And yet she thinks others need to do as she says since she likes to
plead little miss innocent....Check out rec.aquaria.marine.reef to see
carol and her hipcrime software in action........just look for the
flood of posts by the NEW Tristan! Carol certainly is one loser. Most
however oculd see it coming as she had numerous slapdowns over the
weekend and did not garner the attention she so much craved, so this
is her retaliation for no one siding up with her and taking her stand
or giving her much more than a "delete" when it came to her posts.

Bye bye carol

Sponsored in part by:
The House of Carol Gulley©
The Carol Gulley Institute of Usenet Socks
Anonymity® and Sock Puppetry.
The Committee to Take Back our USENET Groups!
Gulleys Home for Orphaned Socks LLC.
Supporters of Your Local Newsgroups (SLN, Ltd.)
The Carol AKA Zebulon Gulley Plonk Foundation©
Just say no to CArol Gulley!
Its not all about Carol Gulley, Trust me on that!
Send Carol an Email.....tell her how you realy feel!
Send CArols ISP and NNTP aan Abuse report,
let them know how you feel too.



-= Have LoneGunman, Will Travel. =-

On 12 Feb 2007 17:03:28 -0800, "Nekojin" wrote:

After the trashing Jan and Gill gave her... well you know Carol is
what Carol does.
I doubt Jan and all the other moderators will even bother replying to
her antics.

did you know it has taken them more than three month to figure out how
to exclude her in their moderation policy?

We haven't been trying to exclude anyone. And while you might be
technically correct about the three months figure, you've got to
remember that during that time was the Christmas/New Year's holiday
season. We've been trying to hash out some kind of moderation policy
and charter. You've got to remember that everyone involved does so on
a strictly voluntary basis too. Hey -- I've got plenty of excuses for
why this isn't done yet -- don't even get me started.

But more to the point as to when rpm might be running, there are
exactly two software packages that come anywhere close to what we want
to do. Out of this vast selection, we have pretty much decided on the
one and are trying to get it configured, get it a host machine and
newsfeed, that sort of stuff. Then we want to run a few "trial" posts
through it so that the moderaters know how to use the system and feel
comfortable with it. I understand things happen pretty fast once the
final discussion is finished. We want to have all our "ducks in line"
when that happens. I'm just guessing, but from where I sit early
March sounds like a pretty reasonable guess for when rpm ought to be
up and running.
Galen Hekhuis
Illiterate? Write for FREE help

"Galen Hekhuis" wrote in message
...
On 12 Feb 2007 17:03:28 -0800, "Nekojin" wrote:

After the trashing Jan and Gill gave her... well you know Carol is
what Carol does.
I doubt Jan and all the other moderators will even bother replying to
her antics.

did you know it has taken them more than three month to figure out how
to exclude her in their moderation policy?
=========================
We haven't been trying to exclude anyone.

Galen, he's been told that many times by many people in the past weeks. He
just keeps repeating the same thing over and over using different
names/nyms. They finally stopped replying to him on the news.groups group.
He wants to be reassured that certain people will be excluded from
moderated.rec.ponds. He's one of the two people "on a mission" holding this
group "hostage," as Jayne referred to the situation here.

brevity snip

But more to the point as to when rpm might be running, there are
exactly two software packages that come anywhere close to what we want
to do. Out of this vast selection, we have pretty much decided on the
one and are trying to get it configured, get it a host machine and
newsfeed, that sort of stuff.

By host machine you mean a machine that's connected to the net 24/7/365 I
assume. All this work will be worth it in the end.

Then we want to run a few "trial" posts
through it so that the moderaters know how to use the system and feel
comfortable with it. I understand things happen pretty fast once the
final discussion is finished. We want to have all our "ducks in line"
when that happens. I'm just guessing, but from where I sit early
March sounds like a pretty reasonable guess for when rpm ought to be
up and running.

Just in time for the new spring posters....... :-))
--
ZB....
Frugal ponding since 1995.
rec.ponder since late 1996.
My Pond & Aquarium Pages:
http://tinyurl.com/9do58
~~~~ }((((* ~~~ }{{{{(ö ~~~~ }((((({*

On 12 Feb 2007 18:03:45 -0800, "Nekojin" wrote:

That the party line you giving to the big-8. Even Jayne pulled her
support. Nice try.
we all know better.

The software has been modified so that there is absolutely no way
available to anyone to reject a post based on header information. The
software simply will not permit it.
Galen Hekhuis
Illiterate? Write for FREE help

On 12 Feb 2007 18:26:49 -0800, "PonderKoi"
wrote:

so why the need of so many moderators?

1. To cut down the workload of any single one of us.
2. To try and get a good timezone spread if we can.
3. I forgot what 3 was, but you can bet it was good.

sorry Galen. you are not making sense. either a human moderator reads
it or not.
approves it or not. When they see a Carol post... it will be gone. You
know it, we all do.

That's just it. There *is* no way to reject a "Carol post." Sure,
there's a list of posts, so it doesn't take much more than literacy to
recognize the author is Carol, even though she may not use that exact
name. But it requires *two* people to reject a post. Each of the
moderators have committed NOT to reject a post solely on the basis of
headers. It would require a conspiracy of two individuals, plus they
would have to hide it from the rest of us. Granted, it isn't an
insurmountable hurdle at all, but it is pretty high. It's about the
best we can do.

"Galen Hekhuis" wrote in message
...
On 12 Feb 2007 18:26:49 -0800, "PonderKoi"
wrote:

so why the need of so many moderators?

1. To cut down the workload of any single one of us.
2. To try and get a good timezone spread if we can.
3. I forgot what 3 was, but you can bet it was good.

sorry Galen. you are not making sense. either a human moderator reads
it or not.
approves it or not. When they see a Carol post... it will be gone. You
know it, we all do.

That's just it. There *is* no way to reject a "Carol post." Sure,
there's a list of posts, so it doesn't take much more than literacy to
recognize the author is Carol, ......

And this Galen is why I refused to leave for a few weeks and try coming back
with a new name. It would have been impossible to fool the regulars. I
couldn't convince those who wanted me to do it, that it wouldn't work. I
hope anyone else who may have resorted to this "passing as someone else" in
fear of personal attacks can soon post on the moderated version of rec.ponds
as themselves. :-)

even though she may not use that exact
name. But it requires *two* people to reject a post. Each of the
moderators have committed NOT to reject a post solely on the basis of
headers. It would require a conspiracy of two individuals, plus they
would have to hide it from the rest of us. Granted, it isn't an
insurmountable hurdle at all, but it is pretty high. It's about the
best we can do.
--
ZB....
Frugal ponding since 1995.
rec.ponder since late 1996.
My Pond & Aquarium Pages:
http://tinyurl.com/9do58
~~~~ }((((* ~~~ }{{{{(ö ~~~~ }((((({*