OT? - Where is the real Bear?

[Nicetameetya]

I've noticed people replying to the fake Bears (as well as Catshit's
incessant posts). But, thankfully, I don't see the fake Bear posts
because they're filtered out.

What I haven't seen lately is any posts from the real Bear and was
wondering if he's stopped contributing to acf.

[Bear]

Nicetameetya <gd...@invalid.invalid> wrote in news:9skuelFouvU3
@mid.individual.net:

No, I haven't stopped - not yet anyway and I haven't figured out why. You
should have seen some nice posts by me...maybe your filters are getting
them.

--
Bear
http://bearware.info
The real Bear's header path is:
news.sunsite.dk!dotsrc.org!filter.dotsrc.org!news.dotsrc.org!not-for-mail

[Jon Danniken]

Bear wrote:
> Nicetameetya <gd...@invalid.invalid> wrote in news:9skuelFouvU3
> @mid.individual.net:
>
>>
>> I've noticed people replying to the fake Bears (as well as Catshit's
>> incessant posts). But, thankfully, I don't see the fake Bear posts
>> because they're filtered out.
>>
>> What I haven't seen lately is any posts from the real Bear and was
>> wondering if he's stopped contributing to acf.
>>
>>
>
> No, I haven't stopped - not yet anyway and I haven't figured out why.
> You should have seen some nice posts by me...maybe your filters are
> getting them.

I honestly don't know who is who in this group, so if I feel a need to reply
to a post, I just reply to the post and ignore whatever name is in the name
field.

Jon

[Christopher Millbank]

I know where everyone is,I make it my business to. I can inform you
whenever you like. Here is what I need from you, however: type this
in your subject: "Christopher Millbank: Polish Community: UK". Then
ask anything, I will respond rapidly.
Best!
Chris

[p-0-0-h the cat]

On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 19:36:03 -0700, "Jon Danniken" <jonSPAMMEN...@yahSPAMhoo.com>
wrote:

Exactly, I only read the headers now because it amuses me to guess the real posts from the
frauds. I don't give a damn who posts it. I rarely finish reading any of the posts from
this pathetic clique a.k.a the Goon squad. Once again Nicetameetya has contributed jack
shit of any value. This group existed, and was far better before Bottoms arrived. Who
cares.

--
p-0-0-h the cat
Internet Terrorist, Mass Sock puppeteer, Agent provocateur, Gutter rat
Devil incarnate, Linux user#666, BaStarD hacker

[Mike Easter]

Nicetameetya wrote:

> What I haven't seen lately is any posts from the real Bear and was
> wondering if he's stopped contributing to acf.

Two recent Bears preceding the reply to your post:

Subject: Re: Leaving the Cloud
Message-ID: <XnsA0197BB7C7422be...@130.225.254.104>
Date: 17 Mar 2012 17:09:47 GMT

Subject: Capture2Text
Message-ID: <XnsA019BDF8080A5be...@130.225.254.104>
Date: 17 Mar 2012 23:40:33 GMT

Perhaps your filters need tweaking.

Faulty usenet filters, like faulty false-positive spam filters losing
goodmail/ham are worse than no filters, IMO.

The idea is to get/see the mail or news you want without losing any of
what you don't want to miss/lose. A proper filter can have some
imperfect leakage-thru' of the unwanted, but it should never ever hide
or lose the wanted items.



--
Mike Easter

[Bear]

Nicetameetya <gd...@invalid.invalid> wrote in news:9skuelFouvU3
@mid.individual.net:

>

I haven't stopped. Not yet although I haven't figured out why. You
should be seeing good posts by me...maybe your filters are getting in the
way.

--
Bear
http://bearware.info
Must Do: System image and automatic real-time off-site data backup
Recommended tools: EaseUS Todo Backup and SugarSync

[M.L.]

>> What I haven't seen lately is any posts from the real Bear and was
>> wondering if he's stopped contributing to acf.
>
>Two recent Bears preceding the reply to your post:
>
>Subject: Re: Leaving the Cloud
>Message-ID: <XnsA0197BB7C7422be...@130.225.254.104>
>Date: 17 Mar 2012 17:09:47 GMT
>
>Subject: Capture2Text
>Message-ID: <XnsA019BDF8080A5be...@130.225.254.104>
>Date: 17 Mar 2012 23:40:33 GMT
>
>Perhaps your filters need tweaking.

