OT:WARNING: CItibank Scam

On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 14:35:45 +0100, "dave" found these unused words floating about:

Received this today
Dear Citibank Member,

This email was sent by the Citibank server to verify your E-mail address. You must complete this process by clicking on the link below and entering in the small window your Citibank ATM/Debit Card number and PIN that you use on ATM.

This is done for your protection – because some of our members no longer have access to their email addresses and we must verify it.

To verify your E-mail address and access your bank account, click on the link below:

https://web.da-us.citibank.com/signin/citifi/scripts/email_x verify.jsp

—————————————

Thank you for using Citibank

—————————————

Welcome to 2004 newbie troll !

ok, whatever
"J. A. Mc." wrote in message

On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 14:35:45 +0100, "dave" found these unused words floating about:

Received this today
Dear Citibank Member,

This email was sent by the Citibank server to verify your E-mail address. You must complete this process by clicking on the link below and entering in the small window your Citibank ATM/Debit Card number and PIN that you use on ATM.

This is done for your protection – because some of our members no longer have access to their email addresses and we must verify it.

To verify your E-mail address and access your bank account, click on the link below:

https://web.da-us.citibank.com/signin/citifi/scripts/email_x verify.jsp

—————————————

Thank you for using Citibank

—————————————

Welcome to 2004 newbie troll !

hi m8
these bloody things been around ages ,usually from ,lloyds tsb,barclays etc some people fall for them i just delete them
steve

—

———————————————————— ——— "Are you still wasting your time with spam?…
There is a solution!"

Protected by GIANT Company’s Spam Inspector
The most powerful anti-spam software available.
http://mail.spaminspector.com

"dave" wrote in message

ok, whatever
"J. A. Mc." wrote in message

On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 14:35:45 +0100, "dave" found these

unused

words floating about:

Received this today
Dear Citibank Member,

This email was sent by the Citibank server to verify your E-mail address. You must complete this process by clicking on the link below and entering in the small window your Citibank ATM/Debit Card number and PIN that you use on ATM.

This is done for your protection – because some of our members no longer have access to their email addresses and we must verify it.

To verify your E-mail address and access your bank account, click on the link below:

https://web.da-us.citibank.com/signin/citifi/scripts/email_x verify.jsp

—————————————

Thank you for using Citibank

—————————————

Welcome to 2004 newbie troll !

"dave" wrote in text.dial.pipex.com:

Received this today
Dear Citibank Member,

This email was sent by the Citibank server to verify your E-mail address. You must complete this process by clicking on the link below and entering in the small window your Citibank ATM/Debit Card number and PIN that you use on ATM.

All very nice, but why post this to uk groups, you spanner!?!

And also, see how I’m replying to your post by typing underneath it? This is how you do it, see? Top posting, putting your reply across the top, is for stupid Americans only…thank you..

—
*..

Have you registered Adolf Hitler?

Have you registered Elizabeth Windsor?

And bottom posting is for morons who can’t remember the text of the message before and have to re-read the whole thing again.
For your information, top/bottom posting is a matter of ettiquette, something you obviously have no idea about….

"POD {ҿ

why post to UK groups??
I’m in UK, have a Citibank card and got the email.
Just warning people who may not know.
"POD {ҿ

Tony Bond wrote:

And bottom posting is for morons who can’t remember the text of the message before and have to re-read the whole thing again. For your information, top/bottom posting is a matter of ettiquette, something you obviously have no idea about….

….except that in many newsgroups it ISN’T a matter of etiquette as the posting norm is explicitly defined in the charter.

In article <407c1198$0$6543$>,
dave wrote:

why post to UK groups??
I’m in UK, have a Citibank card and got the email.
Just warning people who may not know.

Do you cross post to the world about every scam spam you get? And would you be stupid enough to reveal your PIN to anyone?

