Other servers

WHY YOU DO NOT Like HOT-TEXT

"Sn!pe" wrote in message .uk...
Hot-text wrote:

------=_NextPart_001_000F_01CAF8AE.324A5290
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Don't. Do. That.

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe

My pet rock Gordon loathes HTML on Usenet.

"PA Bear [MS MVP]" wrote:

"Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest!"

C'mon, October 1st!
--
~PAÞ

Pieter Zijlstra wrote:
JeffRelf.F-M.FM @. wrote:

You geniuses think I invented this ( folded ) user·agent line: ?

geniuses is plural, right?-) and that includes me, right?-)
blithersnippage

.


Just ignore them, Robear. :-o

"PA Bear [MS MVP]" wrote:

"Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest!"

C'mon, October 1st!
--
~PAÞ

Pieter Zijlstra wrote:
JeffRelf.F-M.FM @. wrote:

You geniuses think I invented this ( folded ) user·agent line: ?

geniuses is plural, right?-) and that includes me, right?-)
blithersnippage

.


Just ignore them, Robear. :-o

In article ,
Hot-text writes
WHY YOU DO NOT Like HOT-TEXT


I do not like it because it redundantly contains the message twice and
the superfluous version is bloated by unnecessary "stuff".
Neither did your client, WLM, strip Sn!pe's .sig.
All of which nibbles away at my finite monthly traffic allowance.

I was surprised to see:
Lines: 23
in your headers, since the actual line count, even without folding,
looks much greater to me.

[unsnipped:]
"Sn!pe" wrote in message
o.uk...
Hot-text wrote:

------=_NextPart_001_000F_01CAF8AE.324A5290
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Don't. Do. That.

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe

My pet rock Gordon loathes HTML on Usenet.

--
Misha
Free on-line, off-site backups?
https://mozy.com/?ref=UK45Y5

In article ,
Hot-text writes
WHY YOU DO NOT Like HOT-TEXT


I do not like it because it redundantly contains the message twice and
the superfluous version is bloated by unnecessary "stuff".
Neither did your client, WLM, strip Sn!pe's .sig.
All of which nibbles away at my finite monthly traffic allowance.

I was surprised to see:
Lines: 23
in your headers, since the actual line count, even without folding,
looks much greater to me.

[unsnipped:]
"Sn!pe" wrote in message
o.uk...
Hot-text wrote:

------=_NextPart_001_000F_01CAF8AE.324A5290
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Don't. Do. That.

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe

My pet rock Gordon loathes HTML on Usenet.

--
Misha
Free on-line, off-site backups?
https://mozy.com/?ref=UK45Y5

In article , MEB-not-
says...

snip

Right, nice attempt to ignore that the legal Notice has been posted in
all present groups, AND in specific groups the actually closing date,
AND even a reminder in many groups of that closing.

So your claim is you haven't received anything, right. Nice try, you
would have to deliberately block Microsoft's postings and would thereby
STILL be potentially liable. You have, in essence, been "served" in the
same fashion as every other user.



snip

You mention "potentially liable" but fail to amplify from where
liability stems. To what tort are you referring? If no actionable tort
exists then there can be no liability.

Microsoft can protect its trade name where the public could be confused
but that doctrine would not preclude a newsgroup named "Microsoft."

--
James E. Morrow
Email to:

In article , MEB-not-
says...

snip

Right, nice attempt to ignore that the legal Notice has been posted in
all present groups, AND in specific groups the actually closing date,
AND even a reminder in many groups of that closing.

So your claim is you haven't received anything, right. Nice try, you
would have to deliberately block Microsoft's postings and would thereby
STILL be potentially liable. You have, in essence, been "served" in the
same fashion as every other user.



snip

You mention "potentially liable" but fail to amplify from where
liability stems. To what tort are you referring? If no actionable tort
exists then there can be no liability.

Microsoft can protect its trade name where the public could be confused
but that doctrine would not preclude a newsgroup named "Microsoft."

--
James E. Morrow
Email to:

On 05/26/2010 11:47 PM, James E. Morrow wrote:
In article , MEB-not-
says...

snip

Right, nice attempt to ignore that the legal Notice has been posted in
all present groups, AND in specific groups the actually closing date,
AND even a reminder in many groups of that closing.

So your claim is you haven't received anything, right. Nice try, you
would have to deliberately block Microsoft's postings and would thereby
STILL be potentially liable. You have, in essence, been "served" in the
same fashion as every other user.



snip

You mention "potentially liable" but fail to amplify from where
liability stems. To what tort are you referring? If no actionable tort
exists then there can be no liability.

Microsoft can protect its trade name where the public could be confused
but that doctrine would not preclude a newsgroup named "Microsoft."


Read Microsoft's TOU and TOS. Further and compare your purported
questions and arguments towards Microsoft's:

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/p.../nwsgrppr.mspx
http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal/en/us/Default.aspx
http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal...rks/en-us.aspx
http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal...s/Default.aspx

Don't forget to check the applicable federal Laws and other that apply,
such as property, commerce, etc..

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government
___---

On 05/26/2010 11:47 PM, James E. Morrow wrote:
In article , MEB-not-
says...

snip

Right, nice attempt to ignore that the legal Notice has been posted in
all present groups, AND in specific groups the actually closing date,
AND even a reminder in many groups of that closing.

So your claim is you haven't received anything, right. Nice try, you
would have to deliberately block Microsoft's postings and would thereby
STILL be potentially liable. You have, in essence, been "served" in the
same fashion as every other user.



snip

You mention "potentially liable" but fail to amplify from where
liability stems. To what tort are you referring? If no actionable tort
exists then there can be no liability.

Microsoft can protect its trade name where the public could be confused
but that doctrine would not preclude a newsgroup named "Microsoft."


Read Microsoft's TOU and TOS. Further and compare your purported
questions and arguments towards Microsoft's:

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/p.../nwsgrppr.mspx
http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal/en/us/Default.aspx
http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal...rks/en-us.aspx
http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal...s/Default.aspx

Don't forget to check the applicable federal Laws and other that apply,
such as property, commerce, etc..

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government
___---

On 05/27/2010 12:09 AM, MEB wrote:
On 05/26/2010 11:47 PM, James E. Morrow wrote:
In article , MEB-not-
says...

snip

Right, nice attempt to ignore that the legal Notice has been posted in
all present groups, AND in specific groups the actually closing date,
AND even a reminder in many groups of that closing.

So your claim is you haven't received anything, right. Nice try, you
would have to deliberately block Microsoft's postings and would thereby
STILL be potentially liable. You have, in essence, been "served" in the
same fashion as every other user.



snip

You mention "potentially liable" but fail to amplify from where
liability stems. To what tort are you referring? If no actionable tort
exists then there can be no liability.

Microsoft can protect its trade name where the public could be confused
but that doctrine would not preclude a newsgroup named "Microsoft."


Read Microsoft's TOU and TOS. Further and compare your purported
questions and arguments towards Microsoft's:

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/p.../nwsgrppr.mspx
http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal/en/us/Default.aspx
http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal...rks/en-us.aspx
http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal...s/Default.aspx

Don't forget to check the applicable federal Laws and other that apply,
such as property, commerce, etc..


Sorry, you may be from [or representing] a foreign nation or party
wherein these would also apply:

Free Trade agreements,
W.T.O.,
U.N. Treaties and agreements,
International Laws,
E.U. agreements and/or Laws,
and various other as apply.

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government
___---