Airplane noise can indeed be annoying

Orval Fairbairn wrote:

In article ,
Franklin "Franklin wrote:

On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 09:12:28 -0400, Morgans wrote:

"Franklin" "Franklin wrote


Harstfield? Atlanta Georgia?

That's Atlanta, I have been there many times.

If that was true, you would know Harstfield is not a GA airport.

They moved Atlanta out of Georgia? when was that?

Also, it is Hartsfield, if you want to spell it the way the rest of
us do...

Oh, a NetKop.

Well, dumbass, in this case "GA" means "General Aviation," NOT
"Georgia!

If you were a legitimate participant in rec.aviation.piloting, you
would know that.


Orval, that's torn it! The sock really hates to be shown up. Heh!

He posts to alt.comp.freeware and he hates if you call his bluff about
aviation or special forces. (He pretends to be a Navy Seal.)

Expect more socks to join in this discussion and bolster what he wrote.
Or try and bury your observation with dozens of their meaningless posts.

"Franklin" wrote in message
...

Orval, that's torn it! The sock really hates to be shown up. Heh!

He posts to alt.comp.freeware and he hates if you call his bluff about
aviation or special forces. (He pretends to be a Navy Seal.)

Expect more socks to join in this discussion and bolster what he
wrote.
Or try and bury your observation with dozens of their meaningless
posts.

If this guy is a fake seal then use this link to bust him:
http://www.nightscribe.com/Military/...nabe_seals.htm

Ive used it and it works..

L

hummingbird wrote:
Franklin

I have seen that exact same From: field used by you scores of
times (among the other 150 variations you use).

The contents of the "From:" header is useless in determining source since
its contents are under total control of the poster. A little more reliable
is the contents of the "Path:" header. The poster has, at best, only
partial control of that (called path pre-loading; which most Usenet
providers forbid as part of their terms of service - and even when allowed,
the poster can only append something to the right-hand side.)

Jim Logajan wrote:
hummingbird wrote:
Franklin
I have seen that exact same From: field used by you scores of
times (among the other 150 variations you use).

The contents of the "From:" header is useless in determining source since
its contents are under total control of the poster. A little more reliable
is the contents of the "Path:" header. The poster has, at best, only
partial control of that (called path pre-loading; which most Usenet
providers forbid as part of their terms of service - and even when allowed,
the poster can only append something to the right-hand side.)


As long as nobody knows what Operating system I use; I'm safe.

On 15/07/2009 3:09 PM, Justin wrote:
Jim Logajan wrote:
hummingbird wrote:
Franklin
I have seen that exact same From: field used by you scores of
times (among the other 150 variations you use).

The contents of the "From:" header is useless in determining source
since its contents are under total control of the poster. A little
more reliable is the contents of the "Path:" header. The poster has,
at best, only partial control of that (called path pre-loading; which
most Usenet providers forbid as part of their terms of service - and
even when allowed, the poster can only append something to the
right-hand side.)


As long as nobody knows what Operating system I use; I'm safe.

You're using a Mac :-)

--
MH

Justin wrote:
Jim Logajan wrote:
hummingbird wrote:
Franklin
I have seen that exact same From: field used by you scores of
times (among the other 150 variations you use).

The contents of the "From:" header is useless in determining source
since its contents are under total control of the poster. A little
more reliable is the contents of the "Path:" header. The poster has,
at best, only partial control of that (called path pre-loading; which
most Usenet providers forbid as part of their terms of service - and
even when allowed, the poster can only append something to the
right-hand side.)


As long as nobody knows what Operating system I use; I'm safe.
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Macintosh/20090605) - so I'd be
thinking Darwin.

Cheers,
Gary B-)