--- In gevincountdown@...,
Howard Somerset <drawoh_tesremos@y...> wrote:
>
> I only came across this group earlier this week, and
> on first glance was reluctant to join because of the
> obvious spam.  However, I looked further, and
> recognise a number of names from another group where
> I'm a member, so signed up.
>

Good to have you here Howard - welcome aboard.

Howard Somerset <drawoh_tesremos@y...> wrote:
>
> Regarding the spam, I'm pleased to see that posting is
> now restricted to members only.  I'm surprised that
> you ever allowed posting by non-members, as, I've not
> yet seen a successful yahoo group which allows
> non-members to post.
>

A very good point Howard.  Allowing non-members to post
messages, while on the face of it entirely laudible, had
one very major drawback.  That drawback came into play
when non-members posted trolling messages.

Because of that drawback, if members posted trolling
messages?  They could have their posting rights restricted
(being placed on the "moderation list", or having posting
rights to this forum completely removed).

But when non-members did the same thing?  No such sanctions
were available - IMO making a complete mockery of my earnest
attempts to ensure that repeated forum misuse would be
prevented from taking place.


Howard Somerset <drawoh_tesremos@y...> wrote:
>
> I'd predict that the new policy should eliminate the
> spam posts, but if any do recur, you (moderator and
> owner) have the option to terminate the membership of
> whoever makes such posts.
>

Since June 2006, Gevincountdown has had 2 people who can
moderate - Gevin ("List owner") and myself (moderator).

Now that posting is "members only"?  We can quickly
dispose of anyone attempting to sneak in "under the wire"
to spam this forum.

Howard Somerset <drawoh_tesremos@y...> wrote:
>
> I hope that, once it's realised by the members that
> action has been taken, posting will return to the
> earlier standard.
>

The standard of posts upon this forum should be improved,
automatically, by the very absence of the spammers & the
non-member trolls! :-)

The frequency of how often anyone or everyone posts (or
doesn't post) upon this forum is entirely a matter for
each individual person's own free choice - so I can make
you any promises about how often anyone will (or won't)
post messages here in future.

But this recent removal of the posting rights of various
forum misusers should now make Gevincountdown forum into
a safer & more comfortable place.  Why?  Because the
Gevincountdown forum is somewhere for everyone who wants
to messages about Countdown in an environment where
absolutely NONE of the moderators have a track record for
involvement in repeatedly making insulting postings - or
harrassment that probably breaches umpteen Yahoo rules.

That statement is not however something which I could say
about the entire current line-up of moderators (below the
level of "list-owner") at a certain other Countdown forum
within the Yahoogroups system ....


Zef

I only came across this group earlier this week, and
on first glance was reluctant to join because of the
obvious spam.  However, I looked further, and
recognise a number of names from another group where
I'm a member, so signed up.

Regarding the spam, I'm pleased to see that posting is
now restricted to members only.  I'm surprised that
you ever allowed posting by non-members, as, I've not
yet seen a successful yahoo group which allows
non-members to post.

I'd predict that the new policy should eliminate the
spam posts, but if any do recur, you (moderator and
owner) have the option to terminate the membership of
whoever makes such posts.

I hope that, once it's realised by the members that
action has been taken, posting will return to the
earlier standard.



--- gevinchapwell <gevinchapwell@...> wrote:

> I've changed it so that only member can post - we'll
> see if that
> reduces spam. I'm reluctant to actually stop posting
> altogether but
> that may change. Maybe if there is a suitable
> replacement...
>
> But being serious, I don't really like Yahoo Groups.
> I think someone
> should start a proper message board which has
> topics, rather than just
> a long line of posts.
>
> --- In gevincountdown@..., "Jim
> Bentley" <jim@j...>
> wrote:
> >
> > Since Jono's message on September 4th (no. 9058),
> there has been only
> > spam posted to this group.  This is message no.
> 9178, and all the
> > spam's still there.  Am I to take this to mean
> that this group is now
> > officially dead?
> >
>
>
>
>




___________________________________________________________
All New Yahoo! Mail – Tired of Vi@gr@! come-ons? Let our SpamGuard protect you.
http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html

--- In gevincountdown@..., "gevinchapwell"
<gevinchapwell@y...> wrote:
>
> I've changed it [gevincountdown forum] so that only
> members can post - we'll see if that reduces spam.

