Topics on Electronics

Back that up with statistics. I.E. Verify that.
"mikeyhsd" wrote in message ...
in fact labeling it as SPAM will cause MORE people to check it out just to see.






"Bill in Co." wrote in message ...
Tom [Pepper] Willett wrote:
it unattractive to potential readers. Most spammers give up quickly when
they see their spam message defaced within five minutes of posting.

Oh for cryin' out loud. How many spammers do you think actually come back
and see their spam message?

Zero.

Where do you get the five minutes? Do you
think the spammers actually care that someone calls it spam?

Nope.

You in effect, are insulting many valuable posters (problem solvers) in this
group. Shame on you.
"Tom [Pepper] Willett" wrote in message
...
People who feel compelled to label it as SPAM to assist the rest of us
less
fortunates, have too much non-productive time on their hands.

"mikeyhsd" wrote in message
...
in fact labeling it as SPAM will cause MORE people to check it out just to
see.






"Bill in Co." wrote in message
...
Tom [Pepper] Willett wrote:
it unattractive to potential readers. Most spammers give up quickly
when
they see their spam message defaced within five minutes of posting.

Oh for cryin' out loud. How many spammers do you think actually come
back
and see their spam message?

Zero.

Where do you get the five minutes? Do you
think the spammers actually care that someone calls it spam?

Nope.

Think very carefully! Doesn't your posted statement come from someone with a low IQ?
"mikeyhsd" wrote in message ...
it's a matter of low IQ trying to prove to others it is intelligent.

thinking that the correct spelling of SPAM will do it.





"DDW" wrote in message ...
On Mon, 8 Dec 2008 12:12:08 -0600, "Unknown"
wrote:

Unfortunately no!

Well, if they're using a newsreader, changing the subject to "Spam"
ain't gonna do anything to help that. The offending post is off
somewhere else, not to be seen.

Changing the subject and posting something about the unquoted poster
does absolutely nothing. At least quote the email address of the
offender, huh???


"DDW" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 8 Dec 2008 17:11:16 +0100, "Pegasus \(MVP\)"
wrote:

Pure spam plus a lot of nonsense, e.g. this statement: "resistors convert
a
current to a voltage"

Another orphan (subject changed) post.

Don'tcha think most people know "spam" when they see it?

DDW
--
Reply via this group
No email please


DDW
--
Reply via this group
No email please

They need to continue solving problems and stop acting like they are
providing a valuable service by informing us of spam.

"Unknown" wrote in message
...
: You in effect, are insulting many valuable posters (problem solvers) in
this
: group. Shame on you.
: "Tom [Pepper] Willett" wrote in message
: ...
: People who feel compelled to label it as SPAM to assist the rest of us
: less
: fortunates, have too much non-productive time on their hands.
:
: "mikeyhsd" wrote in message
: ...
: in fact labeling it as SPAM will cause MORE people to check it out just
to
: see.
:
:
:
:
:
:
: "Bill in Co." wrote in message
: ...
: Tom [Pepper] Willett wrote:
: it unattractive to potential readers. Most spammers give up quickly
: when
: they see their spam message defaced within five minutes of posting.
:
: Oh for cryin' out loud. How many spammers do you think actually come
: back
: and see their spam message?
:
: Zero.
:
: Where do you get the five minutes? Do you
: think the spammers actually care that someone calls it spam?
:
: Nope.
:
:
:
:
:

You continue doing what you do so well....trolling.

"Unknown" wrote in message
...
Think very carefully! Doesn't your posted statement come from someone with a
low IQ?
"mikeyhsd" wrote in message
...
it's a matter of low IQ trying to prove to others it is intelligent.

thinking that the correct spelling of SPAM will do it.





"DDW" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 8 Dec 2008 12:12:08 -0600, "Unknown"
wrote:

Unfortunately no!

Well, if they're using a newsreader, changing the subject to "Spam"
ain't gonna do anything to help that. The offending post is off
somewhere else, not to be seen.

Changing the subject and posting something about the unquoted poster
does absolutely nothing. At least quote the email address of the
offender, huh???


"DDW" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 8 Dec 2008 17:11:16 +0100, "Pegasus \(MVP\)"
wrote:

Pure spam plus a lot of nonsense, e.g. this statement: "resistors
convert
a
current to a voltage"

Another orphan (subject changed) post.

Don'tcha think most people know "spam" when they see it?

DDW
--
Reply via this group
No email please


DDW
--
Reply via this group
No email please

But not everyone is as intelligent as you. Don't you think there are many
novices out there?
Give them a break.
"Tom [Pepper] Willett" wrote in message
...
They need to continue solving problems and stop acting like they are
providing a valuable service by informing us of spam.

"Unknown" wrote in message
...
: You in effect, are insulting many valuable posters (problem solvers) in
this
: group. Shame on you.
: "Tom [Pepper] Willett" wrote in message
: ...
: People who feel compelled to label it as SPAM to assist the rest of us
: less
: fortunates, have too much non-productive time on their hands.
:
: "mikeyhsd" wrote in message
: ...
: in fact labeling it as SPAM will cause MORE people to check it out
just
to
: see.
:
:
:
:
:
:
: "Bill in Co." wrote in message
: ...
: Tom [Pepper] Willett wrote:
: it unattractive to potential readers. Most spammers give up
quickly
: when
: they see their spam message defaced within five minutes of
posting.
:
: Oh for cryin' out loud. How many spammers do you think actually
come
: back
: and see their spam message?
:
: Zero.
:
: Where do you get the five minutes? Do you
: think the spammers actually care that someone calls it spam?
:
: Nope.
:
:
:
:
:

You continue doing what you THINK you're doing well------impressing someone.
"Tom [Pepper] Willett" wrote in message
...
You continue doing what you do so well....trolling.

"Unknown" wrote in message
...
Think very carefully! Doesn't your posted statement come from someone with
a
low IQ?
"mikeyhsd" wrote in message
...
it's a matter of low IQ trying to prove to others it is intelligent.

thinking that the correct spelling of SPAM will do it.





"DDW" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 8 Dec 2008 12:12:08 -0600, "Unknown"
wrote:

Unfortunately no!

Well, if they're using a newsreader, changing the subject to "Spam"
ain't gonna do anything to help that. The offending post is off
somewhere else, not to be seen.

Changing the subject and posting something about the unquoted poster
does absolutely nothing. At least quote the email address of the
offender, huh???


"DDW" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 8 Dec 2008 17:11:16 +0100, "Pegasus \(MVP\)"
wrote:

Pure spam plus a lot of nonsense, e.g. this statement: "resistors
convert
a
current to a voltage"

Another orphan (subject changed) post.

Don'tcha think most people know "spam" when they see it?

DDW
--
Reply via this group
No email please


DDW
--
Reply via this group
No email please