like giving the whole class detention
> > when only a couple of brats are misbehaving. Paolo ran
> > his server the same way and it didn't stop his server
> > from being abused more than a server that requires
> > registration. Same goes for mixmin and the mail2news
> > servers.
>
> And here you are wrong, and even big. Paolo had a lot of closed groups,
> both for anonymous users and for registered users. He made few
> exceptions for registered users, and only for a handful of groups (eg
> it.politica, which is a latrine of the Italian hierarchy).
>
> You can see the full list of groups he closed (read-only) here:
>
> http://web.archive.org/web/20220214143128/https://news.aioe.org/documentation/access-restrictions/
>
> (Due to shutdown of him server I used latest version of webarchive)

You're either not understanding me or I'm not
understanding you. The only way to control abuse with an
open server such as yours is to ban posting or cross
posting to specific groups. That doesn't stop the abuse
to all the other groups until you or Paolo decide to ban
posting to those groups too. Maybe it's easier for you
and the absent Paolo to run your servers like that and
that's why you do it? Servers that require registration
have far less abuse and groups don't need to be banned.

Seamus Coleman wrote:
[...]
> I have been called lots of names before. Kerman always blames me for
> abuse going on in these news groups when he doesn't have any evidence to
> support his claim. According to him it is guilty by association. I post
> to these newsgroups from time to time so I am guilty according to him.

You sound a lot like Derbyshire. The only real difference
is you aren't wearing a skirt and frilly knickers.

William Stickers <bill.stickers@innocent.com> wrote:

> Seamus Coleman wrote:
> [...]
> > I have been called lots of names before. Kerman always blames me for
> > abuse going on in these news groups when he doesn't have any evidence to
> > support his claim. According to him it is guilty by association. I post
> > to these newsgroups from time to time so I am guilty according to him.
>
> You sound a lot like Derbyshire. The only real difference
> is you aren't wearing a skirt and frilly knickers.

Another example of how Coleman posts:-

Message-ID: <trrq3r$3tnna$1@paganini.bofh.team>

------8<-----
On 06/02/2023 19:51, Ray Banana wrote:
> On 10751 September 1993, Tony wrote:
>
>> I noticed the same thing the guy who runs Eternal September throws
>> temper tantrums if you say anything bad about him.
> Shut up, Seamus.
>

DO YOU MIND NOT INVOLVING ME WITH YOUR ARGUMENTS WITH TONY. i HAVE NO
INTEREST IN YOUR FUCKED UP SERVER.
DO YOU MIND NOT INVOLVING ME WITH YOUR ARGUMENTS WITH TONY. i HAVE NO
INTEREST IN YOUR FUCKED UP SERVER.
DO YOU MIND NOT INVOLVING ME WITH YOUR ARGUMENTS WITH TONY. i HAVE NO
INTEREST IN YOUR FUCKED UP SERVER.
DO YOU MIND NOT INVOLVING ME WITH YOUR ARGUMENTS WITH TONY. i HAVE NO
INTEREST IN YOUR FUCKED UP SERVER.
DO YOU MIND NOT INVOLVING ME WITH YOUR ARGUMENTS WITH TONY. i HAVE NO
INTEREST IN YOUR FUCKED UP SERVER.
DO YOU MIND NOT INVOLVING ME WITH YOUR ARGUMENTS WITH TONY. i HAVE NO
INTEREST IN YOUR FUCKED UP SERVER.
DO YOU MIND NOT INVOLVING ME WITH YOUR ARGUMENTS WITH TONY. i HAVE NO
INTEREST IN YOUR FUCKED UP SERVER.
DO YOU MIND NOT INVOLVING ME WITH YOUR ARGUMENTS WITH TONY. i HAVE NO
INTEREST IN YOUR FUCKED UP SERVER.
DO YOU MIND NOT INVOLVING ME WITH YOUR ARGUMENTS WITH TONY. i HAVE NO
INTEREST IN YOUR FUCKED UP SERVER.
----->8-----

- draw your own conclusions.

--
^Ï^. – Sn!pe – My pet rock Gordon just is.

<https://youtu.be/_kqytf31a8E>

On 28/04/2023 11:26, William Stickers wrote:
> You're either not understanding me or I'm not
> understanding you.

Probably

> The only way to control abuse with an
> open server such as yours is to ban posting or cross
> posting to specific groups.

Areally done (on my server, I don't know other server's policies)

> That doesn't stop the abuse

Affermative.

> to all the other groups until you or Paolo decide to ban
> posting to those groups too. Maybe it's easier for you
> and the absent Paolo to run your servers like that and
> that's why you do it? Servers that require registration
> have far less abuse and groups don't need to be banned.

Yes. Mantaining a system with registration take a lot of time. It's a my
project (actually I manually take the registration) but not a my priority.

Sincerely

--
Ivo Gandolfo