But the Bear at "Message-ID: ...130.225.254.104" uses
From: Bear <removebea...@gmai.com>
whereas the original used
From: Bear Bottoms <bearbott...@gmail.com>

[idle]

On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 15:09:41 +1300, Nicetameetya wrote in
alt.comp.freeware:

Found him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJGH0DZg-f4


--
idle
None of us is as good as all of us.

[Mike Easter]

M.L. wrote:
> my cite

>> Two recent Bears preceding the reply to your post:
>>
>> Subject: Re: Leaving the Cloud
>> Message-ID:<XnsA0197BB7C7422be...@130.225.254.104>
>> Date: 17 Mar 2012 17:09:47 GMT
>>
>> Subject: Capture2Text
>> Message-ID:<XnsA019BDF8080A5be...@130.225.254.104>
>> Date: 17 Mar 2012 23:40:33 GMT
>>
>> Perhaps your filters need tweaking.
>
> But the Bear at "Message-ID: ...130.225.254.104" uses
> From: Bear<removebea...@gmai.com>
> whereas the original used
> From: Bear Bottoms<bearbott...@gmail.com>

There is a problem with focusing on the From:

- it is absolutely the most 'forgeable' (and variable) element of a
message; typically even normal users forge/falsify/munge/change/vary
their From

- it is much better to focus on some element which is much much much
less forgeable, such as the NPH nntp-posting-host, and supported by a
non-preloaded Path which elements for the real Bear is in the
68.11.143.149 block and dotsrc.org respectively.


Focus in this context can refer to human eyeball/brain processing or
examination or complex filter scoring algorithms.


--
Mike Easter

[p-0-0-h the cat]

I liked the warning at the end.

*NEVER APPROACH BEAR BOTTOMS*

[M.L.]

>>> Two recent Bears preceding the reply to your post:
>>>
>>> Subject: Re: Leaving the Cloud
>>> Message-ID:<XnsA0197BB7C7422be...@130.225.254.104>
>>> Date: 17 Mar 2012 17:09:47 GMT
>>>
>>> Subject: Capture2Text
>>> Message-ID:<XnsA019BDF8080A5be...@130.225.254.104>
>>> Date: 17 Mar 2012 23:40:33 GMT
>>>
>>> Perhaps your filters need tweaking.
>>
>> But the Bear at "Message-ID: ...130.225.254.104" uses
>> From: Bear<removebea...@gmai.com>
>> whereas the original used
>> From: Bear Bottoms<bearbott...@gmail.com>
>
>There is a problem with focusing on the From:
>
> - it is absolutely the most 'forgeable' (and variable) element of a
>message; typically even normal users forge/falsify/munge/change/vary
>their From

Why would the original bear change his From: header's email and screen
name? Usually he makes a post indicating that he is changing his host.

[Bear]

M.L. <m...@privacy.invalid> wrote in
news:1llcm7h8bpep3vn4j...@4ax.com:

I'm still using dotsrc. So my header path is the same as indicated
below. I went back to my original munged email addy bearbottoms1
@gmai.com.

I dumped Thunderbird and MesNews and went back with Xnews...I'm just
used to it.

[»Q«]

On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 04:40:11 -0700
Mike Easter <Mi...@ster.invalid> wrote:

> Faulty usenet filters, like faulty false-positive spam filters losing
> goodmail/ham are worse than no filters, IMO.
>
> The idea is to get/see the mail or news you want without losing any
> of what you don't want to miss/lose. A proper filter can have some
> imperfect leakage-thru' of the unwanted, but it should never ever
> hide or lose the wanted items.

I disagree. Losing a few posts one would have wanted to see can be
worth the gains. Spending time fine-tuning the filters with artificial
goals like "no false positives" wastes more time than living with
slightly sub-optimal filters, no matter what the filter criteria.

[Bear]

=?UTF-8?B?wrtRwqs=?= <box...@gmx.net> wrote in
news:20120318170...@fuchsia.remarqs.net:

> On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 04:40:11 -0700
> Mike Easter <Mi...@ster.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Faulty usenet filters, like faulty false-positive spam filters losing
>> goodmail/ham are worse than no filters, IMO.
>>
>> The idea is to get/see the mail or news you want without losing any
>> of what you don't want to miss/lose. A proper filter can have some
>> imperfect leakage-thru' of the unwanted, but it should never ever
>> hide or lose the wanted items.
>

> I disagree. Losing a fosts one would have wanted to see can be

> worth the gains. Spending time fine-tuning the filters with artificial
> goals like "no false positives" wastes more time than living with
> slightly sub-optimal filters, no matter what the filter criteria.
>

I disagree with that. The converse kinda of that is with false positives. I
would rather see more false positives and catch more malware, than see less
false positives and miss more malware.

