martin wrote:

It took me 5 minutes to find Franz's address using Internet. I
already
posted his address here.

It must have escaped my attention. We all have his email address, of
course; but if you mean his postal address, isn't it best not to
publish, even if it is on the Internet?

--
Mike.

martin wrote:
On Fri, 20 May 2005 17:38:35 +0100, "Mike Lyle"
wrote:

martin wrote:

It took me 5 minutes to find Franz's address using Internet. I
already posted his address here.

It must have escaped my attention. We all have his email address,
of
course; but if you mean his postal address, isn't it best not to
publish, even if it is on the Internet?

Since nobody seemed to notice, there's no damage done.

Sorry to go on about it, but though my own address, for example, is
easy enough to find if you're in the right place, it would still make
it easier for crooks and weirdoes to misuse it if it were published
on the Internet. So if anybody ever feels like making it widely
known, I'd much rather they didn't. There are particular
crook-and-weirdo vulnerabilities when somebody's just died.

--
Mike.

On 20/5/05 17:40, in article ,
"martin" wrote:

On Fri, 20 May 2005 17:38:35 +0100, "Mike Lyle"
wrote:

martin wrote:

It took me 5 minutes to find Franz's address using Internet. I
already
posted his address here.

It must have escaped my attention. We all have his email address, of
course; but if you mean his postal address, isn't it best not to
publish, even if it is on the Internet?

Since nobody seemed to notice, there's no damage done.

It really is better not to post addresses, though Martin. I realise your
intentions were of the very best but...
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(remove the weeds to email me)

"martin" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 20 May 2005 17:38:35 +0100, "Mike Lyle"
wrote:

martin wrote:

It took me 5 minutes to find Franz's address using Internet. I
already
posted his address here.

It must have escaped my attention. We all have his email address, of
course; but if you mean his postal address, isn't it best not to
publish, even if it is on the Internet?

Since nobody seemed to notice, there's no damage done.

I didn't notice your posting of his postal address, but it's dead easy to
look it up on 192.com, as you say.

On Fri, 20 May 2005 18:40:58 +0200, martin wrote:

On Fri, 20 May 2005 17:38:35 +0100, "Mike Lyle"
wrote:

martin wrote:

It took me 5 minutes to find Franz's address using Internet. I
already
posted his address here.

It must have escaped my attention. We all have his email address, of
course; but if you mean his postal address, isn't it best not to
publish, even if it is on the Internet?

Since nobody seemed to notice, there's no damage done.

Using Agent, you can actually delete messages from usenet, but
presumably only your own. From trial and error it seems to work like
this, but there may be a better way.

Display the message you want to delete, highlight all the text,
including any quoted text from earlier messages in the thread, and
copy it. Then click on 'Post' from the page-top menu, and click on
'Cancel Usenet Message' at the bottom of the drop-down list. This
brings up an empty message page. Paste the copy of your message and
send it, and it vanishes from usenet, or appears to.

Of course, it might just be that your own computer no longer displays
it! I accidentally sent two replies to the thread on 'Dwarf Rhode
problem' a couple of weeks ago, the second being a revised version of
the first. The two messages appeared, but not wishing both to be
displayed, I canceled the first version almost immediately using the
above procedure.

The relevant message certainly disappeared from my computer (which
surprised me slightly, as I assumed it would only be deleted from the
main usenet file servers), but did everyone except me still see two
versions?

Martin, if you do this with the message containing Franz's address, it
will be interesting to see if it goes from people's individual
computers, as well as usenet in general.


--
Chris

E-mail: christopher[dot]hogg[at]virgin[dot]net

On 22/5/05 11:22, in article ,
"martin" wrote:

On Sun, 22 May 2005 11:08:48 +0100, Chris Hogg wrote:


Martin, if you do this with the message containing Franz's address, it
will be interesting to see if it goes from people's individual
computers, as well as usenet in general.

The "cancel usenet message" function should only delete messages from
the servers. I suspect I sent Franz's address only to Sacha and not to
the whole group.

You did email it to me, yes but it was on the group, too. Might be better
to ask Google to delete it.
--

Sacha
(remove the weeds for email)

martin wrote:
On Sun, 22 May 2005 11:08:48 +0100, Chris Hogg
wrote:


Martin, if you do this with the message containing Franz's
address,
it will be interesting to see if it goes from people's individual
computers, as well as usenet in general.

The "cancel usenet message" function should only delete messages
from
the servers. I suspect I sent Franz's address only to Sacha and not
to
the whole group.