—
*We waste time, so you don’t have to *

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

"dave" wrote in message

why post to UK groups??
I’m in UK, have a Citibank card and got the email.
Just warning people who may not know.

Including the link in your post was a bit dumb, though. You just perpetuate the problem.

On 13 Apr 2004 14:57:28 GMT, "POD {Ò¿Ó}" found these unused words floating about:

"dave" wrote in text.dial.pipex.com:

Received this today
Dear Citibank Member,

This email was sent by the Citibank server to verify your E-mail address. You must complete this process by clicking on the link below and entering in the small window your Citibank ATM/Debit Card number and PIN that you use on ATM.

All very nice, but why post this to uk groups, you spanner!?!
And also, see how I’m replying to your post by typing underneath it? This is how you do it, see? Top posting, putting your reply across the top, is for stupid Americans only…thank you..

We have a bunch of equally stupid uk’ers top posting in other groups. Isn’t just yanks but UK’s as well.

Contact your FBI or whatever police force you have.

"dave" wrote in message

Received this today
Dear Citibank Member,

This email was sent by the Citibank server to verify your E-mail address. You must complete this process by clicking on the link below and entering in the small window your Citibank ATM/Debit Card number and PIN that you use on ATM.

This is done for your protection – because some of our members no longer have access to their email addresses and we must verify it.

To verify your E-mail address and access your bank account, click on the link below:

https://web.da-us.citibank.com/signin/citifi/scripts/email_v erify.jsp

—————————————

Thank you for using Citibank

—————————————

"Tony Bond" wrote in
news:efUec.75053$:

And bottom posting is for morons who can’t remember the text of the message before and have to re-read the whole thing again. For your information, top/bottom posting is a matter of ettiquette, something you obviously have no idea about….

Ah, Meester Bond, I have been expecting you…or rather, I was expecting some lame-arsed comeback from some muppet, who hasn’t a friggin’ clue about Usenet.

Just because you are so fecklessly stupid to be using Outlook Express, and it’s ignorant way of prompting you to top-post, does not make it acceptable. So it’s twice as laughable that you make a further baboon’s arse out of yourself by spouting that *I* have no idea!!! This from a spanner using OE on Blueyonder….BAWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Jeez, what a clown!

Go on, entertain me further, come back again and spout more rubbish, I need the laugh, you feckless wonder!

—
*..

J. A. Mc. wrote in
news::

We have a bunch of equally stupid uk’ers top posting in other groups. Isn’t just yanks but UK’s as well.

Forgive me..just a silly lame troll of mine…naughty POD!

—
*..

People that put the attachments of others posts at the top of an email are complete idiots and should think about their netiquette.

How many times are we supposed to read the crap over and over before we get to the reply? On a long post it better be good or most will just killfilter you to avoid further repeat reading. The Europeans on cells modems will certainly love you for running up their online bills…NOT!

Idiot!

"POD {ҿ

In article <407bec7a$0$3301$>, dave
wrote:

Received this today
Dear Citibank Member,

bah… I fire up my newsreader, see 16 new messages and I think there’s some juicy scrap I’ve missed out on… that’ll teach me to hang out in groups where 16 messages is a big deal…

BTW, anyone who actually falls for scams like this without checking with their bank first *deserves* to have the contents of their account scooped up by some dumb-ass script kiddie and spent on crack, porn and doughnuts…

http://www.citibank.com/domain/spoof/report_abuse.htm

—
mave
—————————————————-
drugs… rock ‘n’ roll… bad-ass vegas whores…
late-night booty calls… shiny disco balls…

…………………………………………………… ….. Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access

at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<<

-=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-

In article , Gymmy Bob
wrote:

The Europeans on cells modems will
certainly love you for running up their online bills…NOT!
Idiot!

cells modems?? what is this witchcraft you speak of? you should know that we Europeans are mere apes compared to our atlantic cousins… now if you’ll excuse me, I have to go and bang some rocks together, I haven’t spoken to my mother in weeks…

—
mave
—————————————————-
drugs… rock ‘n’ roll… bad-ass vegas whores…
late-night booty calls… shiny disco balls…

…………………………………………………… ….. Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access

at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<<

-=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-

On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 18:35:08 -0400, Gymmy Bob used
to say…

People that put the attachments of others posts at the top of an email are complete idiots and should think about their netiquette.

