From Newsgroup: news.admin.hierarchies

Roberto CORRADO <i@corradoroberto.it> wrote:

free.it.ai.general General discussions on artificial intelligence.

One person and one person only sends a checkgroups message. That person
is the hierarchy administrator. It is a declaration of being the
hierarchy for a specific hierarchy.

You are NOT the hierarchy administrator of free.*. No one is. alt.* and
free.* are unadministered hierarchies.

checkgroups messages are NEVER sent in those hierarchies.

Furthermore, checkgroups is the list of groups recognized by the
hierarchy administrator. The act of a News administrator processing a checkgroups message is to create any group in the list not already
created locally, and to remove any newsgroup in the hierarchy not listed
in the checkgroups message.

Do you understand the harm you just committed?

This is a technical troll. It's so serious that you should be de-peered.

I strongly urge you to make an explicit statement that you will NEVER
send another control message until you fully understand the implications
of doing so, that you acknowledge that you are NOT the hierarchy
administrator of free.* because free.* is unadministered.

Stop sending control messages. If you don't behave, you should be de-peered
if that's the only way to get through to you.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: news.admin.hierarchies

On 06/04/25 20:13, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Roberto CORRADO <i@corradoroberto.it> wrote:

Do you understand the harm you just committed?

This is a technical troll. It's so serious that you should be de-peered.

I strongly urge you to make an explicit statement that you will NEVER
send another control message until you fully understand the implications
of doing so, that you acknowledge that you are NOT the hierarchy >administrator of free.* because free.* is unadministered.

Hello Adam,

I am writing on behalf of Roberto Corrado regarding the issue of the
"checkgroups" message sent for the free.it.ai.general group. Roberto
contacted me, deeply mortified about the mistake he made, and asked for my
help in extending his apologies.

Roberto acknowledges that he erred by sending an inappropriate control
message in an unadministered hierarchy like free.*. He has assured me that
he understands the mistake and had no intention of causing harm; his
actions were in good faith, but he was unaware of the technical
implications of the "checkgroups" message. He commits to never sending
inappropriate control messages again and wishes to sincerely apologize for
the inconvenience caused.

I ask that his apologies be accepted and that this incident be viewed as an
honest mistake by someone who is learning the rules of Usenet. Roberto is
willing to make amends in the proper way, such as proposing the
free.it.ai.general group with a "newgroup" message, if deemed appropriate.

Thank you, Adam, for your attention, and thanks to the entire Usenet
community for your understanding.
--
*Posted from
PhoNews Pro for Android V.3.13.3
News.individual.net*

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: news.admin.hierarchies

In date: dom, 06 apr 2025 20:13:18 on group: news.admin.hierarchies,
Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Roberto CORRADO <i@corradoroberto.it> wrote:

free.it.ai.general General discussions on artificial intelligence.

Hello Adam,

I am writing on behalf of Roberto Corrado regarding the issue of the "checkgroups" message sent for the free.it.ai.general group. Roberto
contacted me, deeply mortified about the mistake he made, and asked for my
help in extending his apologies.

Roberto acknowledges that he erred by sending an inappropriate control
message in an unadministered hierarchy like free.*. He has assured me that
he understands the mistake and had no intention of causing harm; his
actions were in good faith, but he was unaware of the technical
implications of the "checkgroups" message. He commits to never sending inappropriate control messages again and wishes to sincerely apologize for
the inconvenience caused.

I ask that his apologies be accepted and that this incident be viewed as an honest mistake by someone who is learning the rules of Usenet. Roberto is willing to make amends in the proper way, such as proposing the free.it.ai.general group with a "newgroup" message, if deemed appropriate.

Thank you, Adam, for your attention, and thanks to the entire Usenet
community for your understanding.
--
--- MQ2.13/PointMail 2.1Demo
* Origin: PORT-ENFANT Contenitore per trasporto di elefanti (2:332/218.2)
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2