An excellent move Gevin, thank you.  Without this, I reckon
that the abuses of this Gevincountdown forum by spammers
- and others - would have only got worse and worse.

> I'm reluctant to actually stop posting altogether but that
> may change. Maybe if there is a suitable replacement...

For any "suitable replacement" forum, we need something
much, much more important than just better software.
We need a forum which is run fairly ALL of the time.

But that objective can only be achieved if any new forum
is being run by the right people.


Zef

I've changed it so that only member can post - we'll see if that
reduces spam. I'm reluctant to actually stop posting altogether but
that may change. Maybe if there is a suitable replacement...

But being serious, I don't really like Yahoo Groups. I think someone
should start a proper message board which has topics, rather than just
a long line of posts.

--- In gevincountdown@..., "Jim Bentley" <jim@j...>
wrote:
>
> Since Jono's message on September 4th (no. 9058), there has been only
> spam posted to this group.  This is message no. 9178, and all the
> spam's still there.  Am I to take this to mean that this group is now
> officially dead?
>

Have you tried asking on the "evil" group?

--- In gevincountdown@..., "DarrylFrancis"
<darrylfrancis@y...> wrote:
>
> Can someone provide me with an email address for Tony Warren, who I
> understand wasan octochamp earlier this year?
>
> Many thanks.
>
> Darryl Francis
> Octochamp & series champion
> darryl.francis@y...
>

Can someone provide me with an email address for Tony Warren, who I
understand wasan octochamp earlier this year?

Many thanks.

Darryl Francis
Octochamp & series champion
darryl.francis@...

Since Jono's message on September 4th (no. 9058), there has been only
spam posted to this group.  This is message no. 9178, and all the
spam's still there.  Am I to take this to mean that this group is now
officially dead?

That's right bastards!

http://www.thecountdownpage.com/exp-jon-oneill.htm

Enjoy.

Despite their spelling skill more than half the contestants in the last
Countdown finals could not pronounce a TH sound. From tyhe way they say
the word I would expect them to spell 'another' ANUVVA.

A little poem:

"I'll need 1 F and 3 Vs, Carol,
   As I form my word,
Cos I'm gonna need anuVVA,
   Ven I'll want a FIRD"

Swift

--- In gevincountdown@..., "Jon ONeill"
<gothicentities@a...> wrote:
>
> --- In gevincountdown@...,
> "gevinchapwell" <gevinchapwell@y...> wrote:
>
> > Obviously I'm just not as intelligent as you then
>
> That's basically what I was getting at.
>
> - Jono
>

Some people just don't understand sarcasm.

--- In gevincountdown@...,
"gevinchapwell" <gevinchapwell@y...> wrote:

> Obviously I'm just not as intelligent as you then

That's basically what I was getting at.

- Jono

--- In gevincountdown@..., "Jon ONeill"
<gothicentities@a...> wrote:
>
> --- In gevincountdown@...,
> "gevinchapwell" <gevinchapwell@y...> wrote:
> >
> > Basically Jon, what you wrote was as bad as any playground bully -

> > well worse really because you're old enough to know better. But
if
> > that's the sort of person you want to be, then the choice is
yours.
> > It seems funny that some of the people who left this group for
the
> > other one seemed to think they were taking some sort of "moral
> > highground". I wonder what the other members think of this.
>
> Some people just don't understand irony.
>
> - Jono
>
> (P.S. I mean you)
>


Obviously I'm just not as intelligent as you then (how I wish I was).
You referred to somoene on this group as an earmuffed monstrosity.
That just sounds rude and nasty to me.