What a tonka toy you be.

How many times are we supposed to read the crap over and over before we get to the reply? On a long post it better be good or most will just killfilter you to avoid further repeat reading. The Europeans on cells modems will certainly love you for running up their online bills…NOT!

That’s why snipping unnecessary text is the way to go, then replying directly under the text you are referring to.

Unfortunately muppets like you who top-post are invariably the worst offenders for not snipping the text you quote.

I appreciate it’s a double whammy you being Canadian and an OE user, but I’m sure you can put a little effort into moving the cursor from where Bill suggests you start typing.

Then I suggest you actually read up on some of the Usenet ‘manuals’ aka RFCs

On 13 Apr 2004 22:11:16 GMT, "POD {Ò¿Ó}"
wrote:

Ah, Meester Bond, I have been expecting you…or rather, I was expecting some lame-arsed comeback from some muppet, who hasn’t a friggin’ clue about Usenet.

Just because you are so fecklessly stupid to be using Outlook Express, and it’s ignorant way of prompting you to top-post, does not make it acceptable. So it’s twice as laughable that you make a further baboon’s arse out of yourself by spouting that *I* have no idea!!! This from a spanner using OE on Blueyonder….BAWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Jeez, what a clown!

Go on, entertain me further, come back again and spout more rubbish, I need the laugh, you feckless wonder!

No one gives a rat’s arse about netiquette anymore. Otherwise you wouldn’t have cross posted to so many groups. And ascii art sigs are so 1990’s. Get with the program.

Slug wrote in news:fuvo70l1c9g0tet42m6e7oqc5l7ja7vnm5@
4ax.com:

No one gives a rat’s arse about netiquette anymore. Otherwise you wouldn’t have cross posted to so many groups. And ascii art sigs are so 1990’s. Get with the program.

Who am I to trim a cross post? I simply replied to the original cross post, and the vast and un-related cross grouping was that person’s stange selection. To therefore be assured that my reply is read, I needed to maintain the groups.

And don’t dis the ascii art…I’m actually an 80’s kinda guy, and have to show my outdated and outmoded ways in some way!

—
*..

dave wrote:

why post to UK groups??
I’m in UK, have a Citibank card and got the email.
Just warning people who may not know.

That’s considerate of you, but if for every single internet scam out there (there are countless ones) somebody crossposted a notice/warning through usenet, we’d be flooded with such caveats in short time.

—
-paleophile (ask for e-mail)

"I ask myself, is it a sin,
to be flexible, when the boat comes in."

mave wrote in news:130420042336406780%:

BTW, anyone who actually falls for scams like this without checking with their bank first *deserves* to have the contents of their account scooped up by some dumb-ass script kiddie and spent on crack, porn and doughnuts…

Agreed, it’s like driving a car, using the Internet is a dangerous enterprise, and while it maybe far fetched to suggest lessons and a test to use the Internet, I think it’s fair to suggest, that you’d be in the same kinda trouble to do embark on either venture while lacking a good grounding.

Getting into a car and trying to drive away is not too distant from getting onto the internet without knowledge of firewalls, anti-virus, pop-up blockers, spam-blockers…and so on..

Or maybe a better analogy is with sex education, as we need to be educating our 10 year olds about their safety, and their own protection. And that using Outlook Express as your newsreader is akin to using any form of contraceptive endorsed by the Catholic Church, as they both end up getting you into trouble and disowned by your family!

—
*..

There are no USENET MANUALS and if anybody tries to tell you that they are sillier than you.
Usenet does NOT specify formats or netiquette. It is all just opinion on preferences. Practicality is the only way.