And, AIUI, you can't delete messages from the Gg archive. I suppose
there must be some way of dealing with bad spoof messages, but it
can't be automatic, or the archive wouldn't be an archive.

--
Mike.

martin wrote:
On Sun, 22 May 2005 12:04:00 +0100, "Mike Lyle"
wrote:

martin wrote:
On Sun, 22 May 2005 11:08:48 +0100, Chris Hogg
wrote:


Martin, if you do this with the message containing Franz's
address,
it will be interesting to see if it goes from people's
individual
computers, as well as usenet in general.

The "cancel usenet message" function should only delete messages
from the servers. I suspect I sent Franz's address only to Sacha
and not to the whole group.

And, AIUI, you can't delete messages from the Gg archive. I
suppose
there must be some way of dealing with bad spoof messages, but it
can't be automatic, or the archive wouldn't be an archive.

I have X-no-archive set. Gg honours such requests

Sure. But I'm thinking of deleting messages _from_ the archive.

--
Mike.

martin wrote:
On Sun, 22 May 2005 16:45:39 +0100, "Mike Lyle"
wrote:

martin wrote:
On Sun, 22 May 2005 12:04:00 +0100, "Mike Lyle"
wrote:

martin wrote:
On Sun, 22 May 2005 11:08:48 +0100, Chris Hogg
wrote:


Martin, if you do this with the message containing Franz's
address, it will be interesting to see if it goes from
people's
individual computers, as well as usenet in general.

The "cancel usenet message" function should only delete
messages
from the servers. I suspect I sent Franz's address only to
Sacha
and not to the whole group.

And, AIUI, you can't delete messages from the Gg archive. I
suppose
there must be some way of dealing with bad spoof messages, but
it
can't be automatic, or the archive wouldn't be an archive.

I have X-no-archive set. Gg honours such requests

Sure. But I'm thinking of deleting messages _from_ the archive.

There is no message to delete from the archive. It hasn't been
archived.

No, honestly, I wouldn't lie to you. I really _was_ thinking of
deleting messages from the archive! I said:
" I suppose there must be some way of dealing with bad spoof
messages, but it can't be automatic, or the archive wouldn't be an
archive." I never said, or thought for a moment, that yours was a
"bad spoof message"; I was moving the discussion on.

I do know about "X-no-archive".

--
Mike.

On 22/5/05 16:47, in article , "Janet
Baraclough" wrote:

The message
from martin contains these words:

On Sun, 22 May 2005 11:08:48 +0100, Chris Hogg wrote:


Martin, if you do this with the message containing Franz's address, it
will be interesting to see if it goes from people's individual
computers, as well as usenet in general.

It won't, Sacha. snip

I didn't write the "Martin, if you do this with the message......." post.
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(remove the weeds to email me)

On 22/5/05 19:48, in article , "Janet
Baraclough" wrote:

The message
from Sacha contains these words:

On 22/5/05 16:47, in article , "Janet
Baraclough" wrote:

It won't, Sacha. snip

I didn't write the "Martin, if you do this with the message......." post.

oops. Sorry:-)

Janet

No problem.
--

Sacha
(remove the weeds for email)

In message , Janet Baraclough
writes
The message
from Sacha contains these words:

On 22/5/05 16:47, in article , "Janet
Baraclough" wrote:

It won't, Sacha. snip

I didn't write the "Martin, if you do this with the message......." post.

oops. Sorry:-)

Janet
We all make mistakes.
--
June Hughes

The message
from June Hughes contains these words:
In message , Janet Baraclough
writes
The message
from Sacha contains these words:

On 22/5/05 16:47, in article
, "Janet
Baraclough" wrote:

It won't, Sacha. snip

I didn't write the "Martin, if you do this with the message......." post.

oops. Sorry:-)

Janet

We all make mistakes.

Exsept me, becuase im prefect.

--
Rusty
Open the creaking gate to make a horrid.squeak, then lower the foobar.
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi/

In message , Jaques
d'Alltrades writes
The message
from June Hughes contains these words:
In message , Janet Baraclough
writes

oops. Sorry:-)

Janet

We all make mistakes.

Exsept me, becuase im prefect.

g How's the netty?
--
June Hughes

The message
from June Hughes contains these words:
In message , Jaques
d'Alltrades writes
The message
from June Hughes contains these words:
In message , Janet Baraclough
writes

oops. Sorry:-)

Janet

We all make mistakes.

Exsept me, becuase im prefect.

g How's the netty?

Can't get near: there's a bogeyman living in it...
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi/ad/shedx.jpg

--
Rusty
Open the creaking gate to make a horrid.squeak, then lower the foobar.