[»Q«]

On 18 Mar 2012 22:58:54 GMT

Bear <bearbo...@gmai.com> wrote:

> =?UTF-8?B?wrtRwqs=?= <box...@gmx.net> wrote in
> news:20120318170...@fuchsia.remarqs.net:
>
> > On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 04:40:11 -0700
> > Mike Easter <Mi...@ster.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> Faulty usenet filters, like faulty false-positive spam filters
> >> losing goodmail/ham are worse than no filters, IMO.
> >>
> >> The idea is to get/see the mail or news you want without losing any
> >> of what you don't want to miss/lose. A proper filter can have some
> >> imperfect leakage-thru' of the unwanted, but it should never ever
> >> hide or lose the wanted items.
> >
> > I disagree. Losing a fosts one would have wanted to see can be

Dunno how that happened. s/fosts/few posts/

> > worth the gains. Spending time fine-tuning the filters with
> > artificial goals like "no false positives" wastes more time than
> > living with slightly sub-optimal filters, no matter what the filter
> > criteria.
>
> I disagree with that.

You haven't understood what you are attempting to "disagree" with.

> The converse kinda of that is with false positives. I would rather
> see more false positives and catch more malware, than see less false
> positives and miss more malware.

That's not the converse; that's a direct analogy agreeing with
what I posted.

[Nicetameetya]

[Default] On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 16:47:00 -0500, M.L.
<m...@privacy.invalid> told us in complete confidence:

All I know is that I used to see posts from the real Bear while
filtering out all those from the Bear forger/s. Since I haven't
changed any of those filters I can only assume that the real Bear has
changed his info without telling anyone and that his new info matches
one of the Agent filters I have for forgeries.

The following are the kilfilters I have for Bear forgeries.:

Author: Bear <bearbott...@gmail.com

Author: REMOVEbea...@gmai.com

Author: Bear Bottoms <REMOVEbea...@gmai.com>

Author: <REMOVEbea...@gmail.com>

Author: (bear bottoms) &! <bearbott...@gmail.com>

[John Corliss [ES]]

I dunno, they all look good to me

[Bear]

=?UTF-8?B?wrtRwqs=?= <box...@gmx.net> wrote in
news:20120318181...@fuchsia.remarqs.net:

Not really. You said it's better to lose some good ones to get rid of
the bad ones.

I said it's better to get some bad ones in order not to miss some good
ones.

I hope that is clearer for you :)

[Bear]

Nicetameetya <gd...@invalid.invalid> wrote in news:9sn9pqF8joU1
@mid.individual.net:

that should work

[Quaalude]

On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 15:09:41 +1300, Nicetameetya wrote:

> What I haven't seen lately is any posts from the real Bear

I would imagine he's thanking God for being alive. Used CIA assets
always are.

[John Corliss (ES)]

Somebody pretending to be me (John Corliss) forged:

> On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 12:35:23 +1300, Nicetameetya<gd...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>> (snip)

>> The following are the kilfilters I have for Bear forgeries.:
>>
>> Author: Bear<bearbott...@gmail.com
>> Author: REMOVEbea...@gmai.com
>> Author: Bear Bottoms<REMOVEbea...@gmai.com>
>> Author:<REMOVEbea...@gmail.com>

>> Author: (bear bottoms)&!<bearbott...@gmail.com>

>
> I dunno, they all look good to me

The post to which I'm replying is a forgery which I did not send. I only
post through Computer Country (an ISP in Oregon, U.S.A.) or sometimes
through my account with Eternal-September.

Here is a breakdown of the forgery's path header as I see it from my
location:

eternal-september.org!
mx04.eternal-september.org!
feeder.eternal-september.org!
news.mixmin.net! <-----------An anonymous remailer service.
.POSTED!not-for-mail

As you can see, the forgery was sent through mixmin, an anonymous
services I never use:

Injection-Info: news.mixmin.net; posting-host="0/2aomapqmhgA12ZVCKWSFzCYf8";
logging-data="3166"; mail-complaints-to="ab...@mixmin.net"

Also, there was this:

X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 6.00/32.1186

and:

Message-ID: <riscm7habcpa2jedg...@4ax.com>

The "4ax.com" suffix indicates a message sent using Forte Agent. I don't
even have Forte Agent installed on my system and have never used it.