--- In gevincountdown@...,
"gevinchapwell" <gevinchapwell@y...> wrote:
>
> Basically Jon, what you wrote was as bad as any playground bully -
> well worse really because you're old enough to know better. But if
> that's the sort of person you want to be, then the choice is yours.
> It seems funny that some of the people who left this group for the
> other one seemed to think they were taking some sort of "moral
> highground". I wonder what the other members think of this.

Some people just don't understand irony.

- Jono

(P.S. I mean you)

--- In gevincountdown@..., "Jon ONeill"
<gothicentities@a...> wrote:
>
> --- In gevincountdown@...,
> "zefcountdown" <zefcountdown@y...> wrote:
> >
> > I entirely hope that you do Jono.  But ask yourself
> > "Who is selling who short?"
> > ... when one person lashes out at another person
> > over what the other person (allegedly?) IS - rather
> > than what the other person (allegedly?) has done?
> >
> > And "Who is selling who short?"
> > ... when one person lowers theirself to taking a swipe
> > at the nearest & dearest relative of another person?
> >
> > I'll give you a clue Jono: The one individual person
> > who was most strongly 'sold short' by your inclusion
> > of certain content within your recent postings on
> > this thread *isn't* myself or "ma mere".
>
> In the hope of extracting something coherent from this random
> arrangement of words, I translated to and from Simplified Chinese,
> producing this:
>
> I entire hoped that, you make Jono. Who but requests yourself "Who
to
> sell short?" .. What another person when a person does attack in
> other personover (is a suspect?) Is what another person - the
> ratherthan (is a suspect?) Has done my mum??? And "who sells who
> short?" .. When a person reduces theirself to adopt swipeat other
> person? I'll awarded recently the & dearest relative you clue Jono:
> Within this alone personwho ' suddenly intensely has sold ' by
yours
> inclusionof some content or "ma mere" Zef is gay onthis threading
> your recently 0N submits a piece of writing for publication in I *
> was not *
>
> A significant improvement, I think you will agree.
>
> - Jono
>

Basically Jon, what you wrote was as bad as any playground bully -
well worse really because you're old enough to know better. But if
that's the sort of person you want to be, then the choice is yours.
It seems funny that some of the people who left this group for the
other one seemed to think they were taking some sort of "moral
highground". I wonder what the other members think of this.

--- In gevincountdown@..., "bakerrailway"
<stephensellick@t...> wrote:
>
> Is there a record of statistics kept by a group member.
> Regards,
> Stephen Sellick.
>
> ps The clock on this sites "Post Message" is an hour fast.
>

Stephen, the best places for Countdown information are the Countdown
Corral, maintained by Soo Reams, and Mike Brown's Countdown Page.

The Countdown Corral: http://www.thecountdowncorral.com/cd/
The Countdown Page: http://www.thecountdownpage.com/

The Corral has round by round summaries of all the games played over
the last few series along with statistical analysis and lots of other
Countdown goodies.

The Countdown Page has the scores of pretty much every game of
Countdown that's ever been played and detailed summaries of some
classic games from down the years. There's also lots of other juicy
stuff there, like records of DC lexicographers and guests, contestant
experiences and links to other Countdown websites.

Both are highly recommended!

Cheers
Paul

--- In gevincountdown@..., "thetwo_janowskys"
<thetwo_janowskys@y...> wrote:
>
>
> >
> > R6 SRCEIESTO
> >
> > AJ RECITES (7)
> > SD STORIES (7)
> > DC ESCORTS/COSIEST/SERIES
> >
>
>
> Sorry, just scouring some of the older recaps,
> but is there ESOTERIC in here?
>

Due to constraints of time, of lack of DC/CV beater
info, or lack of an up to date dictionary for wordchecks,
not all of the reviews/recap/summaries ever written have
had included "OTher words" (OT).  For this round, had
there been an extra "OT" line included, then it might
have read something like this:-