Please post your attachments at the bottom if you want people to read your posts. If you don’t then what are you trying to accomplish?

"Kurt Hamster" wrote in message

On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 18:35:08 -0400, Gymmy Bob used
to say…

People that put the attachments of others posts at the top of an email

are

complete idiots and should think about their netiquette.

What a tonka toy you be.

How many times are we supposed to read the crap over and over before we

get

to the reply? On a long post it better be good or most will just

killfilter

you to avoid further repeat reading. The Europeans on cells modems will certainly love you for running up their online bills…NOT!

That’s why snipping unnecessary text is the way to go, then replying directly under the text you are referring to.

Unfortunately muppets like you who top-post are invariably the worst offenders for not snipping the text you quote.

I appreciate it’s a double whammy you being Canadian and an OE user, but I’m sure you can put a little effort into moving the cursor from where Bill suggests you start typing.

Then I suggest you actually read up on some of the Usenet ‘manuals’ aka RFCs

On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 17:07:33 +0100, "Tony Bond" vaguely proposed a theory
…….and in reply I say!:
remove ns from my header address to reply via email

And bottom posting is for morons who can’t remember the text of the message before and have to re-read the whole thing again.

YES! Well said. Or who can’t be bothered to check the thread, and want….aaargh!

For your information, top/bottom posting is a matter of ettiquette, something you obviously have no idea about….

AH! But if you argue etiquette, then there is right and wrong. I post wherever I think is most appropriate, using a bit of _thought_, which is what absolutes, rules and "etiquette" are designed to prevent! <G>

****************************************************
I went on a guided tour not long ago.The guide got
us lost. He was a non-compass mentor………sorry
………no I’m not.

On 13 Apr 2004 22:11:16 GMT, "POD {Ò¿Ó}"
vaguely proposed a theory
…….and in reply I say!:
remove ns from my header address to reply via email

BAWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Ah! We have a familiar cry!

I will certainly be "bottom posting" _you_ arsewipe.

****************************************************
I went on a guided tour not long ago.The guide got
us lost. He was a non-compass mentor………sorry
………no I’m not.

On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 18:35:08 -0400, "Gymmy Bob" vaguely proposed a theory
…….and in reply I say!:
remove ns from my header address to reply via email

I think there may a much more direct reason for KF’ing this poster anyway…

People that put the attachments of others posts at the top of an email are complete idiots and should think about their netiquette.
most will just killfilter
you to avoid further repeat reading.

****************************************************
I went on a guided tour not long ago.The guide got
us lost. He was a non-compass mentor………sorry
………no I’m not.

On 13 Apr 2004 22:11:16 GMT, "POD {Ò¿Ó}"
vaguely proposed a theory
…….and in reply I say!:
remove ns from my header address to reply via email

Who probably knows that they might be accused of being a

…..SPA– _MM_ –ER……..

I let it go first time, but that’s twice. Your m key appears to work. I have to start thinking you actually think that the word is spanner.

This from a
spanner using OE on Blueyonder….

****************************************************
I went on a guided tour not long ago.The guide got
us lost. He was a non-compass mentor………sorry
………no I’m not.

Old Nick wrote in
news::

Who probably knows that they might be accused of being a
….SPA– _MM_ –ER……..

I let it go first time, but that’s twice. Your m key appears to work. I have to start thinking you actually think that the word is spanner.

This from a
spanner using OE on Blueyonder….

Spanner, as in tool, as in idiot as in Old Nick

—
*..

Old Nick wrote:

On 13 Apr 2004 22:11:16 GMT, "POD {ҿ

In article ,
Gymmy Bob wrote:

Usenet does NOT specify formats or netiquette. It is all just opinion on preferences.

You don’t half talk bollocks. If there were no standards on formats, then MS would long ago have produced newsreaders that made it impossible for other makers to read/write to newsgroups. Instead of just making one which makes things look crap.

