Some Simple Truths About DALnet
killah_...@my-deja.com
nickserv for spam purposes. It has already been
confirmed that this practice has already started.
DALnet IS using snooping techniques to get rid of
ANY staff member that does not go with the flow of
the EB. Not only can they snoop channels, but they
can also snoop INDIVIDUAL user connections. While
DALnet is using this ability to collect
information on the many users attacking the
network, they are also using this in order to
collect information on IRCops, who do not conform
to the ideals of the EB. This technique was used
to gather possibly damaging information against
LadyMorgaine showing that she had given
information to someone who should not have had
that information. However, this individual was
already privvy to said information because it was
already passed to them by a server administrator
who had installed the snooping capabilities on his
server. This snooping capability was approved by
Taz, the EB, and Dalvenjah himself prior to its
institution.
For those of you that don't think that DALnet is
going to be commercialized, here are couple of
other facts:
Taz, co-founder of money.net, is preparing to make
a move to San Diago from New York, saying that he
wants to devote more time to
DALnet, although his company money.net just
recieved an 8 million dollar infusion of cash from
Motorola. So why would he quit his job to move to
spend more time on something that doesn't make any
money, when he would be leaving a job that had a
LARGE income potential, if they are not planning
to commercialize DALnet to make money. To further
illustrate this point services have been moved to
an SQL database server to facilitate censorship of
the /list command.
It certainly is agreed that taking the unsavory
elements out of the list will most assuredly
remove the kiddie porn channels but it will also
remove any channel not deemed appropriate by a
committee who will be deciding what users can or
can't see in the list, in the hopes of attracting
investors to the DALnet they are attempting to
commercialize.
Concerned DALnet citizen
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Michael Bracker
(this is USEnet and not DALnet btw ...)
<killah_...@my-deja.com> wrote in news:8od6et$fv7$1...@nnrp1.deja.com
> DALnet IS, and WILL be using emails collected by
> nickserv for spam purposes. It has already been
> confirmed that this practice has already started.
1) false
2) false
would be great if you can tell us the source. There is _no_ spamming or
commercial email-address-collecting going on on DALnet. Please just take it
as it is and believe it. Thank you.
> DALnet IS using snooping techniques to get rid of
> ANY staff member that does not go with the flow of
> the EB.
again wrong. If I have got a opinion I voice it and if they don't like it -
bad luck. And if they don't like me then - bad luck. When I want to go (like
LadyMorgaine) it is their decision. You actually can't be forced not to use
DALnet. Therefor there are too many ip's around the world ...
> To further
> illustrate this point services have been moved to
> an SQL database server to facilitate censorship of
> the /list command
*meep* - wrong. With the SQL database we have got more potential to grow.
The SQL-database is just more powerful and reliable one as the old one. How
can someone think like that?
> It certainly is agreed that taking the unsavory
> elements out of the list will most assuredly
> remove the kiddie porn channels but it will also
> remove any channel not deemed appropriate by a
> committee who will be deciding what users can or
> can't see in the list, in the hopes of attracting
> investors to the DALnet they are attempting to
> commercialize.
> /dev/null (ad absurdum)
Please users, don't discuss everything from the beginning again. The
email-addresses will be secure, not sold and DALnet won't become commercial.
Dot.
cya,
--
Michael 'magD' Bracker
ma...@dal.net
SA & IRCop on traced.*
Scott Williams
>DALnet IS, and WILL be using emails collected by
>nickserv for spam purposes. It has already been
>confirmed that this practice has already started.
>
>DALnet IS using snooping techniques to get rid of
>ANY staff member that does not go with the flow of
>the EB. Not only can they snoop channels, but they
>can also snoop INDIVIDUAL user connections. While
>DALnet is using this ability to collect
>information on the many users attacking the
>network, they are also using this in order to
>collect information on IRCops, who do not conform
>to the ideals of the EB. This technique was used
>to gather possibly damaging information against
>LadyMorgaine showing that she had given
>information to someone who should not have had
*snip lots of babbling crap*
well its simple, you dont like DALnet the way its going, goto
Undernet, or one of the networks that constantly keeps spamming these
newsgroups, im sure they want the extra user. personally, I like the
way DALnet is going.
Scott Williams
Scottee
SOP #DALnetNewbies
irc.dal.net
Jim Murray
killah_...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> DALnet IS, and WILL be using emails collected by
> nickserv for spam purposes. It has already been
> confirmed that this practice has already started.
Confirmed by? How? You seem to assert much and prove nothing. Put up or shut
up.
>
> DALnet IS using snooping techniques to get rid of
> ANY staff member that does not go with the flow of
> the EB. Not only can they snoop channels, but they
> can also snoop INDIVIDUAL user connections.
I don't know about this. There are rumours but then agian there have _always_
been rumours. None of them have ever been proven true, why should this one be
any different? If you have information that proves what you're asserting then
let's see it, otherwise shut up and stop trying to spread FUD.
As to LadyMorgaine, she left of her own accord. I know she reads (or at least
read) this group, if that's somehow not true I'm pretty sure she'll pop up and
put me right.
>
> For those of you that don't think that DALnet is
> going to be commercialized, here are couple of
> other facts:
<snip pointless crap about Taz>
> To further
> illustrate this point services have been moved to
> an SQL database server to facilitate censorship of
> the /list command.
>
> It certainly is agreed that taking the unsavory
> elements out of the list will most assuredly
> remove the kiddie porn channels but it will also
> remove any channel not deemed appropriate by a
> committee who will be deciding what users can or
> can't see in the list, in the hopes of attracting
> investors to the DALnet they are attempting to
> commercialize.
>
What a load of total and utter unadulterated bullshit. Quite apart from the
fact that /list is an IRCd command and not in the least related to services,
who the hell would waste their time on so pointless a project as that.
> Concerned DALnet citizen
I doubt it. If you're who I think you are you've got about as much concern for
DALnet as I have about swatting a fly.
Jim.
--
Jim Murray = j...@digitaldaemons.net = jim...@dal.net
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"If you think the problem is bad now,
just wait until we've solved it."
-
Tony Miller
>DALnet IS, and WILL be using emails collected by
<Delusional conspiracy-theory bull-pooky snipped>
Do not feed the trolls.
-Tony
--
Reliable, "eggable" Unix shell accounts. http://www.jtan.com/proshell/
cl00bie @ IRC - /server cookie.sorcery.net 9000, http://www.sorcery.net
We welcome WebTV'ers - http://www.sorcery.net/help/index.html#WebTV
Dalvenjah FoxFire
this seems to be one of the same people who's enjoyed illegally
DoS attacking DALnet servers and resources in an attempt to bring
it down; since that hasn't worked, perhaps this person is attempting
a different tack.
In terms of spamming: Nope. We don't spam, plain and simple. I realize
it's asking a lot of people to trust that we don't and won't ever
spam anyone in this day and age, but the people who run DALnet have
been around since before the days of Canter and Siegel, and remember
how nice it was when pretty much all mail and USEnet was content.
In terms of monitoring: Any idiot with tcpdump and a router or box
in between a server or client can snoop packets. As a rule, we don't;
however, we do have a disclaimer stating that we reserve the right to
do so. The only time we actually do this is if we're attempting to solve
a technical issue, or to comply with a court order from the US Dept.
of Justice (which we have done in the past). That's it. It is immoral
and unethical to watch traffic for any other reason, and DALnet doesn't
do that. You also need to consider that DALnet passes a hell of a lot of
traffic each day, every DALnet staff member has a day job, and
definitely not enough time to spend snooping peoples' conversations.
This is unfortunately another point where you have to simply
trust us; if you don't trust us, then I suggest you also don't
trust your e-mail provider and anyone between you and your
destination, and begin exclusively using encryption to communicate
over the internet. You can only be so paranoid before you drive
yourself nuts.
(I find it quite rich that a person who, I believe, regularly
gains illicit access to various machines used to attack us,
ostensibly by running sniffers in order to find passwords to
gain that illicit access, accuses us of sniffing packets and
monitoring conversations.)
In terms of making money off of DALnet: Has it ever occurred to you
that some people simply don't care that much about getting rich?
Perhaps unlike you, certain people's lives simply do not revolve
around money. We've been running DALnet for 6 years now without
making a cent off of it. In fact I've spent thousands of dollars of
my own personal money trying to help keep DALnet alive over the years,
as have nearly all the other staff members and ISPs who contribute
bandwidth, machines, time, and other resources to DALnet.
If anything, we should be angry at people like you, who steal those
resources for your own selfish reasons by attacking our servers and
reputations and attempting to destroy what we have created. We
aren't, though, as your little ego trips and penis parades simply
don't matter in the long run.
I can also tell you that if I or the others who run DALnet were
concerned about money, we would have sold out long ago. We haven't,
because we're better than that.