To make this group readable by blocking out forgeries and trolling, I
suggest that you keep your eyes open for such garbage by checking
message headers whenever a message from somebody seems out of character.
You can also filter out anything from all of the remailers and rogue
usenet feeds I provide below in my signature file if you want to be able
to read this group without all the noise generated by our resident trolls.

Also, because of Googlespam and Googletrolls, I recommend that you set
your news reader to flag, or even better, block everything sent through
Google Groups as well. If you know of somebody who is posting through
Google Groups and who is NOT a troll or spammer, you can easily add them
to a white list in most newsreaders so that you'll still see their messages.

To the troll: the only time my signature file will contain this list of
recommended domains and other elements to filter on will be when you
forge posts from me. Keep forging posts from me though, and I will
restore the list to my Giganews signature file. Not only that, but I
will begin posting daily instructions about how to filter this group so
that your noise won't be seen.

--
John Corliss BS206. No ad, CD, commercial, cripple, demo, nag, share,
spy, time-limited, trial or web wares, OR warez for me, please.

Freeware- legally obtainable, local install computer programs which you
may use at no cost, monetary or otherwise, for as long as you wish.

Because of Googlespam, I block almost everything from Google Groups. I
also usually block as much as possible from anonymous remailers and
feeds, and other such rogue services because forger-trolls use them:

aioe.org
alt.net
anonymous (look for it in the Path header)
datemas.de
dizum.com
ecn.org
enfer-du-nord.net
frell.theremailer.net
goblin.stu.neva.ru (look for it in the Path header) <-----NEW!
mail2news (look for it in the Path header)
mixmaster.*
mixmin (look for it in the Path header)
newshosting.com <---Refuse to respond to abuse complaints
newsreader.com (look for it in the Path header)
octanews.net
open-news-network.org
Pooh or any of its variants (look for it in the Subject or From headers)
reece.net.au (look for it in the Message-ID header)
remailer (look for it in the Path header)
rip.ax.lt
tioat.net
usenet4all.se
xsusenet.com
x-privat.org
etc. (as they appear)

P.S. I don't reply to complaints about my signature file length. It's
laid out this way so that it's easier for people to see the individual
rogue services.

[TG]

On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 01:48:50 -0700, "John Corliss (ES)" <q34w...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>The post to which I'm replying is a forgery

Forgery my arse, the nym and addy are different.

"John Corliss (ES)" <q34w...@yahoo.com>

"John Corliss [ES]"<j...@IPaddress.invalid>

Case dismissed

--
Scaly moRon May - mo...@hotmail.com - Ubuntu/Vista Dual Boot
Registered Linux User #666- Ubuntu User #666(11.10)
ACF "Shit Surfers": http://dl.dropbox.com/u/7365303/ACF/SL.html

[Mike Easter]

I think the problem of losing good/wanted mail because of faulty spam
filters is a much bigger problem than 'missing' a news message.

Missing a particular news message is often a temporary loss, because
often someone replies to the missed message, while the safety/recovery
features for discovering a lost goodmail is not nearly the same and is
much more likely to be a permanent loss, perhaps important.

I consider the use of excellent email spam filters, which excellence is
defined as virtually never losing a goodmail, to be
essential/imperative, while I consider the use of usenet filters to be
optional, where I am perfectly happy to simply ignore undesirable news
posts while I am not so happy to ignore spam in my inbox nor misplaced
goodmail into my spam folder, much less dropped on the floor/lost.

--
Mike Easter

[»Q«]

On 19 Mar 2012 00:31:14 GMT

And you also said more false positives are better than not catching
all the bad ones.

> I said it's better to get some bad ones in order not to miss some good
> ones.

And now you've switched to wanting fewer false positives.

> I hope that is clearer for you :)

Don't worry about it; it's not as if you're expected to be consistent
or rational.

[Bear]

=?UTF-8?B?wrtRwqs=?= <box...@gmx.net> wrote in
news:20120319132...@fuchsia.remarqs.net:

Nope, you misread. I said I would rather catch more malware along with
more false positives rather than have less false positives /and/ miss
some malware.