As regards netiquette – have you ever done a search and read the results?

—
*There are two sides to every divorce: Yours and shit head’s*

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 10:04:31 +0100, Dave Plowman
wrote:

In article ,
Gymmy Bob wrote:

Usenet does NOT specify formats or netiquette. It is all just opinion on preferences.

As regards netiquette – have you ever done a search and read the results?

try RFC1855

On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 23:51:08 -0400, Gymmy Bob used
to say…

[silly top posting corrected]

"Kurt Hamster" wrote in message

On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 18:35:08 -0400, Gymmy Bob used
to say…

People that put the attachments of others posts at the top of an email

are

complete idiots and should think about their netiquette.

What a tonka toy you be.

How many times are we supposed to read the crap over and over before we

get

to the reply? On a long post it better be good or most will just

killfilter

you to avoid further repeat reading. The Europeans on cells modems will certainly love you for running up their online bills…NOT!

That’s why snipping unnecessary text is the way to go, then replying directly under the text you are referring to.

Unfortunately muppets like you who top-post are invariably the worst offenders for not snipping the text you quote.

I appreciate it’s a double whammy you being Canadian and an OE user, but I’m sure you can put a little effort into moving the cursor from where Bill suggests you start typing.

Then I suggest you actually read up on some of the Usenet ‘manuals’ aka RFCs

There are no USENET MANUALS and if anybody tries to tell you that they are sillier than you.

You did spot the quotes didn’t you?

You are obviously a newbie at this, given away by your propensity for top posting, your use of OE and your ignorance of what an RFC is.

Usenet does NOT specify formats or netiquette. It is all just opinion on preferences. Practicality is the only way.

They are opinions based on knowledge and experience, then agreed on by other people who know better than you or I.

Try RFC1855 for a start, you never know, you may even klearn something (though I won’t hold my breath.)

Please post your attachments at the bottom if you want people to read your posts. If you don’t then what are you trying to accomplish?

And yet another example of your newbie status, i.e. not knowing the difference between an attachment and a reply.

Kurt Hamster wrote in
news::

Please post your attachments at the bottom if you want people to read your posts. If you don’t then what are you trying to accomplish?

And yet another example of your newbie status, i.e. not knowing the difference between an attachment and a reply.

I was trying to figure out what the hell he was on about over that 😉

—
*..

On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 23:36:40 +0100, mave found these unused words floating about:

In article <407bec7a$0$3301$>, dave
wrote:

Received this today
Dear Citibank Member,

bah… I fire up my newsreader, see 16 new messages and I think there’s some juicy scrap I’ve missed out on… that’ll teach me to hang out in groups where 16 messages is a big deal…

BTW, anyone who actually falls for scams like this without checking with their bank first *deserves* to have the contents of their account scooped up by some dumb-ass script kiddie and spent on crack, porn and doughnuts…

Then obviously you want rec.photo.digital … usually hundreds of useless OT drivel like this. Should make your entertainment (between silly soaps and lame sitcoms, that is).

I did. The opinion of that self designated group says **NOT** to include the entire post to which you are replying to at the top of the reply.

"imbsysop" wrote in message

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 10:04:31 +0100, Dave Plowman
wrote:

In article ,
Gymmy Bob wrote:

Usenet does NOT specify formats or netiquette. It is all just opinion

on

preferences.

As regards netiquette – have you ever done a search and read the results?

try RFC1855

Sorry my overload/bandwidth saver newsgroup filter cut off your garbage.

"Kurt Hamster" wrote in message

On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 23:51:08 -0400, Gymmy Bob used
to say…

[silly top posting corrected]

"Kurt Hamster" wrote in message

On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 18:35:08 -0400, Gymmy Bob used
to say…

People that put the attachments of others posts at the top of an email

are

complete idiots and should think about their netiquette.

What a tonka toy you be.