I gain joy from simply knowing that I'm helping to create a
community where people can meet, talk, and have fun. I enjoy
knowing that something I've helped put together is being put to
good use by people who enjoy it, and I know that the rest of DALnet's
staff feels the same. DALnet has made a difference in society;
perhaps nothing earth-shattering like the ACLU, Napster, or the
DeCSS folks, but we've helped set the stage to influence people's
lives in great ways. Can you say that about something you've done,
or have all your efforts gone towards destroying the work of others?
In terms of changing services over to be SQL-based in order to
censor the /list: Sorry, no. Anyone who knows something about
writing programs to keep track of large data sets such as
the 500,000+ registered nicknames and 150,000+ registered channels
on DALnet understands that it inevitably ends up being much
easier to allow a database to keep track of the data rather than
writing your own homegrown system and duplicating the efforts of many
hundreds of people over the past 20-odd years. This allows services
to keep track of many more records without throwing as much hardware
at it as we've had to in the past. This is also the start of a long-term
effort to distribute services across multiple machines in order to make
it more speedy and reliable.
The "censoring /list" talk most likely comes from ideas thrown around
in order to manage the /list output and make it searchable. If anyone
tells you that the /list command in its current format is even remotely
usable, they are smoking an awful lot of crack.
DALnet's mission since its inception has been to provide a safe, enjoyable
place to chat, meet friends, have conversations and debates, etc. Every
change and decision we've made in the past has been an attempt to keep
and enhance that mission. Services is an attempt to organize and curb
abuse by people who would steal nicknames and channels. The various
modifications and enhancements to the IRC server have been made in an
attempt to make the network faster and more reliable, and less susceptible
to things like flood attacks and wingate floods and such. And requiring
an e-mail address to register a nick is quite simply in order to facilitate
the mailing of passwords to users who forget them.
In addition to all that, we've tried to provide services for our users,
such as @u.dal.net e-mail addresses and home pages. We plan to continue
trying to find and provide innovations that users can take advantage of
or not, as they see fit.
We've made mistakes and bad decisions, and will probably continue
to do so, just like everyone else. But I guarantee you that none of
the decisions will ever be made in malice or at the expense of someone
else. We've worked hard to build up 6 years of reputation as a network
and organization that tries to serve its users reliably and trustworthily,
and it would be foolhardy for us to throw that away by doing something
as stupid as selling off e-mail addresses or alienating our userbase.
When you read this (if you've made it this far), I urge you to
consider the REAL truth of what DALnet's all about, and not go
assuming that a rumor someone tells you is the truth.
-dalvenjah
In article <8od6et$fv7$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, <killah_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>DALnet IS, and WILL be using emails collected by
>nickserv for spam purposes. It has already been
>confirmed that this practice has already started.
>
>DALnet IS using snooping techniques to get rid of
>ANY staff member that does not go with the flow of
>the EB. Not only can they snoop channels, but they
>can also snoop INDIVIDUAL user connections. While
>DALnet is using this ability to collect
>information on the many users attacking the
>network, they are also using this in order to
>collect information on IRCops, who do not conform
>to the ideals of the EB. This technique was used
>to gather possibly damaging information against
>LadyMorgaine showing that she had given
>information to someone who should not have had
>that information. However, this individual was
>already privvy to said information because it was
>already passed to them by a server administrator
>who had installed the snooping capabilities on his
>server. This snooping capability was approved by
>Taz, the EB, and Dalvenjah himself prior to its
>institution.
>
>For those of you that don't think that DALnet is
>going to be commercialized, here are couple of
>other facts:
>
>Taz, co-founder of money.net, is preparing to make
>a move to San Diago from New York, saying that he
>wants to devote more time to
>DALnet, although his company money.net just
>recieved an 8 million dollar infusion of cash from
>Motorola. So why would he quit his job to move to
>spend more time on something that doesn't make any
>money, when he would be leaving a job that had a
>LARGE income potential, if they are not planning
>to commercialize DALnet to make money. To further
>illustrate this point services have been moved to
>an SQL database server to facilitate censorship of
>the /list command.
>
>It certainly is agreed that taking the unsavory
>elements out of the list will most assuredly
>remove the kiddie porn channels but it will also
>remove any channel not deemed appropriate by a
>committee who will be deciding what users can or
>can't see in the list, in the hopes of attracting
>investors to the DALnet they are attempting to
>commercialize.
>
>Concerned DALnet citizen
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
--
Dalvenjah FoxFire (aka Sven Nielsen)
Founder, the DALnet IRC Network
e-mail: dalv...@dal.net WWW: http://www.dal.net/~dalvenjah/
whois: SN90 Try DALnet! http://www.dal.net/
killah_...@my-deja.com
Jim Murray <not.int...@spam.dev.nul> wrote:
>
>
> killah_...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >
> > DALnet IS, and WILL be using emails collected by
> > nickserv for spam purposes. It has already been
> > confirmed that this practice has already started.
>
or shut
> up.
The IRCop that gave me this information has asked to remain anonymous,
and if I am to get information from this person again, I must respect
this request.
> >
> > DALnet IS using snooping techniques to get rid of
> > ANY staff member that does not go with the flow of
> > the EB. Not only can they snoop channels, but they
> > can also snoop INDIVIDUAL user connections.
>
> I don't know about this. There are rumours but then agian there have
_always_
> been rumours. None of them have ever been proven true, why should this
one be
> any different? If you have information that proves what you're
asserting then
> let's see it, otherwise shut up and stop trying to spread FUD.
>
> As to LadyMorgaine, she left of her own accord. I know she reads (or
at least
> read) this group, if that's somehow not true I'm pretty sure she'll
pop up and
> put me right.
>
Why would LadyMorgaine have ANYTHING to do with DALnet ever again. After
devoting 5 years to the network, 1.5 of which were as Director of Kline.
To be put out and ostracized by those very people that she thought were
her friends.
> >
> > For those of you that don't think that DALnet is
> > going to be commercialized, here are couple of
> > other facts:
>
> <snip pointless crap about Taz>
>
> > To further
> > illustrate this point services have been moved to
> > an SQL database server to facilitate censorship of
> > the /list command.
> >
> > It certainly is agreed that taking the unsavory
> > elements out of the list will most assuredly
> > remove the kiddie porn channels but it will also
> > remove any channel not deemed appropriate by a
> > committee who will be deciding what users can or
> > can't see in the list, in the hopes of attracting
> > investors to the DALnet they are attempting to
> > commercialize.
> >
>
> What a load of total and utter unadulterated bullshit. Quite apart
from the
> fact that /list is an IRCd command and not in the least related to
services,
> who the hell would waste their time on so pointless a project as that.
If a global zline can be added to services, they why can't the /list be
moved to services also. Even if the /list is kept an IRCd command, it
can STILL be reprogrammed to query an SQL Server database.
>
> > Concerned DALnet citizen
>
> I doubt it. If you're who I think you are you've got about as much
concern for
> DALnet as I have about swatting a fly.
If you were as concerned about DALnet as others are, you would not be so
QUICK to judge, without FIRST investigating to the best of your
abilities the information that I have provided you herein.
>
> Jim.
>
> --
> Jim Murray = j...@digitaldaemons.net = jim...@dal.net
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> "If you think the problem is bad now,
> just wait until we've solved it."
> -
>
killah_...@my-deja.com
fact or reality.
Time will tell...
In article <slrn8ql1hv....@io.jtan.com>,
cl0...@flame.org wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Aug 2000 08:04:53 GMT,
> killah_...@my-deja.com <killah_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >DALnet IS, and WILL be using emails collected by
>
> <Delusional conspiracy-theory bull-pooky snipped>
>
> Do not feed the trolls.
>
> -Tony
>
> --
> Reliable, "eggable" Unix shell accounts. http://www.jtan.com/proshell/
> cl00bie @ IRC - /server cookie.sorcery.net 9000,
http://www.sorcery.net
> We welcome WebTV'ers - http://www.sorcery.net/help/index.html#WebTV
>
killah_...@my-deja.com
Dalvenjah FoxFire <*dalv...@dal.net*> wrote:
> Hmm...someone seems a bit disillusioned. Unless I miss my mark,
> this seems to be one of the same people who's enjoyed illegally
> DoS attacking DALnet servers and resources in an attempt to bring
> it down; since that hasn't worked, perhaps this person is attempting
> a different tack.
WOW, if it isn't the "lovable Don Carnage" our beloved leader Dalvenjah
Foxfire. He came out of hiding, trying to avoid confrontation, to stare
it RIGHT in the face.
> In terms of spamming: Nope. We don't spam, plain and simple. I realize
> it's asking a lot of people to trust that we don't and won't ever
> spam anyone in this day and age, but the people who run DALnet have
> been around since before the days of Canter and Siegel, and remember
> how nice it was when pretty much all mail and USEnet was content.
