Judges-L FAQ
by Tim Skirvin

Q:	Why was this list set up?
A:	To make David Stodolsky happy.

Q: 	Is it of any use whatsoever?
A: 	It's pretty easy to flame David Stodolsky on it.

Q:	No, really, is it of any use?
A:	Honestly, no.  

Q:	Then why was it set up again?
A:	I already told you.  To make David Stodolsky happy.

Q:	How is it making him happy?
A:	We really don't know.  All he's gotten out of it is a whole lot
	of flames.  He might be a masochist, I guess.

Q:	*sigh* Let's try this: why does David Stodolsky say it was set
	up?
A:	To be an arbiter of cancellations.  

Q:	Cancellations?  What are those?
A:	You send out a message, and a post is cancelled from Usenet.

Q:	That sounds like a bad idea.  Couldn't anyone cancel anyone's
	post, basically censoring them?
A:	Yup.  

Q:	Then...
A:	Oh.  You want to know why the authors put cancels in.

Q:	Right.
A:	Basically, they were _meant_ to be secure.  You had to use the
	same name in the cancel as in the original post.  To cancel 
	someone else's posts requires forgery.

Q:	Ah.
A:	Of course, this doesn't stop all cancels of other people's
	posts...

Q:	WHAT?  You mean that people forge...
A: 	Calm down, calm down.  It's alright.  The forgeries are done --
	usually -- only to cancel posts that were in too many places 
	(defined as spam; see the news.admin.net-abuse.misc FAQ).  There
	have been very few objections to this practice, mostly by those
	that posted way too much.

Q:	I understand that, but...usually?
A:	Yes, usually.  There are some real jerks out there that cancel 
	posts anyway.  

Q:	Like?
A:	The Church of Scientology (see alt.religion.scientology for
	details, if you have the time), for one.  Rogue cancellers, for
	another.  And, of course, there's Mr. Stodolsky's list.

Q:	Isn't this all illegal?
A:	Possibly.  It hasn't come to court yet.  It is considered pretty
	bad, though.  If you want to see all the stuff that's going on
	with cancels, check out news.admin.net-abuse.misc.

Q: 	Right.  I'll do that.  Back to the original case; what about
	this Judges-L list?
A:	They think that they can control this stuff.  Apparently, it's 
	their job, as a bunch of questionable net citizens, to be
	dictators.

Q:	WHAT?  Who gave them that right?
A:	They did.  Or, more accurately, he did.  David Stodolsky.
	Alone.

Q:	And why does he have this authority, exactly?
A:	Nobody knows.  He's real good at being an idiot, but that seems
	to be about it.  He doesn't even know _how_ to do this.

Q:	Then...
A:	Hey, don't ask me.  I was only forced to write this after the 
	guy complained that nobody ever helped him out.  

Q:	I guess I'll just stay away from him, then.
A:	Oh, you can do better than that.

Q:	How?
A:	Easy.  Flame him.  Consistently.  If he posts, send mail _and_
	publically post a flame that will really annoy him.  It wastes 
	his time, bugs him, and maybe, just maybe, he'll get a clue some
	day if we try a massive blood transfusion.

Q:	Well, thanks for the info.  What's his e-mail?
A:	I don't know.  It's probably at the top of the message or
	something.  Mine is tskirvin@uiuc.edu.  Just look for a real 
	big crosspost from hell saying "Cancel Messages FAQ".  

Q:	Thanks...I appreciate this.
A:	No problem.  Glad I could help?

Q:	Oh yes, one more thing.  Who's actually on this list?
A:	As far as I know, nobody anymore.  They all got kicked off by 
	Stodolsky for not agreeing with him, or somesuch.  

Q:	What an asshole.
A:	Hey, I don't curse much, but I agree entirely.  

Q:	Anyway, thanks again.  Bye.
A:	See ya around.  You got my e-mail.