XPost: comp.programming 
 From: peter_ammon@rocketmail.com 
  
 Thomas G. Marshall wrote: 
 > I've been interested in the following, but am not sure if it violates 
 > the ethics and charter of usenet. 
 > 
 > Please tell me if I'm asking this in the wrong place. 
 > 
 > I've noticed that there are many miscreants out there that flame away, 
 > and even /prefer/ to become plonked, because it gives them freedom of 
 > sorts to respond to the plonkers without argument.  This is bad for the 
 > others to see. 
 > 
 > Is this ok for a newsreader to do? 
 > 
 >     1. If a user is bozo-bin'd by you, then 
 >     2.    /IF/ he responds to a post of yours, then 
 >     3.        Your newsreader replies with post with the subject: 
 > 
 >         " automatically ignored by newsreader" 
 > 
 > with a body of 
 > 
 >         This post was made by a user that had previously plonked 
 >         by me and was therefore automatically ignored by my newsreader 
 >         without me reading it. 
 > 
 >         The purpose of this message is to make it clear to others 
 >         that this person had been ignored, and to hopefully make 
 >         it clear than when I do not further respond, that it is not 
 >         because I believe that he is correct. 
 > 
 >         This is critical because many such people actually prefer 
 >         to become plonked so that they can appear to make points 
 >         that are without retort. 
 > 
 > Or somesuch. 
 > 
 > Remember, it /only/ would happen if a plonked user responded /directly/ 
 > to your post.  Further, it would not happen to a reply to an autoplonk 
 > message, as this could cycle itself out of control should both parties 
 > plonk each other, and have each autoplonk message respond to each other. 
 > 
 > *Does this already exist in a newsreader somewhere*, and/or is this a 
 > terrible idea? 
 > 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)