It's pretty SAD when your OWN network staff has setup private email
accounts, JUST for the purpose of catching spam from being forced into
supplying an email address for their registered nick. It's not that hard
to see, that the spam came from a machine on the CERT network "your
place of employment".
> In terms of monitoring: Any idiot with tcpdump and a router or box
> in between a server or client can snoop packets. As a rule, we don't;
> however, we do have a disclaimer stating that we reserve the right to
> do so. The only time we actually do this is if we're attempting to
solve
> a technical issue, or to comply with a court order from the US Dept.
> of Justice (which we have done in the past). That's it. It is immoral
> and unethical to watch traffic for any other reason, and DALnet
doesn't
> do that. You also need to consider that DALnet passes a hell of a lot
of
> traffic each day, every DALnet staff member has a day job, and
> definitely not enough time to spend snooping peoples' conversations.
>
> This is unfortunately another point where you have to simply
> trust us; if you don't trust us, then I suggest you also don't
> trust your e-mail provider and anyone between you and your
> destination, and begin exclusively using encryption to communicate
> over the internet. You can only be so paranoid before you drive
> yourself nuts.
>
> (I find it quite rich that a person who, I believe, regularly
> gains illicit access to various machines used to attack us,
> ostensibly by running sniffers in order to find passwords to
> gain that illicit access, accuses us of sniffing packets and
> monitoring conversations.)
How is snooping IRCops a technical problem with the IRCd? I understand
that there is a TREMENDOUS amount of traffic on the DALnet IRC Network.
But it's NOT that difficult to log ALL traffic from a few users, and
then later on grep'ing the log file for lines with a specific nick.
> In terms of making money off of DALnet: Has it ever occurred to you
> that some people simply don't care that much about getting rich?
> Perhaps unlike you, certain people's lives simply do not revolve
> around money. We've been running DALnet for 6 years now without
> making a cent off of it. In fact I've spent thousands of dollars of
> my own personal money trying to help keep DALnet alive over the years,
> as have nearly all the other staff members and ISPs who contribute
> bandwidth, machines, time, and other resources to DALnet.
It has definatly occured to me that some people don't care about getting
rich off of IRC. But as you say, DALnet has been up and running now for
6 years on donations alone. Wouldn't it be nice to have money coming in,
instead of going out all the time. But, then again, the only people that
would EVER see any of this money from the commercialization of DALnet,
would be yourself, the EB, and MAYBE server admins, or those
organizations that are hosting the network servers.
What ever happened to your committee that was created, for marketing
purposes. Or any of the projects that they had going like t-shirt
sales??
> If anything, we should be angry at people like you, who steal those
> resources for your own selfish reasons by attacking our servers and
> reputations and attempting to destroy what we have created. We
> aren't, though, as your little ego trips and penis parades simply
> don't matter in the long run.
>
> I can also tell you that if I or the others who run DALnet were
> concerned about money, we would have sold out long ago. We haven't,
> because we're better than that.
Oh, and like you havn't already sold out? As I recall, a few years ago,
you incorperated dal.net on the idea that webmaster told you that you
could make money off of DALnet.
> I gain joy from simply knowing that I'm helping to create a
> community where people can meet, talk, and have fun. I enjoy
> knowing that something I've helped put together is being put to
> good use by people who enjoy it, and I know that the rest of DALnet's
> staff feels the same. DALnet has made a difference in society;
> perhaps nothing earth-shattering like the ACLU, Napster, or the
> DeCSS folks, but we've helped set the stage to influence people's
> lives in great ways. Can you say that about something you've done,
> or have all your efforts gone towards destroying the work of others?
Is this why you spend the majority of your time in hiding, under a
secret nick, no visible to the users that you so GREATLY enjoy being
around, and depend on. This sets a GOOD exapmle to the rest of the
DALnet staff who have also taken to hiding with unknown nick, or just
flat out refusing to acknowledging that they are users.
> In terms of changing services over to be SQL-based in order to
> censor the /list: Sorry, no. Anyone who knows something about
> writing programs to keep track of large data sets such as
> the 500,000+ registered nicknames and 150,000+ registered channels
> on DALnet understands that it inevitably ends up being much
> easier to allow a database to keep track of the data rather than
> writing your own homegrown system and duplicating the efforts of many
> hundreds of people over the past 20-odd years. This allows services
> to keep track of many more records without throwing as much hardware
> at it as we've had to in the past. This is also the start of a
long-term
> effort to distribute services across multiple machines in order to
make
> it more speedy and reliable.
Truth be known, its more like 750,000+ registered nicks. But if
migrating the services databases to an SQL server for reasons of data
wharehouseing, then it would most DEFINATLY be of great advantage to do
so. BUT it also gives you the opportunity to better manipulate channels
and nicks, removing what little control the users had over their nicks
and channels. You will be able to completely hide, or remove nicks/
channels from the system, that you don't feel would be in the best
interest of potential investors to see when they visit the network.
> The "censoring /list" talk most likely comes from ideas thrown around
> in order to manage the /list output and make it searchable. If anyone
> tells you that the /list command in its current format is even
remotely
> usable, they are smoking an awful lot of crack.
Ideas, mostly introduced my MirclMax, and supported by the EB and
admins, even tho when put to the admins for a vote, not enough admins
cast a vote to make the decision valid. At which point the EB had to
make a decision, and they of course, went with what MirclMax wanted,
because after all, MirclMax is in the habit of sending out email
directing others on what to say and how to say it, and even going as far
as to writing statements for them, and just telling them to cut and
paste it back and send it in. My favorite directive from MirclMax, has
to be where he TOLD someone to say "what a good job he (MirclMax) is
doing as a member of the SRA group and COO of DALnet"
And what about the plans for implementing the changes to /list?
Step 1: Making all the kiddie porn, warez, hate crime, sex, H/P/A,
alternate lifeystyle channels to
be FORCED +s, or closed by DALnet.
Step 2: All unregistered channels will NOT be in the /list command
Step 3: appointing a committee to decide what channels will and will
not be in the list. And forcing channel founders into
applying to the committee for their channel to be included in
the list.
Furthermore, who is going to be appointed to this committee? will it be
a committee of DALnet staff memberes ONLY, or will it be a mixed
committee of IRCops and users? This committee would best serve DALnet,
if it consisted of users from all walks and styles of life. But we all
know that this committee will probably consist of IRCops that you and
the EB can manipulate and control.
One last point about the /list issue: Why was it decided NOT to make
public the "/list -all" command, so that users who wanted to see ALL of
the channels, could?
> DALnet's mission since its inception has been to provide a safe,
enjoyable
> place to chat, meet friends, have conversations and debates, etc.
Every
> change and decision we've made in the past has been an attempt to keep
> and enhance that mission. Services is an attempt to organize and curb
> abuse by people who would steal nicknames and channels. The various
> modifications and enhancements to the IRC server have been made in an
> attempt to make the network faster and more reliable, and less
susceptible
> to things like flood attacks and wingate floods and such.
As far as THIS user is concerned, this is the ONLY truth you have spoken
in this ENTIRE post.
> And requiring an e-mail address to register a nick is quite simply in
order to
facilitate
> the mailing of passwords to users who forget them.
With the implementation of this system, you have effectivly rendered
your CSOP staff useless. ANY IRCop "COULD" be given the access to issue
the "sendpass" command at any given time. This would also effectly
demolish the caste system on DALnet ( IRCop, SA, CSOP ), Making EVERY
IRCop an EQUAL on the network. There is NO reason that EVERY IRCop on
the netork should be not be allowed to use the akill command, and
sendpass command. At this point there should be no more trust issues,
since the getpass command would no longer be used.
> In addition to all that, we've tried to provide services for our
users,
> such as @u.dal.net e-mail addresses and home pages. We plan to
continue
> trying to find and provide innovations that users can take advantage
of
> or not, as they see fit.
How much longer before you force users to have banner adds on their
sites, and in taglines for email, just like all the rest of the "free"
webspace providers on the internet?
> We've made mistakes and bad decisions, and will probably continue
> to do so, just like everyone else. But I guarantee you that none of
> the decisions will ever be made in malice or at the expense of someone
> else. We've worked hard to build up 6 years of reputation as a network
> and organization that tries to serve its users reliably and
trustworthily,
> and it would be foolhardy for us to throw that away by doing something
> as stupid as selling off e-mail addresses or alienating our userbase.
>
> When you read this (if you've made it this far), I urge you to
> consider the REAL truth of what DALnet's all about, and not go
> assuming that a rumor someone tells you is the truth.
I never implied that DALnet would sell off the email address' collected
through registring nick's and channels. what I AM implying, is that
DALnet is going to start spamming its users, on behalf of companies that
are willing to invest in DALnet.