How many times are we supposed to read the crap over and over before

we

get

to the reply? On a long post it better be good or most will just

killfilter

you to avoid further repeat reading. The Europeans on cells modems

will

certainly love you for running up their online bills…NOT!

That’s why snipping unnecessary text is the way to go, then replying directly under the text you are referring to.

Unfortunately muppets like you who top-post are invariably the worst offenders for not snipping the text you quote.

I appreciate it’s a double whammy you being Canadian and an OE user,

but

I’m sure you can put a little effort into moving the cursor from where Bill suggests you start typing.

Then I suggest you actually read up on some of the Usenet ‘manuals’ aka RFCs

There are no USENET MANUALS and if anybody tries to tell you that they

are

sillier th

You don’t have to studder if you get excited.

"Old Nick" wrote in message

On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 18:35:08 -0400, "Gymmy Bob" vaguely proposed a theory
……and in reply I say!:
remove ns from my header address to reply via email

I think there may a much more direct reason for KF’ing this poster anyway…

People that put the attachments of others posts at the top of an email

are

complete idiots and should think about their netiquette.
most will just killfilter
you to avoid further repeat reading.

****************************************************
I went on a guided tour not long ago.The guide got
us lost. He was a non-compass mentor………sorry
……..no I’m not.

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 19:42:50 -0400, "Gymmy Bob" vaguely proposed a theory
…….and in reply I say!:
remove ns from my header address to reply via email

errr?….

You don’t have to studder if you get excited.

****************************************************
I went on a guided tour not long ago.The guide got
us lost. He was a non-compass mentor………sorry
………no I’m not.

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 19:42:03 -0400, Gymmy Bob used
to say…

Sorry my overload/bandwidth saver newsgroup filter cut off your garbage.

It can’t work that well as it allows you to post.

You sad bastard.
I much prefer posts at the top, then you don’t have to scroll down to read it. Much easier.
So how can one person be wrong about this? It’s what ever each individual person prefers.

"POD {ҿ

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 19:42:50 -0400, "Gymmy Bob" found these unused words floating about:

You don’t have to studder if you get excited.

I’ve heard of shudder and stutter … is ‘studder’ something studdents do?

In article <c5m8dl$2n6$>,
Peter Hewitt-Dutton wrote:

You sad bastard. I much prefer posts at the top, then you don’t have to scroll down to read it. Much easier. So how can one person be wrong about this? It’s what ever each individual person prefers.

So you only post to a group to read your own posts?

Try counting the numbers of top against bottom posts on this or any other UK group. Bottom posting is the norm – and by a factor of several.

—
*Born free…Taxed to death.

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

Try counting the numbers of top against bottom posts on this or any other UK group. Bottom posting is the norm – and by a factor of several.

Don’t say that, they’ll go on a crazy top posting rampage just to out number the bottom (proper) posts just to prove you wrong.

A. Because it messes up the reading order
Q. Why shouldn’t people top post?

A. Top Posting
Q. Whats the most annoying thing on usenet?

"Dave Plowman" wrote in message

Try counting the numbers of top against bottom posts on this or any

other

UK group. Bottom posting is the norm – and by a factor of several.

The implication here is that ‘you’ have counted them …………You must be a pretty sad guy.

Know what I mean? ……..;-)))

Bill Newton

On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 17:56:29 +0000 (UTC), Bill Newton used <c5micc$i7v$> to say…

"Dave Plowman" wrote in message

Try counting the numbers of top against bottom posts on this or any

other

UK group. Bottom posting is the norm – and by a factor of several.

The implication here is that ‘you’ have counted them …………You must be a pretty sad guy.

Know what I mean? ……..;-)))

One doesn’t need to count when the overwhelming majority correctly bottom post.

"Peter Hewitt-Dutton" wrote in
news:c5m8dl$2n6$:

You sad bastard.
I much prefer posts at the top, then you don’t have to scroll down to read it. Much easier.
So how can one person be wrong about this? It’s what ever each individual person prefers.

