From: rphenry@home.com 
  
 "Rebecca Ore"  wrote in message 
 news:spamtrapforore-61CAF6.00012512092004@news.verizon.net... 
 > In article , 
 >  "Richard Henry"  wrote: 
 > 
 > > 1.  "No 757 hit the Pentagon".  An effective, honest, and _non-spam_ 
 > > response to each such postings would be a link to the ASCE report on the 
 > > damage to the Pentagon.  Identically.  Every time. 
 > 
 > And after 20 times in a 45 day period, more or less, such a post would 
 > be cancellable spam. 
  
 A frank admission of the failure of the spam detector technology. 
  
 > We've been through this before with people telling 
 > various hands to shut up, that they didn't have permission to speak, and 
 > other things like them. 
 > 
 > Even useful information can be spam and can be cancelled (at least 
 > theoretically) if it's posted too many times.  Howard Knight cancelled 
 > and shut down posts by a bot called Candice the Cybernetic Border Collie 
 > which was posting automated replies to a very disturbed troll/mission 
 > poster in one of the pet groups.  The bot's owner thought what she was 
 > doing was useful. 
 > 
 > > 
 > > 2.  "NASA never landed a man on the moon".  An effective, honest, and 
 > > _non-spam_ response to each such postings would be a link to the NASA 
 > > webpage in response.  Identically.  Every time. 
 > 
 > Most of the posts like this are geared to get someone else to spam up to 
 > cancellable levels. 
  
 Do you have a credible source for this information?  Or is it your opinion? 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)