So what you are saying is "Belive our propaganda" because quantity is
much more important to you than quality. you would rather have more
users, than good users.
Killah_Skrilla
> -dalvenjah
killah_...@my-deja.com
"Michael Bracker" <mi...@gmx.net> wrote:
> hi killah or whatever your Real name is...,
> (this is USEnet and not DALnet btw ...)
>
Yes, this is USEnet, and not DALnet, but then again, its also a USEnet
group ABOUT dalnet, and my post is ABOUT DALnet. Therefore, I believe
that I have followed the "rules" of USEnet.
> <killah_...@my-deja.com> wrote in news:8od6et$fv7$1...@nnrp1.deja.com
> > DALnet IS, and WILL be using emails collected by
> > nickserv for spam purposes. It has already been
> > confirmed that this practice has already started.
>
> 1) false
> 2) false
>
> would be great if you can tell us the source. There is _no_ spamming
or
> commercial email-address-collecting going on on DALnet. Please just
take it
> as it is and believe it. Thank you.
There have aready been reports of spam email, ending up in VERY private
email accounts, that originated from CERN machine, which happens to be
where Dalvenjah works. And this machine is one that he is in charge of
>
> > DALnet IS using snooping techniques to get rid of
> > ANY staff member that does not go with the flow of
> > the EB.
>
> again wrong. If I have got a opinion I voice it and if they don't like
it -
> bad luck. And if they don't like me then - bad luck. When I want to go
(like
> LadyMorgaine) it is their decision. You actually can't be forced not
to use
> DALnet. Therefor there are too many ip's around the world ...
how do you know that LadyMorgaine resigned on her OWN free will? How do
you know that she was NOT given the choice of resign, or be akilled. You
are not a member of the EB, and would not be privvy to this information.
And you most CERTAINLY would not be told of this practice either.
>
> > To further
> > illustrate this point services have been moved to
> > an SQL database server to facilitate censorship of
> > the /list command
>
> *meep* - wrong. With the SQL database we have got more potential to
grow.
> The SQL-database is just more powerful and reliable one as the old
one. How
> can someone think like that?
Mark my words on this one, censorship of the /list command is already
been put into the system, its only a matter of time before everyone
see's the outcome.
>
> > It certainly is agreed that taking the unsavory
> > elements out of the list will most assuredly
> > remove the kiddie porn channels but it will also
> > remove any channel not deemed appropriate by a
> > committee who will be deciding what users can or
> > can't see in the list, in the hopes of attracting
> > investors to the DALnet they are attempting to
> > commercialize.
>
> > /dev/null (ad absurdum)
>
> Please users, don't discuss everything from the beginning again. The
> email-addresses will be secure, not sold and DALnet won't become
commercial.
> Dot.
Why shouldn't we discuss this? Or is this just another attempt at the
staff of DALnet to hide the obvious from the users? whatever happened to
"we are here for the users"?
>
> cya,
> --
> Michael 'magD' Bracker
> ma...@dal.net
> SA & IRCop on traced.*
>
>
killah_...@my-deja.com
never going to be an IRCop? You are about as CLUELESS as the rest of the
users on our so called "beloved" DALnet. I suggest that you remove your
head from whoever's ass you have it in, and open your eyes. Ask around.
The truth will set you free, not to mention, will also shock you.
In article <39aa44d...@news.net.ntl.com>,
Sco...@me.com (Scott Williams) wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Aug 2000 08:04:53 GMT, killah_...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> >DALnet IS, and WILL be using emails collected by
> >nickserv for spam purposes. It has already been
> >confirmed that this practice has already started.
> >
> >DALnet IS using snooping techniques to get rid of
> >ANY staff member that does not go with the flow of
> >the EB. Not only can they snoop channels, but they
> >can also snoop INDIVIDUAL user connections. While
> >DALnet is using this ability to collect
> >information on the many users attacking the
> >network, they are also using this in order to
> >collect information on IRCops, who do not conform
> >to the ideals of the EB. This technique was used
> >to gather possibly damaging information against
> >LadyMorgaine showing that she had given
> >information to someone who should not have had
> *snip lots of babbling crap*
>
> well its simple, you dont like DALnet the way its going, goto
> Undernet, or one of the networks that constantly keeps spamming these
> newsgroups, im sure they want the extra user. personally, I like the
> way DALnet is going.
>
> Scott Williams
>
> Scottee
> SOP #DALnetNewbies
> irc.dal.net
>
Mark Owen
> What ever happened to your committee that was created, for marketing
> purposes. Or any of the projects that they had going like t-shirt
> sales??
The thought was to provide the network with more and better equipment to
continue to provide free services for its users.
> > If anything, we should be angry at people like you, who steal those
> > resources for your own selfish reasons by attacking our servers and
> > reputations and attempting to destroy what we have created. We
> > aren't, though, as your little ego trips and penis parades simply
> > don't matter in the long run.
> >
> > I can also tell you that if I or the others who run DALnet were
> > concerned about money, we would have sold out long ago. We haven't,
> > because we're better than that.
>
> Oh, and like you havn't already sold out? As I recall, a few years ago,
> you incorperated dal.net on the idea that webmaster told you that you
> could make money off of DALnet.
Get real, since I'm the WebMaster you refer to I'd think that I would be in
a pretty good position to know the facts about what you are refering to.
WebMaster never intended to make money off of DALnet, or buy DALnet. We
decided to run servers and help with an organization we felt had good
customer service for its users in mind. The DALnet I knew would never do
what you suggest and I would recomend that you stop reading someones ranting
on web pages when they're just trying to grind an axe against the network.
DALnet provides a free service for its users. It tries to do so in a
professional manner and I personally know most of the people running the
network. What you suggest is completely ridiculous.
> > I gain joy from simply knowing that I'm helping to create a
> > community where people can meet, talk, and have fun. I enjoy
> > knowing that something I've helped put together is being put to
> > good use by people who enjoy it, and I know that the rest of DALnet's
> > staff feels the same. DALnet has made a difference in society;
> > perhaps nothing earth-shattering like the ACLU, Napster, or the
> > DeCSS folks, but we've helped set the stage to influence people's
> > lives in great ways. Can you say that about something you've done,
> > or have all your efforts gone towards destroying the work of others?
>
> Is this why you spend the majority of your time in hiding, under a
> secret nick, no visible to the users that you so GREATLY enjoy being
> around, and depend on. This sets a GOOD exapmle to the rest of the
> DALnet staff who have also taken to hiding with unknown nick, or just
> flat out refusing to acknowledging that they are users.
Most likely it's because he has a life, school and work take alot of time.
Plus you can get burnt out and need a break. Don't read more into it than
that. He obviously keeps up to date with events or wouldn't be answering
you.
> > In terms of changing services over to be SQL-based in order to
> > censor the /list: Sorry, no. Anyone who knows something about
> > writing programs to keep track of large data sets such as
> > the 500,000+ registered nicknames and 150,000+ registered channels
> > on DALnet understands that it inevitably ends up being much
> > easier to allow a database to keep track of the data rather than
> > writing your own homegrown system and duplicating the efforts of many
> > hundreds of people over the past 20-odd years. This allows services
> > to keep track of many more records without throwing as much hardware
> > at it as we've had to in the past. This is also the start of a
> long-term
> > effort to distribute services across multiple machines in order to
> make
> > it more speedy and reliable.
>
> Truth be known, its more like 750,000+ registered nicks. But if
> migrating the services databases to an SQL server for reasons of data
> wharehouseing, then it would most DEFINATLY be of great advantage to do
> so. BUT it also gives you the opportunity to better manipulate channels
> and nicks, removing what little control the users had over their nicks
> and channels. You will be able to completely hide, or remove nicks/
> channels from the system, that you don't feel would be in the best
> interest of potential investors to see when they visit the network.
Do you realize how much memory in RAM it takes to hold that information?
you start having to make decisions about what data to throw away, or how
long you can have a registered nickname or channel. Again, this is
something that they're attempting to do because their old system wouldn't
carry them into the future. We knew that this was going to be needed two
years ago. Why try to read something bad into something that is being done
to provide better service. Besides if they had wanted a list of email
addresses to spam with they could have easily done so with the last set of
services. Using email to authenticate nicknames is a way of limiting abuse
of the nickname system.
<snip>
> I never implied that DALnet would sell off the email address' collected
> through registring nick's and channels. what I AM implying, is that
> DALnet is going to start spamming its users, on behalf of companies that
> are willing to invest in DALnet.
>
> So what you are saying is "Belive our propaganda" because quantity is
> much more important to you than quality. you would rather have more
> users, than good users.
No, actually what he's saying is to take a look at the history of DALnet.
People like you have been making these comments since before I joined the
network and at the time I did it was at 3000+ users. DALnet has always
tried to make a better environment for the users that choose to use DALnet.
