Aardvark wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Jan 2012 09:07:37 +0000, ~BD~ wrote:
>
>> That is not in accord with item 2 of the Charter, Dustin.
>> http://shplink.com/misc/FAQ.htm
>
> That section perfectly covers your recent spamming behaviour. If
> someone were to collect all the headers of all your 'SPAM' posts and send
> them with an abuse report to BT, I think you could expect your
> relationship with them would quickly be at an end.
>
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spam_%28electronic%29#Newsgroup_and_forum>
>
> "Usenet convention defines spamming as excessive multiple posting, that
> is, the repeated posting of a message (or substantially similar messages)"
>
> Yup, that describes to a tee exactly what you've been doing. I told you a day or two ago.
>
>
>

@ Aardvark

Perhaps you simply didn't understand what Dustin said? Is that it?

He *threatened* - *threatened* - to publish my personal home telephone
number (again!) when he's already given his word that he would not do
so. He has no honour.

May I suggest that if *you* feel strongly about this, *YOU*, in the best
interest of everyone posting on Usenet, collect all the headers of all
my 'SPAM' posts and send them with an abuse report to BT.

It shouldn't take you too long. Are you game?

I'm most interested to see if BT would, actually, dump a loyal customer
for my terrible misdemeanour. It certainly bothers me not one jot!

--
Dave - "It is much better to be hated for what you are, than to be loved
for what you definitely are not." "Do unto others as you would have them
do unto you."