conditionally.
information before
Errm if you reread that that means no one would publish the information, the differing schedules of the magazines would mean that they'd be waiting on each other. I would guess that with Rail Express's bias towards D&E modeling (the only monthly periodical that does specialise in this area), they were give dispensation to report on their area. The other mags still have the Grange and the Live Steam A3 to report on.
Jeremy wrote:-
I used the phrase "their *own* information", see above.
What you mean as in you not knowing the difference between the terms 'slander' and 'libel' ?
They could jsut as easily fill their pages with nothing but hostile reviews.
(kim)
Jeremy wrote:-
No, since it is wildly off-topic.
More likely to prevent your being reported to your ISP for verbal abuse.
(kim)
Jim Guthrie wrote:-
If you believe everything reported in the media then no minister has ever been sacked, all of them ''resigned' of their own free will. Of course if they hadn't 'resigned', they would have been sacked. It's just semantics.
(kim)
"kim" wrote
If you believed everything which the media reports then there would be no Government in this country because the whole lot would have to quit.
John.
"kim" wrote
If you know how to do it, it's still possible to identify the sender from his computer IP address.
John.
I don't think that that has answered my question.
Jim.
Now we know you are attempting to troll, what do you say Kimberly ?
I really have got the measure of your one idiot brain cell if you have gone Googling....
And your point is / was, how ever you put try and put it the information is not *theirs*, how ever they obtain the information it is the property of Hornby.
Now you are splitting hairs, I suspect you might well have been doing both in any case !
And all they would do is drive away the readers, we are not all as clueless as you seem to think people are (including yourself) !
-- Reply to group please.
begin .......nothing!
Look, you can either cite your information or not, which is it ?
-- Reply to group please.
begin .......nothing!
Meaning, you mean you can't....
You clueless moron ! :~(
-- Reply to group please.
begin .......nothing!
Not it is not John, you can ID the ISP, not the 'sender' (unless the ISP issue a fixed IP to their customers, which most don't), anyway that has nothing to do with sending an abuse report.
-- Reply to group please.
begin .......nothing!
In message , ":::Jerry::::" writes
WTF is "verbal abuse"? If you send a complaint about "verbal abuse" to my ISP, they will fall about laughing. "Usenet is an adult medium and strong language is to be expected" or whatever it says in my ISPs AUP. However, they will take note if you post something that breaks the law (i.e. is libellous or defamatory, or could involve them in a costly court case, such as accusing certain ex-cabinet ministers and other people of various forms of impropriety).
I'm getting a little tired of this argument. Can we give it a rest, please.
":::Jerry::::" writes
Sorry, I agree that it's possible to identify the ISP, or even be rather more specific than that in certain circumstances. I understand that from the IP address the ISP can identify the 'sender', so technically my comment is correct.
John.
Several Canadian ISPs claimed in court that it was wellnigh impossible to positively identify the sender of a particular message. Even if an IP address could be matched to an account at a particular time and date, it still wouldn't show who actually sent the message. Dial-up IPs change frequently, and even broadband IPs change from time to time.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required