[Imc-aotearoa-ed] victor a spammer?

[Clare]

yup, victor is the very defination of spam. Does everyone else agree=
 because we need to reach concensus on this.

here is spam proceedure:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------=
------
// C. Spam Attack Procedure [top]

A spam attack is defined as a pattern of abuse of the newswire by a=
 particular poster. If the editorial collective reaches consensus (at a=
 meeting or on the listserv) that a specific individual is launching a spam=
 attack on the AIMC newswire, the spammer's post(s) may be hidden from the=
 newswire by a member of the editorial collective. Each instance of=
 recognized spam will be considered individually, and the reason why the=
 editorial collective perceives the post(s) as spam will be stated on the=
 editorial list, as well as in a comment on the hidden article itself. When=
 a member of the editorial collective hides a post, (s)he shall immediately=
 notify the editorial listserv.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----

theres a coupla posts of his up on the news wire as i write, duplicates and=
 links to duplicates mostly (all hidden articles on other indy wires).=
 Started to use other names sometimes, but *exactly* the same posts as when=
 this person posts as victor.

clare



*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 26/06/2002 at 1:02 a.m. finn c. wrote:

>Hi
>
>> Hence, victor is a spammer it seems.
>
>No no, Victor is the uber-spammer. For instance, today he posted:
>
>1) reposted his ozzy loan shark story on twin cities imc
>2) a link to the twin cities story on a-imc
>3) a link to the twin cities story on another us site
>4) a link to the previous link (3) on melbourne imc
>5) on the twin cities story he posted a link to the bank fraud article on
>a-imc . . .
>
>etc etc
>
>Thats just what I saw without looking. I'm sure there was a lot more of
>this around the world. I've been removing 1-4 posts of his per day for a
>while.
>
>Do we want to consider this a spam attack. imo it's the definition of a
>spam attack, as victor is repeatedly exploiting the worldwide network, and
>he must realise what he is posting is inappropriate in nearly every imc in
>the world (because everyone hides his posts). If we class his postings as
>a spam attack, then it's basically hide first, ask questions later. Not
>that we hide all his posts, but we treat dodgy posts the same as
>duplicates ie they are hidden immediately and the reason posted on the
>list. They can always be unhidden if we decide.
>
>Does anyone who is keen to do ed work *on the site* want the editorial
>password? I'll email it to people offlist if they are keen.
>
>finn
>
>hmm, we need a general process document . . .
>
>_______________________________________________
>Imc-aotearoa-ed mailing list
>Imc-aotearoa-ed@lists.indymedia.org
>http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-aotearoa-ed