I was proud to be a member of that network, as a user, an oper and an
admin - I may no longer be an active part of the network but I am proud of
where it's going.
Mark Owen
WebMaster Incorporated
David Schwartz
Mark Owen wrote:
> > Oh, and like you havn't already sold out? As I recall, a few years ago,
> > you incorperated dal.net on the idea that webmaster told you that you
> > could make money off of DALnet.
> Get real, since I'm the WebMaster you refer to I'd think that I would be in
> a pretty good position to know the facts about what you are refering to.
> WebMaster never intended to make money off of DALnet, or buy DALnet. We
> decided to run servers and help with an organization we felt had good
> customer service for its users in mind. The DALnet I knew would never do
> what you suggest and I would recomend that you stop reading someones ranting
> on web pages when they're just trying to grind an axe against the network.
> DALnet provides a free service for its users. It tries to do so in a
> professional manner and I personally know most of the people running the
> network. What you suggest is completely ridiculous.
I think you are misreading what he is saying. I believe he is saying
that you encouraged Sven to incorporate DALnet in the hopes of making
money off of it. Since I was there, I think I can set the record
straight on this issue. While I don't recall who specifically initiated
the discussion of incorporating DALnet, it was never done with the
intent of turning DALnet into a money-making enteprise.
One concern was that without a provable claim to the DALnet name, there
might be vulnerability to a name dispute. Another hope was that DALnet
might be turned into a real non-profit organization so that those who
were already donating bandwidth, hardware, and services to DALnet might
be able to get a tax deduction. It was also hoped that this might reduce
potential legal liability. Why sue a corporation that has no assets? It
was also hoped that it would create an entity that could sell T-shirts
and such.
Last I heard, DALnet 'Inc.' has done absolutely nothing. DALnet is
pretty much invulnerable to a domain name dispute under current rules.
The DMCA and the Telecommunications Act pretty much eliminated any
liability for DALnet. Forming a real non-profit is extremely complex and
expensive. As for selling T-shirts, I just think nobody with the
necessary skills has been able to put in the time to organize it.
Personally, I think it's a good idea. There was a time when I would have
proudly worn a DALnet T-shirt.
David Schwartz A.K.A. JoelKatz
chrome
<killah_...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8od6et$fv7$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> DALnet IS using snooping techniques to get rid of
> ANY staff member that does not go with the flow of
> the EB. Not only can they snoop channels, but they
> can also snoop INDIVIDUAL user connections. While
OK,
Show me the code in bahamut which enables this functionality. I've looked, I
can't find it.
chromed.
Emma
Skrilla,
I'm sorry but I have to pipe up here because so much of what you have said
is, i'm afraid, pure bull. Now, before anyone accuses me of ass-kissing,
i've never spoken to Dalvenjah and i'm pretty well known for speaking up if
I don't like something...no matter who's idea it is.
>It's pretty SAD when your OWN network staff has setup private email
>accounts, JUST for the purpose of catching spam from being forced into
>supplying an email address for their registered nick. It's not that hard
>to see, that the spam came from a machine on the CERT network "your
>place of employment".
I can't understand all this hubbub over giving email addresses. I come
from Austnet and they have required an email address to register a nickname
for *years*.
>
>How is snooping IRCops a technical problem with the IRCd? I understand
>that there is a TREMENDOUS amount of traffic on the DALnet IRC Network.
>But it's NOT that difficult to log ALL traffic from a few users, and
>then later on grep'ing the log file for lines with a specific nick.
To snoop *all* traffic from a few users you would have to have the
agreement of all admins to snoop traffic. DALnet does not have that
agreement. I have never, and will never snoop traffic unless someone hands
me a UK court order demanding that I do. I have over a terabyte of traffic
passing through my client server every month...am I going to log all that?
Am I buggery.
>It has definatly occured to me that some people don't care about getting
>rich off of IRC. But as you say, DALnet has been up and running now for
>6 years on donations alone. Wouldn't it be nice to have money coming in,
>instead of going out all the time. But, then again, the only people that
>would EVER see any of this money from the commercialization of DALnet,
>would be yourself, the EB, and MAYBE server admins, or those
>organizations that are hosting the network servers.
Yes, ISPs donate a lot. Since lineone has been linked we have donated
approx £20,000 in hardware and £35,000 per annum for bandwidth (that's
nearly $90,000 in a year). I can categorically tell you that these servers
are run at a loss. I don't know about other admins, but I can tell you why
I continue to take this huge loss; a) because i'm providing a service for
my own customers and; b) because by helping to give free service to others
i'm helping to raise awareness of my ISP.
>What ever happened to your committee that was created, for marketing
>purposes. Or any of the projects that they had going like t-shirt
>sales??
I think that's an idea which has been bandied around every IRC network
there has ever been. The fact that it hasn't happened should tell you that
the logistics of actually doing it would be rather hard.
>
>Is this why you spend the majority of your time in hiding, under a
>secret nick, no visible to the users that you so GREATLY enjoy being
>around, and depend on. This sets a GOOD exapmle to the rest of the
>DALnet staff who have also taken to hiding with unknown nick, or just
>flat out refusing to acknowledging that they are users.
I see nothing wrong with doing that. I'm sure, being who he is, if he
didn't use an alt nick he would have a screen full of /msgs in about 2
seconds flat. When I don't want to be disturbed I also change my nick and
I know an awful lot of people, staff and users alike, who do the same
thing. Are you saying that if you are DALnet staff you shouldn't have any
quiet or privacy *at all*?
>Truth be known, its more like 750,000+ registered nicks. But if
>migrating the services databases to an SQL server for reasons of data
>wharehouseing, then it would most DEFINATLY be of great advantage to do
>so. BUT it also gives you the opportunity to better manipulate channels
>and nicks, removing what little control the users had over their nicks
>and channels. You will be able to completely hide, or remove nicks/
>channels from the system, that you don't feel would be in the best
>interest of potential investors to see when they visit the network.
I remember having the SQL argument on another network a few years ago.
It's an obvious move. The fact is that IRC has not been rethought or
progressed for years. Mostly this is due to either lack of technical
resources or lack of time on behalf of the network. I think it's great
that DALnet are willing to break the mold and look ahead.
>
>Ideas, mostly introduced my MirclMax, and supported by the EB and
>admins, even tho when put to the admins for a vote, not enough admins
>cast a vote to make the decision valid. At which point the EB had to
>make a decision, and they of course, went with what MirclMax wanted,
>because after all, MirclMax is in the habit of sending out email
>directing others on what to say and how to say it, and even going as far
>as to writing statements for them, and just telling them to cut and
>paste it back and send it in. My favorite directive from MirclMax, has
>to be where he TOLD someone to say "what a good job he (MirclMax) is
>doing as a member of the SRA group and COO of DALnet"
I'm sorry, but your first statement is totally untrue, the idea was put
forward by several admins and was in full discussion with MirclMax giving
his 2cent worth along with everyone else. I'm one of the people who
campaigned HARD for a /list which showed DALnet's assets and hid the more
unpleasant things and I can tell you that the reasons have nothing to do
with potential investors. It has to do with potential users. I had
petitions of 100s of users and press coverage when I told LineOne
membership that we'd linked a DALnet server. Why? Because a few users had
nipped onto DALnet and typed /list only to be confronted with a screen full
of kiddie and hardcore porn. They, quite rightly, said that on first
sight, this wasn't a network that any right-minded individual would want to
connect to. It *looked* as though DALnet supported illegal activities.
DALnet is losing *alot* of potentional users because of perceptions which
are almost totally inaccurate. It is sensible and natural that a /list
output should show channels which are suitable for all ages and that people
in search of adult-orientated channels should have to look for them a
little harder. DALnet will *grow* if it goes down this route, and if it
doesn't go down this route then the only time you will see the word DALnet
in the press is when it goes hand in hand with statements about hackers,
kiddie porn and DoS attacks.
>
>How much longer before you force users to have banner adds on their
>sites, and in taglines for email, just like all the rest of the "free"
>webspace providers on the internet?
This shows a very bad understanding of free providers if you don't mind me
saying so. I represent a free internet service provider. Do we put tag-
lines into users email? No. Do we make them display banners on their
sites? No. What we do is provide a great service that will encourage
people back *and* tell their friends to come back. What do you think
DALnet is currently trying to achieve? Think about it.
>
>So what you are saying is "Belive our propaganda" because quantity is
>much more important to you than quality. you would rather have more
>users, than good users.
You have not thought this through at all have you. What do you think /list
is doing? It will encourage quality because it will be encouraging
friendly channels and making it that little bit harder to jump straight
into a #!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!mother-daughter-dog-sex channel. Tell me one
way that this action can possibly be described as encouraging quantity over
quality...unless you're saying that people who spend their time in
#!!!!!!!pre-teensex are the people DALnet should be encouraging.