>> I said it's better to get some bad ones in order not to miss some
>> good ones.
>
> And now you've switched to wanting fewer false positives.

OK, I get it...you are trolling.

[Mike Easter]

Bear wrote:

? Why do you post attributions which look like this:

> =?UTF-8?B?wrtRwqs=?=<box...@gmx.net> wrote in
> news:20120319132...@fuchsia.remarqs.net:

>>> =?UTF-8?B?wrtRwqs=?=<box...@gmx.net> wrote in
>>> news:20120318181...@fuchsia.remarqs.net:

>>>>> =?UTF-8?B?wrtRwqs=?=<box...@gmx.net> wrote in
>>>>> news:20120318170...@fuchsia.remarqs.net:

<giant snip>

> OK, I get it...you are trolling.

And why do you bottom post untrimmed?

Untrimmed bottom posting makes even non-trimming non-contextualizing top
posters crazy, to say nothing of the sanity of those who actually trim
and contextualize.

I'm not familiar with how to configure Xnews, but if your cursor would
land at the top (instead of the bottom) when you hit reply, you could
start your trimming or other editing somewhere up there.


--
Mike Easter

[Christopher Millbank]

I know you *could*. But you're blustering, as usual. The question sought
to ask you *why* you now spend your life posting endless yards of trash
and personal abuse on ACF and elsewhere, *why* you forge and nym-shift
all day and *why* you hold so much hatred for ACF and people on it.
You can add: *why* you have unhealthy fixations about other posters,
past and present.

None of it will get you anywhere, except into an early grave.

Nobody likes you here and nobody wants you here. Blame only yourself.

You cannot *IMPOSE* your views onto others nor *IMPOSE* how ACF runs.
You will *NEVER* be allowed anywhere near Pricelessware. All that ought
to be crystal clear by now. No?

Think about your options.

I won't be reading your response ...

Long live the BNP. Hitler was right.

Enough for today.
Find out more at
http://toucano.plus.com/Common.Purpose/
--
Christopher Millbank - Visionary
<christophe...@toucano.plus.com>
<ch...@toucano.plus.com>
<tou...@toucano.plus.com>

[Bear]

Mike Easter <Mi...@ster.invalid> wrote in news:9spqicFqf6U1
@mid.individual.net:

> <giant snip>
>
>> OK, I get it...you are trolling.
>
> And why do you bottom post untrimmed?
>
> Untrimmed bottom posting makes even non-trimming non-contextualizing top
> posters crazy, to say nothing of the sanity of those who actually trim
> and contextualize.
>
> I'm not familiar with how to configure Xnews, but if your cursor would
> land at the top (instead of the bottom) when you hit reply, you could
> start your trimming or other editing somewhere up there.
>
>

I prefer not to snip so much of the context out, one would have to go back
to a previous thread to see how the discussion developed.

To each his own.

[Mike Easter]

Bear wrote:
> Mike Easter

>> And why do you bottom post untrimmed?
>>
>> Untrimmed bottom posting makes even non-trimming non-contextualizing top
>> posters crazy, to say nothing of the sanity of those who actually trim
>> and contextualize.

> I prefer not to snip so much of the context out, one would have to go back
> to a previous thread to see how the discussion developed.

And how come lazy non-trimming bottom-posters always claim that they are
doing us all some kind of 'favor' or service by not trimming instead of
simply admitting that it is a lot easier to bottom post untrimmed than
to trim properly for optimizing context and therefore understanding and
effective communications.

> To each his own.

That is just what the no-context no-trim top-posters say (believe) as
well; you are all in the same boat. (no trim no context easy peasy for
the poster, not so much for the readers seeking the comprehension
facilitated by the extremely high value of context preceding one's words)


--
Mike Easter

[»Q«]

On 19 Mar 2012 22:08:57 GMT

Nope, you just don't think very well.

> I said I would rather catch more malware along with more false
> positives rather than have less false positives /and/ miss some
> malware.

Which, again, is not the converse of what I said but a direct analogy
supporting what I said.

> >> I said it's better to get some bad ones in order not to miss some
> >> good ones.
> >
> > And now you've switched to wanting fewer false positives.
>
> OK, I get it...you are trolling.

You thought I was trying to help you communicate, perhaps?