> > R6 SRCEIESTO
> >
> > AJ RECITES (7)
> > SD STORIES (7)
> > DC ESCORTS/COSIEST/SERIES
OT: ESOTERIC, COTERIES (8, the two janowskys/Zef)

... unless of course there is a 9?? :-)


Zef

--- In gevincountdown@..., "bakerrailway"
<stephensellick@t...> wrote:
>
> Is there a record of statistics kept by a group member.
> Regards,
> Stephen Sellick.
>

Hello Stephen.  Try here for some statistics stuff:-

http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/gevincountdown/database


"bakerrailway" <stephensellick@t...> wrote:
> ps The clock on this sites "Post Message" is an hour fast.
>

I'm not sure whether Yahoo may use CET (Central European
Time).  Anyway, if you see any messages posted before
3.30 pm which mention words that beat Dictionary Corner?
Then don't worry, nothing untoward is happening! :-)


Zef

Is there a record of statistics kept by a group member.
Regards,
Stephen Sellick.

ps The clock on this sites "Post Message" is an hour fast.

>
> R6 SRCEIESTO
>
> AJ RECITES (7)
> SD STORIES (7)
> DC ESCORTS/COSIEST/SERIES
>


Sorry, just scouring some of the older recaps, but is there ESOTERIC in
here?

--- In gevincountdown@...,
"zefcountdown" <zefcountdown@y...> wrote:
>
> I entirely hope that you do Jono.  But ask yourself
> "Who is selling who short?"
> ... when one person lashes out at another person
> over what the other person (allegedly?) IS - rather
> than what the other person (allegedly?) has done?
>
> And "Who is selling who short?"
> ... when one person lowers theirself to taking a swipe
> at the nearest & dearest relative of another person?
>
> I'll give you a clue Jono: The one individual person
> who was most strongly 'sold short' by your inclusion
> of certain content within your recent postings on
> this thread *isn't* myself or "ma mere".

In the hope of extracting something coherent from this random
arrangement of words, I translated to and from Simplified Chinese,
producing this:

I entire hoped that, you make Jono. Who but requests yourself "Who to
sell short?" .. What another person when a person does attack in
other personover (is a suspect?) Is what another person - the
ratherthan (is a suspect?) Has done my mum??? And "who sells who
short?" .. When a person reduces theirself to adopt swipeat other
person? I'll awarded recently the & dearest relative you clue Jono:
Within this alone personwho ' suddenly intensely has sold ' by yours
inclusionof some content or "ma mere" Zef is gay onthis threading
your recently 0N submits a piece of writing for publication in I *
was not *

A significant improvement, I think you will agree.

- Jono

--- In gevincountdown@..., "Jon ONeill"
<gothicentities@a...> wrote:
>
> overall I think I will come out of life better off.
>
> - Jono
>

I entirely hope that you do Jono.  But ask yourself
"Who is selling who short?"
... when one person lashes out at another person
over what the other person (allegedly?) IS - rather
than what the other person (allegedly?) has done?

And "Who is selling who short?"
... when one person lowers theirself to taking a swipe
at the nearest & dearest relative of another person?

I'll give you a clue Jono: The one individual person
who was most strongly 'sold short' by your inclusion
of certain content within your recent postings on
this thread *isn't* myself or "ma mere".


Zef

he is so good, being 63 seconds.

--- In gevincountdown@...,
"zefcountdown" <zefcountdown@y...> wrote:
>
> Yeah, my mum.  Not one 'O' level or (G)CSE certificate
> to her name, and yet she still solved within the 30 secs
> a C-Of-C numbers game that Jono missed.  Class.
>
> Zef

Well I don't plan to give bith to an earmuffed monstrosity, so
overall I think I will come out of life better off.

- Jono

> > --- In gevincountdown@...,
> > "zefcountdown <zefcountdown@y...> wrote:
> > >
> > > Would you chose to rely upon a telephone directory
> > > which had almost every name, except one, missing from
> > > each double page? Of course not.


