[Imc-uk-features] should we block ram?

[ilyan]

Hello,
I wonder if there is some way of pulling the FDR trick. -He appointed
one of the biggest rip off Capitalists in Wall street to impose
regulations to stop stock market rip offs.  (Joe Kennedy) it worked well
until Reagan abolished the regulations.   Ram and Bollockschops seem to
read every thing on Indymedia, they are already doing the boring part
of  cleaning - watching the newswire all the time.  Recruit them.   That
does mean knowing who they are and meeting them face to face.

I take it the IP address is a code for the individual emailer's address,
and blocking that will not  also block others using the same Internet
Service Provider.      The problem with blocking is the ease with which
people can adopt new e-identities.

Sometimes they give the impression that they think UK IMC isn't open
enough, I cannot understand why they (and others) write such offensive
garbage if that is their feeling, is it just to get thrown out so they
can go around denouncing IMC?  And here and there, rarely,  there be
valuable nuggets..

I recently discovered that indycymru has a routine that automatically
asterisks out selected words, not that I have found it, but would such
be any help?
Regards
Ilyan




andi wrote:

> hi all,
>
> i've traced ram's ip number (and by coincidence bollockschops' ip
> as well) and have switched off the ip log again. still i will not
> put ram on a filter as ab has expressed doubts about blocking ram.
>
> just to explain, if we decide to do that we'd put in a filter that
> would automatically hide any post or comment submitted from that
> ip address.
>
> i guess we should have a further debate if it's worth it to block
> ram. anyone on this list except ab has agreed to that block. so
> i guess it's only fair to ask ab if she feels strongly about this
> and if that is the case we shouldn't go ahead.
>
> for fairness reasons i will not post ram's ip number here until we
> have a consensus. actually i won't send ram's ip to any public list
> cause it won't be fair even if we decide to block him (or her?).
>
> i for one think ram is an agent provocateur even if (s)he lately
> started to repost robert fisk and other 'acceptables'. i've seen
> him/her being disruptive for far too often and don't really
> believe that (s)he's genuinely helping any imc causes. (s)he is
> posing to be super-radical with exactly *one* very primitive
> argument which can best be described as 'oink'. very sophisticated
> indeed [actually it's nearly evident that ram must be a 'him' - too
> much of a testosterone pattern innit ;]
>
> anyhow, i await answers on a postcard...
>
> cheers andi