You’re a dense little fucktard ain’t you sonny? So dense, in fact, that you bend light!

Your newbie arrogance is outstanding and comical, just because you like to do it makes it alright does it? Jeez the logic overpowers me!

Let me point you in the direction of RFC1855, which is easily found on Google, so even a moron like you has no excuse….and from whick I quote

3.1 User Guidelines
3.1.1 General Guidelines for mailing lists and NetNews
If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you summarize the original ==>***"at the top"***<== of the message, or include just enough text of the original to give a context. This will make sure readers understand when they start to read your response. Since NetNews, especially, is proliferated by distributing the postings from one host to another, it is possible to see a response to a message before seeing the original. Giving context helps everyone. But do not include the entire original!

So go take your newbie BTInternet/Outlook Express stupidity and arrogance elsewhere, as you have be found to be clueless on what you are having the nerve to stick your nose in.

—
*..

Who Gives a monkeys?

"Kurt Hamster" wrote in message

On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 17:56:29 +0000 (UTC), Bill Newton used <c5micc$i7v$> to say…

"Dave Plowman" wrote in message

Try counting the numbers of top against bottom posts on this or any

other

UK group. Bottom posting is the norm – and by a factor of several.

The implication here is that ‘you’ have counted them …………You must be a pretty sad guy.

Know what I mean? ……..;-)))

One doesn’t need to count when the overwhelming majority correctly bottom post.

Who Gives a monkeys?

It’s whan you whole body shakes to your words…LOL

"J. A. Mc." wrote in message

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 19:42:50 -0400, "Gymmy Bob"

found

these unused words floating about:

You don’t have to studder if you get excited.

I’ve heard of shudder and stutter … is ‘studder’ something studdents do?

LOL

<see original attached below>

"Phil" wrote in message

Try counting the numbers of top against bottom posts on this or any

other

UK group. Bottom posting is the norm – and by a factor of several.

Don’t say that, they’ll go on a crazy top posting rampage just to out

number

the bottom (proper) posts just to prove you wrong.

A. Because it messes up the reading order
Q. Why shouldn’t people top post?

A. Top Posting
Q. Whats the most annoying thing on usenet?

That’s not what the site I read on it says.

Quote your opinionated site.

Oh I forgot. You can’t read this.

"POD {ҿ

"Gymmy Bob" wrote in message

That’s not what the site I read on it says.

Quote your opinionated site.

Oh I forgot. You can’t read this.

FFS, whats the point of top posting if you don’t remove the rest of the thread?

The rest of the thread is useless if you insist on being an arse and top posting.

In article , POD {Ò¿Ó}
wrote:

You’re a dense little fucktard ain’t you sonny? So dense, in fact, that you bend light!

LMFAO!!!!

—
mave
—————————————————-
drugs… rock ‘n’ roll… bad-ass vegas whores…
late-night booty calls… shiny disco balls…

…………………………………………………… ….. Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access

at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<<

-=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-

Your post is totally useless if you bottom post after a bunch of header crap. Who wants to scroll 100 lines to read somebody’s rant unless they are something special?

<original rant attached below>

"Phil" wrote in message

"Gymmy Bob" wrote in message

That’s not what the site I read on it says.

Quote your opinionated site.

Oh I forgot. You can’t read this.

FFS, whats the point of top posting if you don’t remove the rest of the thread?

The rest of the thread is useless if you insist on being an arse and top posting.

On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 21:01:24 GMT, Ewan Villiers used
<EKCfc.185$> to say…

Who Gives a monkeys?

Obviously you do or you wouldn’t have bothered reading it then making the effort to reply.

Do you think the village idiot is concerned that you are after her job?