> --- In gevincountdown@...,
> "Jon ONeill" <gothicentities@a...> wrote:
> >
> > This is the most ridiculous fucking analogy I have ever seen.


--- In gevincountdown@...,
"zefcountdown" <zefcountdown@y...> wrote:
>
> Neatly demonstrating that Jono's own (present day) levels of
> knowledge, experience, & wisdom/judgement are not yet all
> that they one day might be.
>
> Zef


--- In gevincountdown@...,
"Jon ONeill" <gothicentities@a...> wrote:
>
> you are a patronising twat.
>
> - Jono
>
> P.S. Your mum.


Yeah, my mum.  Not one 'O' level or (G)CSE certificate
to her name, and yet she still solved within the 30 secs
a C-Of-C numbers game that Jono missed.  Class.

Zef

--- In gevincountdown@...,
"zefcountdown" <zefcountdown@y...> wrote:
>
> Neatly demonstrating that Jono's own (present day) levels of
> knowledge, experience, & wisdom/judgement are not yet all
> that they one day might be.

I agree with Jim: you are a patronising twat.

- Jono

P.S. Your mum.

> --- In gevincountdown@...,
> "zefcountdown <zefcountdown@...> wrote:
> >
> > Would you chose to rely upon a telephone directory
> > which had almost every name, except one, missing from
> > each double page? Of course not.

--- In gevincountdown@..., "Jon ONeill"
<gothicentities@a...> wrote:
>
> This is the most ridiculous fucking analogy I have ever seen.
>
> - Jono

Neatly demonstrating that Jono's own (present day) levels of
knowledge, experience, & wisdom/judgement are not yet all
that they one day might be.

Zef

--- In gevincountdown@...,
"goodconnection" <goodconnection@y...> wrote:
>
> Would you chose to rely upon a telephone directory
> which had almost every name, except one, missing from
> each double page? Of course not.

This is the most ridiculous fucking analogy I have ever seen.

- Jono

--- In gevincountdown@..., "Alex Trevelyan"
<scott_evil30@h...> wrote:
>
> do you like three big? i do its hard and i like it when
> carole cant do it
>

Thanks for bringing this up Alex, I reckon that you've
made a very good point here.  But then I would say that,
because I too am a fan of choosing "3 big" aka "3 large"
on numbers games! :-)

For "1 big" or "2 big"?  "6 small" or "4 large"?  IMO,
people tend to gauge quite accurately whether a nos
game is easy, less easy, hard or impossible to solve.

But with "3 large however"?  IMO, the scale of how
difficult or easy they are to solve can sometimes
tend to be a bit less obvious for all to see.

On "3 large", a player may think "I'll be able to do
that" when the target appears, but they come unstuck
and end up declaring 000 or being well away from the
target because they underestimated the difficulty.
Meanwhile, their opponent who correctly gauges
"Anything within less than 5 of the target will do
here" can gain 7 pts to nil.

Alternatively on "3 large", a player may incorrectly
think "If I get to within 1 away, that will get me an
easy 7 pts here".  But their opponent may be mindful
of the fact that a "3 large" nos game generally allows
more different *exact* solutions than a "4 large"
nos game would - allowing them to gain 10 pts to nil.

A slight "fear of the unknown/unpredictable" may be
why some lesser players tend to shy away from 3 large.
But this then raises a bit of a puzzling question:-
"Why do the better (or better at numbers game) players
also seem to stay from 3 large too?


Zef

tbh i got the feeling im not wanted here but im not going where that other
cnut is. do you like three big? i do its hard and i like it when carole cant
do it

_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN Search Toolbar now includes Desktop search!
http://join.msn.com/toolbar/overview

> --- In gevincountdown@..., "zefcountdown"
> <zefcountdown@y...> wrote:
> >
> > Jim, copies of recent spam that may (or may not) be
> > considered poetic are heading for your mailbox.  If you
> > then want to repost any of it onto the c4countdown
> > forum, or elsewhere, that is entirely a matter between
> > you and the people who run each forum.
> >
> > Or ... you could set up your own Yahoogroups forum
> > (aka "mailing list") especially devoted to this stuff.
> >
> > "How difficult is it for me to set up my own forum on
> > Yahoogroups?", I hear you cry?
> >
> > Well, let's put it this way.  If each and every one out
> > of me, Gevin, and Stewart Holden is capable of filling
> > in the online form to set up a Yahoogroups forum /
> > mailing list ... then I see no reason for thinking that
> > starting up a Yahoogroups forum for 'spam poetry' would
> > be "beyond your ken".