Emma/curve
Admin: lineone.*/netropolis.*
Scott Williams
im clueless about DALnet users? Im not DALnet Administration, im not a
DALnet oper.... what does that class me as... oh is it a DALnet user?
I think it is.
I'd like to see where you're getting your information about DALnet
snooping. I jus tthink your a sad little child with to much time on
his hands.. go out, meet people, get a life, and stop bugging DALnet
users
Scott
On Wed, 30 Aug 2000 03:24:11 GMT, killah_...@my-deja.com wrote:
>How much more ass are you going to kiss before you figure out that your
>never going to be an IRCop? You are about as CLUELESS as the rest of the
>users on our so called "beloved" DALnet. I suggest that you remove your
>head from whoever's ass you have it in, and open your eyes. Ask around.
>The truth will set you free, not to mention, will also shock you.
>
>
>In article <39aa44d...@news.net.ntl.com>,
> Sco...@me.com (Scott Williams) wrote:
>> On Mon, 28 Aug 2000 08:04:53 GMT, killah_...@my-deja.com wrote:
>>
>> >DALnet IS, and WILL be using emails collected by
>> >nickserv for spam purposes. It has already been
>> >confirmed that this practice has already started.
>> >
>> >DALnet IS using snooping techniques to get rid of
>> >ANY staff member that does not go with the flow of
>> >the EB. Not only can they snoop channels, but they
>> >can also snoop INDIVIDUAL user connections. While
>> >DALnet is using this ability to collect
>> >information on the many users attacking the
>> >network, they are also using this in order to
>> >collect information on IRCops, who do not conform
>> >to the ideals of the EB. This technique was used
>> >to gather possibly damaging information against
>> >LadyMorgaine showing that she had given
>> >information to someone who should not have had
>> *snip lots of babbling crap*
>>
>> well its simple, you dont like DALnet the way its going, goto
>> Undernet, or one of the networks that constantly keeps spamming these
>> newsgroups, im sure they want the extra user. personally, I like the
>> way DALnet is going.
>>
>> Scott Williams
>>
>> Scottee
>> SOP #DALnetNewbies
>> irc.dal.net
>>
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
Honda CBR250RR
Scott Williams
*snip*
>And what about the plans for implementing the changes to /list?
Bah, sorry about the multiple posts.
> Step 1: Making all the kiddie porn, warez, hate crime, sex, H/P/A,
> alternate lifeystyle channels to
> be FORCED +s, or closed by DALnet.
I actually would like to see some kinda of verson of step1 put into
action, but what are the chances of this happening? How can every
channel in a list be monitored? we are talking about over 20k
channels? That would mean there would have to be someone monitoring
24/7, or is this something the srv's can do automatically? Anyways,
its something which DALnet does not want to promote, but
realistically, can it even be attempted, apart from carried out?
> Step 2: All unregistered channels will NOT be in the /list command
Well, this would atleast stop any sicko channels being put in a list,
but again, realisically, tis not gonna stop perverts comming onto
DALnet, just make it a little harder to find that kind of channels.
> Step 3: appointing a committee to decide what channels will and will not be in the list. And forcing channel founders into
>applying to the committee for their channel to be included in the list.
This means the committee would have to look over EVERY registered
channel? Every time they are registered? with the channel count around
20k would this be possiable?
If something like this had been implemented when DALnet was a baby,
maybe it would be impossiable, but the way I see it (but this is only
my point of view) DALnet has grown to big, the sheer scale of the
channel list is going to make it impossiable for some kind of
restrictions to be set on them.
Regards
Scott Williams
Honda CBR250RR
Joe Bice
<Sco...@me.com> wrote:
>
> well its simple, you dont like DALnet the way its going, goto
> Undernet, or one of the networks that constantly keeps spamming these
> newsgroups, im sure they want the extra user. personally, I like the
> way DALnet is going.
>
> Scott Williams
>
> Scottee
> SOP #DALnetNewbies
> irc.dal.net
I've ALREADY gone to another network. I didn't like the constant lag,
servers gone for hours on end, among other things. Took all of my ops
with me. Every one of them.
I'm sure I'm not alone.
You really *like* the spam and lack of Services, huh? Weird.
JB
Tony Miller
killah_...@my-deja.com <killah_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
<Snip>
>The IRCop that gave me this information has asked to remain anonymous,
>and if I am to get information from this person again, I must respect
>this request.
Undisclosed sources on the dalnet newsgroup do not increase your
credibility. You're going to need to name names, or look silly. I'm not
saying that your assertions are true or false. Just that you need to
consider how people are going to determine whether you are believable or
not (if that is your wish).
<Snippage>
>Why would LadyMorgaine have ANYTHING to do with DALnet ever again. After
>devoting 5 years to the network, 1.5 of which were as Director of Kline.
> To be put out and ostracized by those very people that she thought were
>her friends.
This is IRC. Pretty low in the grand scheme of things. I would imagine
that LM has moved on to more fulfilling and enjoyable pursuits. It's
*you* who are obsessing.
<Snip>
>> What a load of total and utter unadulterated bullshit. Quite apart
>from the
>> fact that /list is an IRCd command and not in the least related to
>services,
>> who the hell would waste their time on so pointless a project as that.
>
>If a global zline can be added to services, they why can't the /list be
>moved to services also. Even if the /list is kept an IRCd command, it
>can STILL be reprogrammed to query an SQL Server database.
First off, it's not a pointless project. Second of all I recommended
years ago that this sort of thing be implemented. It could be done with a
new channel mode with services able to modelock it on.
This allows channels who don't wish to be on the main list (for fear of
attracting children) to set their channel +a (adult) or whatnot. This
allows people who *really want to find* these channels the option of
issuing the /quote list -all *sex* or whatever they need to do to make
the channels appear. At SorceryNet we had toyed with a RSAC-type rating
system, but that would require a special client to connect with.
<Snip>
>If you were as concerned about DALnet as others are, you would not be so
>QUICK to judge, without FIRST investigating to the best of your
>abilities the information that I have provided you herein.
>
Your information may be completely true, but your credibility is
suffering, and your presentation isn't very good.
Aaron Schultz
> A conspiracy theory is only a theory up to the point that it becomes a
> fact or reality.
...or until it is dismissed due to lack of solid evidence or anything
comming true...
1- you mention that dalvenjah worked at CERN in one reply, then CERT in
another. If you don't even know where dalvenjah works, how can you
claim that spam was sent from his office?
...anyway, the place was CERFnet...(none of the above) and I handled
a good portion of the abuse mails for the last year and saw only
1 dalnet related complaint which was an IRC issue, not spam related.
All other spams from CERFnet were sent by customers against the AUP.
Keep in mind that CERFnet has a LOT of connectivity and customers, it's
far from a single person shop. To assume that all spam from a large
ISP is the result of a single person is insane.
2- The personal lives of the DALnet staff should stay personal.
If you want to bring up taz's personal life, I suggest bringing
up personal views on spam too - both taz & dalvenjah hate spam.
3- Regarding the movement of data to a database.. data can always
be searched. It makes no difference what holds the data. Moving
data to a database is a VERY logical move.
Everyone that I've come into contact with from the DALnet staff has shown
professionalism and an interest in helping make DALnet something great.
I'm not just talking about taz & dalvenjah, but also IRCops, the various
groups and the people behind the scenes... even unofficial groups like
#DALnethelp. None of the people I've dealt with are the type to simply
throw the network away by doing something as stupid as spamming.
It's impossible to make everyone happy, but based on the 50K-60K users
online at any given time, I believe they're doing a pretty good job.
People will make mistakes and not everyone will always agree with
decisions... life goes on, there are other networks to choose from if you
disagree with decisions on this one.
> Time will tell...
It certainly will - I'll be on DALnet.
- Aaron Schultz (Wagahai)
- aa...@powertrip.net
Ian Westcott
: In article <39AA6035...@digitaldaemons.net>,
: Jim Murray <not.int...@spam.dev.nul> wrote:
:>
:>
:> killah_...@my-deja.com wrote:
:> >
:> > DALnet IS, and WILL be using emails collected by
:> > nickserv for spam purposes. It has already been
:> > confirmed that this practice has already started.
:>
:> Confirmed by? How? You seem to assert much and prove nothing. Put up
: or shut
:> up.
: The IRCop that gave me this information has asked to remain anonymous,
: and if I am to get information from this person again, I must respect
: this request.
In other words, you're bullshitting.
Either that, or else some oper with a sense of humor is having fun with
you and laughing about it all right now.
:> > DALnet IS using snooping techniques to get rid of
Except it hasn't. Try coming back when you have some actual
-proof- about anything. Heresay from an "anonymous source" is
no proof.