On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 17:56:07 -0400, Gymmy Bob used
to say…

"POD {Ò¿Ó}" wrote in message

Your newbie arrogance is outstanding and comical, just because you like to do it makes it alright does it? Jeez the logic overpowers me!
Let me point you in the direction of RFC1855, which is easily found on Google, so even a moron like you has no excuse….and from whick I quote
3.1 User Guidelines
3.1.1 General Guidelines for mailing lists and NetNews
If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you summarize the original ==>***"at the top"***<== of the message, or include just enough text of the original to give a context. This will make sure readers understand when they start to read your response. Since NetNews, especially, is proliferated by distributing the postings from one host to another, it is possible to see a response to a message before seeing the original. Giving context helps everyone. But do not include the entire original!

So go take your newbie BTInternet/Outlook Express stupidity and arrogance elsewhere, as you have be found to be clueless on what you are having the nerve to stick your nose in.

That’s not what the site I read on it says.

Quote your opinionated site.

Oh I forgot. You can’t read this.

Yet another own goal by a newbie fuckwit.

RFCs are documents, not sites. They may appear on a site, but they aren’t sites as such.

Obviously you weren’t reading the correct document.

So why doesn’t that surprise me.

On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 20:12:27 -0400, Gymmy Bob used
to say…

"Phil" wrote in message

FFS, whats the point of top posting if you don’t remove the rest of the thread?

The rest of the thread is useless if you insist on being an arse and top posting.

Your post is totally useless if you bottom post after a bunch of header crap. Who wants to scroll 100 lines to read somebody’s rant unless they are something special?

<original rant attached below>

Because you dumb fuck, you are supposed to snip non relative parts of the message you are replying to.

It’s lazy fuckwits like you who just bung a few words on top of the original thread that waste bandwidth.

Sooner or later you will experience a not so subtle LART if you keep on with this brain dead attitude.

Fucking newbies, it’s almost as bad as the AOL "me too" of the dim and distant past.

What?

"Kurt Hamster" wrote in message

On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 20:12:27 -0400, Gymmy Bob used
to say…

"Phil" wrote in message

FFS, whats the point of top posting if you don’t remove the rest of the thread?

The rest of the thread is useless if you insist on being an arse and

top

posting.

Your post is totally useless if you bottom post after a bunch of header crap. Who wants to scroll 100 lines to read somebody’s rant unless they

are

something special?

<original rant attached below>

Because you dum

Arguing about a newsgroup post is like running in the special olympics. Even is you win you’re still retarded.

Kurt Hamster wrote in
news::

it’s almost as bad as the AOL "me too" of the dim and distant past.

Not so dim and distant, there were several hundred "me toos" to the 2004 warez list thread.

—
*..

"Gymmy Bob" wrote in
news::

What?

Only goes to compound the fact that you are a fecless dimwit with no fucking clue.

—
*..

"Robert" <none> wrote in news::

Arguing about a newsgroup post is like running in the special olympics. Even is you win you’re still retarded.

What’s up teddy, not been getting any attention of late? Felt the urge to post shite and get noticed?

—
*..

On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 22:09:33 -0400, Gymmy Bob used
to say…

What?

Got halfway through the message and realised "Why bother? The Canuck will never be in possession of any amount of clue".

"Kurt Hamster" wrote in message

On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 21:01:24 GMT, Ewan Villiers used
<EKCfc.185$> to say…

Who Gives a monkeys?

Obviously you do or you wouldn’t have bothered reading it then making the effort to reply.

Do you think the village idiot is concerned that you are after her job?

Awwwww, you cut the bottom posted version of my reply…… I’m heartbroken.

Kindly get a life

Ewan

"POD {ҿ

I often wonder why all the cellphone addicts are so infantile.

"POD {ҿ

Hook, line and sinker.

Take it out of your mouth sucker.

"Kurt Hamster" wrote in message

On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 22:09:33 -0400, Gymmy Bob used
to say…

What?

Got halfway through the message and realised "Why bother? The Canuck will never be in possession of any amount of clue".