--- In gevincountdown@...,
"Jim Bentley" <jim@j...> wrote:
>
> Well, how bloody patronising.  The reason I haven't isn't
> because I don't know how, it's because it would be a
> completely stupid idea.  I thought my original message was
> quite obviously a piss-take, but evidently even the most
> blatant and unsubtle humour flies way over your head.  In
> future, I'll surround any jokes with a flashing neon sign
> saying "THIS IS WRITTEN WITH NOT ENTIRELY SERIOUS INTENT",
> maybe then you'll get the point.
>

Oh dear Jim ... did MY joke fly way over YOUR head? :-)))

Actually, I strongly suspect that it didn't, and that Jim's
above message merely has him 'staying in character' as
"Disgusted of Middlesborough" for maximum comedy value.

But just in case I'm wrong in thinking that?  Or there are
other people wondering "What the hell was Zef doing there??"
Here goes anyway with an explanation ....

-----------

For the benefit of any 3rd parties who didn't spot the
joke, it goes like this.

Jim has made several posts to this gevincountdown forum,
extolling the virtues of some 'spam' forum messages which
were posted to gevincountdown by 'spamming' product vendors.

But when Jim's latest humour posts went on to disagree with
(or IMO almost 'lampoon'?) an IMO perfectly reasonable act -
my deleting of recent spam forum messages at gevincountdown?
That's when I decided to take what Jim was saying, about him
supposedly having a liking for 'spam poetry' ... and IMO
humourously pushing that to its ultimate logical conclusion.

Not only did I suggest that Jim should start up a brand new
'spam poetry' forum of his own ... but I offered him 'help',
being the kind and helpful soul that I am.  ;-)

That 'help' included forwarding to his mailbox about 3
deleted-shortly-after 'spam poetry' messages from the
gevincountdown forum ... and offering to further 'help'
him by forwarding to him many, many more potential
'spam poetry' messages too!!  Hee hee!! :-)))

--------------------------

I took *all* of the usual precautions that some other
people appear to have taken on other occasions when they
have fired their alleged 'jokes' in MY direction, such as
- wearing my cap at a jaunty angle.
- being in a jolly mood while typing my message in.
- emailing the spam to Jim in a silently witty tone of voice.
- clicking "Send Message" in an especially jocular way. :-)

Additionally, I also included at least one 'smiley' symbol
within my message too - which hasn't always been done by
others who target me with their ideas of 'humour'.

But unlike some people who use 'humour' as a vehicle for
being causing offence?  I'm not going to reply by turning
any objection from the person on the other end of 'humour'
into an extra opportunity to spew out certain particular
barbed criticisms or insults, such as

"You have no sense of humour".
"You need to chill out".
"Go take a chill pill".
"It was only a joke" (therefore you are being unreasonable
by objecting to it).
"Get a life" (etc).

-------------

Perhaps some of this goes to show the limitations of ye
olde internet text message mediums as a means of conveying
that the intent of a message writer is to be non-offensive
(and humourous?) - rather than offensive or disrespectful.

And perhaps it also IMO shows that the target of 'humour'
should not be automatically considered as ALWAYS wrong -
nor the maker of 'humour' ALWAYS right - when it comes to
deciding "Is this piece of 'humour' appropriate or not?"

-------------------------------

Jim B wrote
> forwarding spam messages ... you can stop that right now.
> Thank-you.
>

Et viola - tis done! :-)


Zef