--
Ian Westcott Rakarra@IRC
rak...@pacbell.net
Ian Westcott
: In article <8oem46$841$1...@dragonlair.dal.net>,
: Dalvenjah FoxFire <*dalv...@dal.net*> wrote:
:> Hmm...someone seems a bit disillusioned. Unless I miss my mark,
:> this seems to be one of the same people who's enjoyed illegally
:> DoS attacking DALnet servers and resources in an attempt to bring
:> it down; since that hasn't worked, perhaps this person is attempting
:> a different tack.
: WOW, if it isn't the "lovable Don Carnage" our beloved leader Dalvenjah
: Foxfire. He came out of hiding, trying to avoid confrontation, to stare
: it RIGHT in the face.
Yeah, you're really sticking it to the man, aren't you?
: How is snooping IRCops a technical problem with the IRCd? I understand
: that there is a TREMENDOUS amount of traffic on the DALnet IRC Network.
: But it's NOT that difficult to log ALL traffic from a few users, and
: then later on grep'ing the log file for lines with a specific nick.
Then this shows how little experience you have running a server with
a large amount of traffic. With a few hundred people, sure this is no
problem, since the server should have cpu power to spare. Once you
start taking on several thousand users, however, all that disk activity
is going to start causing things to grind to a halt, and it won't be
long until the other admins start wondering why your server is so slow.
Oh, but of course "they're all in on it too." Gotcha.
:> In terms of making money off of DALnet: Has it ever occurred to you
:> that some people simply don't care that much about getting rich?
:> Perhaps unlike you, certain people's lives simply do not revolve
:> around money. We've been running DALnet for 6 years now without
:> making a cent off of it. In fact I've spent thousands of dollars of
:> my own personal money trying to help keep DALnet alive over the years,
:> as have nearly all the other staff members and ISPs who contribute
:> bandwidth, machines, time, and other resources to DALnet.
: It has definatly occured to me that some people don't care about getting
: rich off of IRC. But as you say, DALnet has been up and running now for
: 6 years on donations alone. Wouldn't it be nice to have money coming in,
: instead of going out all the time. But, then again, the only people that
: would EVER see any of this money from the commercialization of DALnet,
: would be yourself, the EB, and MAYBE server admins, or those
: organizations that are hosting the network servers.
In order for traffic sniffing to work, the admins have to be in on it.
And once money starts flowing in, you'd better believe that ISPs are
going to stop donating bandwidth (and equipment, where applicable).
That means that admins would have to use that great revenue flow you
think exists to pay for their connection. Whoops! Doesn't sound like it
would be worth it! Not only would we end up paying more, but we would
alienate a huge portion of your userbase, the network would shrink
drastically because of it (thus lessening revenue again), and we'd
probably face a good share of lawsuit problems as well.
And here is the great flaw in your argument: There is no money to be
made selling addresses in services to spammers. Not even for spamming
on behalf of spam companies (which would bring in less $$ since we'd
have to spend more money on resources). They're just not worth that
much. They would barely pay a tiny fraction of the cost of upkeep.
DALnet servers chew up bandwidth. They're expensive.
: What ever happened to your committee that was created, for marketing
: purposes. Or any of the projects that they had going like t-shirt
: sales??
I wouldn't mind a DALnet T-Shirt. Hell, I would have worn that thing
happily, just because it was neat. Did it never occur to you that such
things were proposed because they were neat, because those involved
thought it would be a cool idea, instead of having some nefarious
purpose? Of course not, that's right. DALnet staff bad, kooky
conspiracy theories good, that's right. Just how much do you think a few
t-shirt sales brings in, anyway?
:> I gain joy from simply knowing that I'm helping to create a
:> community where people can meet, talk, and have fun. I enjoy
:> knowing that something I've helped put together is being put to
:> good use by people who enjoy it, and I know that the rest of DALnet's
:> staff feels the same. DALnet has made a difference in society;
:> perhaps nothing earth-shattering like the ACLU, Napster, or the
:> DeCSS folks, but we've helped set the stage to influence people's
:> lives in great ways. Can you say that about something you've done,
:> or have all your efforts gone towards destroying the work of others?
: Is this why you spend the majority of your time in hiding, under a
: secret nick, no visible to the users that you so GREATLY enjoy being
: around, and depend on. This sets a GOOD exapmle to the rest of the
: DALnet staff who have also taken to hiding with unknown nick, or just
: flat out refusing to acknowledging that they are users.
Apparently you've never been popular, nor have you had a billion
people wanting to talk to you and spit on you and the like. Figures.
Quite honestly, when you're Dalvenjah, you become an instant target.
It's not worth it to pop on the network with your real nick only to
see dozens of "DALnet sucks!!!" messages before getting DoS'd off. }:P
:> In terms of changing services over to be SQL-based in order to
:> censor the /list: Sorry, no. Anyone who knows something about
:> writing programs to keep track of large data sets such as
:> the 500,000+ registered nicknames and 150,000+ registered channels
:> on DALnet understands that it inevitably ends up being much
:> easier to allow a database to keep track of the data rather than
:> writing your own homegrown system and duplicating the efforts of many
:> hundreds of people over the past 20-odd years. This allows services
:> to keep track of many more records without throwing as much hardware
:> at it as we've had to in the past. This is also the start of a
: long-term
:> effort to distribute services across multiple machines in order to
: make
:> it more speedy and reliable.
: Truth be known, its more like 750,000+ registered nicks. But if
: migrating the services databases to an SQL server for reasons of data
: wharehouseing, then it would most DEFINATELY be of great advantage to do
: so. BUT it also gives you the opportunity to better manipulate channels
: and nicks, removing what little control the users had over their nicks
: and channels.
How is that different from the current situation? DALnet has full
control over nicks and channels, and it always has, from the first
day Chanserv, and then Nickserv came online.
: You will be able to completely hide, or remove nicks/
: channels from the system, that you don't feel would be in the best
: interest of potential investors to see when they visit the network.
Again, that's no change from the current system. Do you really know
how things currently sound, or are you just writing a "stream of
consciousness" of anything that sounds sinister? You make the X-Files
look upbeat.
: And what about the plans for implementing the changes to /list?
: Step 1: Making all the kiddie porn, warez, hate crime, sex, H/P/A,
: alternate lifeystyle channels to
: be FORCED +s, or closed by DALnet.
You come up with some crazy stuff. I love it. :)
: One last point about the /list issue: Why was it decided NOT to make
: public the "/list -all" command, so that users who wanted to see ALL of
: the channels, could?
No one ever denied it. I mentioned it myself several times to many a mailing
list (and functionality for it was mentioned in the help docs ever since
the "new" list was introduced), and I wrote the damned thing (well, I
didn't write an -all flag, but I did originally code in the functionality
for server-side filtering... way back when. I believe I also mentioned
it once or twice in the newsgroups too. What else would you have me do?
Send a memo to all registered users?
:> And requiring an e-mail address to register a nick is quite simply in
: order to
: facilitate
:> the mailing of passwords to users who forget them.
: With the implementation of this system, you have effectivly rendered
: your CSOP staff useless. ANY IRCop "COULD" be given the access to issue
: the "sendpass" command at any given time. This would also effectly
: demolish the caste system on DALnet ( IRCop, SA, CSOP ), Making EVERY
: IRCop an EQUAL on the network.
Until recently, I was a CSop. And let me tell you, as a CSop, sendpass
would have been an incredible boon! Imagine it: no more arguing with
users over who the owner of the nick is! No more having to spend so
much time trying to explain why I can't give the user his password back!
I always hated having to put a user on ignore when he wouldn't take no
for an answer. I always wanted to somehow come through and be able to
do more, even when I couldn't. After all, that person came to me to ask
for help, and even though I knew the answer, I couldn't give it to him,
because I couldn't be sure I was giving it to the right person. Is that
so hard to understand? I don't know of any person who actually enjoyed
being the job of CSop -- it was fairly stressful, since we were never
given the tools that could do the job (until now), yet we were expected
to explain why we couldn't.
As for why any oper can't use the sendpass command -- I'd say give it
time. It's -new-. Things are still being discussed, hammered out,
decided. I'd say there are probably good security reasons for allowing
only CSops to use it (after all, why not let ANY user use it? There are
reasons, you know...)
: There is NO reason that EVERY IRCop on
: the netork should be not be allowed to use the akill command, and
: sendpass command. At this point there should be no more trust issues,
: since the getpass command would no longer be used.
Whoops! Sounds like someone doesn't know much about security. :)
:> We've made mistakes and bad decisions, and will probably continue
:> to do so, just like everyone else. But I guarantee you that none of
:> the decisions will ever be made in malice or at the expense of someone
:> else. We've worked hard to build up 6 years of reputation as a network
:> and organization that tries to serve its users reliably and
: trustworthily,
:> and it would be foolhardy for us to throw that away by doing something
:> as stupid as selling off e-mail addresses or alienating our userbase.
:>
:> When you read this (if you've made it this far), I urge you to
:> consider the REAL truth of what DALnet's all about, and not go
:> assuming that a rumor someone tells you is the truth.
: I never implied that DALnet would sell off the email address' collected
: through registring nick's and channels. what I AM implying, is that
: DALnet is going to start spamming its users, on behalf of companies that
: are willing to invest in DALnet.
And... again, just how much $$ is this supposed to bring in? Please
come up with proof, as in hard figures, of exactly how this could
work.
I like how you simply ignored the charges of server DOSing.
Ian Westcott
: <killah_...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
: news:8od6et$fv7$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
:> DALnet IS using snooping techniques to get rid of
:> ANY staff member that does not go with the flow of
:> the EB. Not only can they snoop channels, but they
:> can also snoop INDIVIDUAL user connections. While
: OK,
: Show me the code in bahamut which enables this functionality. I've looked, I
: can't find it.
BTW, it's not hard to circulate a patch and apply that to the source.
Open source software is deceptively easy to modify. :)
chrome
"Ian Westcott" <rak...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:8okkn8$ska$1...@mark.ucdavis.edu...
> :> DALnet IS using snooping techniques to get rid of
> :> ANY staff member that does not go with the flow of
> :> the EB. Not only can they snoop channels, but they
> :> can also snoop INDIVIDUAL user connections. While
>
> : OK,
>
> : Show me the code in bahamut which enables this functionality. I've
looked, I
> : can't find it.
>
> BTW, it's not hard to circulate a patch and apply that to the source.
> Open source software is deceptively easy to modify. :)
True, though I'd like to see someone try patching lineone.* without my
permission.
If there is any snooping being done it'll be done by someone who can code
well enough to insert some extra features into bahamut. Just taking all the
traffic from a raw tcpdump and piping it into a file would very quickly
generate an amount of data that would be impossible to manage. I don't know
many people with access to Terabytes of storage ;)
I also doubt there is any conspiracy between the admins to snoop individuals
or channels - if it is going on, I certainly havn't heard about it, and
it'll be the actions of a few individuals acting without the knowledge or
consent of the other Admins.
chromed.
AA for lineone.* netropolis-e.*
Scott Williams
wrote:
*snip*
>I also doubt there is any conspiracy between the admins to snoop individuals
>or channels - if it is going on, I certainly havn't heard about it, and
>it'll be the actions of a few individuals acting without the knowledge or
>consent of the other Admins.
>
>chromed.
>AA for lineone.* netropolis-e.*
>
the end of the end, this is IRC, to be honest, its not exactly overly
important in most peoples lives. I seriously cant see why everyone is
making a big deal of this :(
Scottee
Tony Miller
Aaron Schultz <aa...@powertrip.net> wrote:
>groups and the people behind the scenes... even unofficial groups like
>#DALnethelp. None of the people I've dealt with are the type to simply
Unofficial? Last I knew #DALnethelp was owned by the DALnet help
committee.. Has something changed that Idon't know about?
Tony Miller
chrome <chr...@lineone.net> wrote:
<Snip>
>> : Show me the code in bahamut which enables this functionality. I've
>looked, I
>> : can't find it.
>>
>> BTW, it's not hard to circulate a patch and apply that to the source.
>> Open source software is deceptively easy to modify. :)
>
>True, though I'd like to see someone try patching lineone.* without my
>permission.
Anyone with root or group permissions ;)
>If there is any snooping being done it'll be done by someone who can code
>well enough to insert some extra features into bahamut. Just taking all the
patch < patchfile? :))
>chromed.
>AA for lineone.* netropolis-e.*
-Tony
Tony Miller
Ian Westcott <rak...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>killah_...@my-deja.com wrote:
<Snip>
>: How is snooping IRCops a technical problem with the IRCd? I understand
>: that there is a TREMENDOUS amount of traffic on the DALnet IRC Network.
>: But it's NOT that difficult to log ALL traffic from a few users, and
>: then later on grep'ing the log file for lines with a specific nick.
>
>Then this shows how little experience you have running a server with
>a large amount of traffic. With a few hundred people, sure this is no
>problem, since the server should have cpu power to spare. Once you
>start taking on several thousand users, however, all that disk activity
>is going to start causing things to grind to a halt, and it won't be
>long until the other admins start wondering why your server is so slow.
>Oh, but of course "they're all in on it too." Gotcha.
Please, let's not get into debunking individual technical suppositions on
snooping. Putting aside whether DALnet, or any DALnet admin is snooping
on anyone, snooping is amazingly easy to do with a simple patch.
There has been talk about opers being able to see +s channels on the list.
Ther has been a mode to allow opers to see who /whois'ed them. There is
also the standard IRCop seeing of things like +i that nobody else can see.
I have been on networks (small ones, few users) who have had a usermode
that allowed them to sit in a channel invisibly and monitor what was being
said. I have seen usermodes that allowed opers to walk through bans.
Rather than logging, what's to stop an admin from diverting chatter to a
private channel to be logged by a bot on another machine?
So let's not split hairs on what's technically possible or practical,
shall we?
<Snip>
>: One last point about the /list issue: Why was it decided NOT to make
>: public the "/list -all" command, so that users who wanted to see ALL of
>: the channels, could?
>
>No one ever denied it. I mentioned it myself several times to many a mailing
>list (and functionality for it was mentioned in the help docs ever since
>the "new" list was introduced), and I wrote the damned thing (well, I
>didn't write an -all flag, but I did originally code in the functionality
>for server-side filtering... way back when. I believe I also mentioned
>it once or twice in the newsgroups too. What else would you have me do?
>Send a memo to all registered users?
-MemoServ- New DALnet news is available! To read, use: /msg MemoServ NEWS
:)
>Ian Westcott Rakarra@IRC
>rak...@pacbell.net
chrome
"Tony Miller" <cl0...@flame.org> wrote in message
news:slrn8qsnrk....@io.jtan.com...
> >True, though I'd like to see someone try patching lineone.* without my
> >permission.
>
> Anyone with root or group permissions ;)
ie, me, or the admin ;)
>
> >If there is any snooping being done it'll be done by someone who can code
> >well enough to insert some extra features into bahamut. Just taking all
the
>
> patch < patchfile? :))
Easy enough to say. But a patch has to be written to patch a specific
version of a peice of software. Not any 'snoop.patch' file (generic name,
I've never seen any patch around to enable snooping in IRCDs) will work on
any IRCD. Bahamut is pretty close to Hybrid, but differs enough I think by
now that any patch written for Hybrid isn't going to work.
So again, they'd have to have enough programming knowledge to do it.
chromed.
AA of lineone.* netropolis-r.*
Emma
>Anyone with root or group permissions ;)
There's only 2 people with root on our machines, chromed and I. Believe
me, it isn't patched ;P
Emma
Emma
>Anyone with root or group permissions ;)
Ahh, but Tony. Not everyone lets the world and his dog have access to his
servers. In our case, it is only chromed and I that have access to
lineone/netropolis - so we can state with absolute and total certainly that
nobody could nip in and add anything which would enable snooping.
To be honest, I think this whole argument is rather silly. Of *course*
it's easy to snoop and any admin could do it. If I *knew* of any admin
doing it, given that they would have taken that action behind other admins'
backs, that person would be lower in my estimation than a snake's
underbelly. So *if* (and it's a big if), any DALnet admin is snooping
users/channels on the quiet I would sincerely hope they would be ashamed of
themselves. It is immoral and really pretty vulgar.
Emma
Tony Miller
Emma <em...@lineone.com> wrote:
>Tony Miller thought for a minute and then uttered in alt.irc.dalnet :
>
>>Anyone with root or group permissions ;)
>
>Ahh, but Tony. Not everyone lets the world and his dog have access to his
>servers. In our case, it is only chromed and I that have access to
Well, not *on purpose* ;)
>lineone/netropolis - so we can state with absolute and total certainly that
>nobody could nip in and add anything which would enable snooping.
Well, I didn't say that you were. I don't subscribe to the "vast
conspiracy" theory. When we at SorceryNet were having some trouble with
our WebTV proxy, I compiled it with debug on. Was I privy to private
conversations? Sure. Did I read them? Yup, glancing over them to find
the errors. Do I remember them? Nope. Did I care at the time? Nope. I
also mentioned the fact in the topic of #WebTV, warning those using the
proxy that I might be looking.
>To be honest, I think this whole argument is rather silly. Of *course*
>it's easy to snoop and any admin could do it. If I *knew* of any admin
>doing it, given that they would have taken that action behind other admins'
>backs, that person would be lower in my estimation than a snake's
>underbelly. So *if* (and it's a big if), any DALnet admin is snooping
>users/channels on the quiet I would sincerely hope they would be ashamed of
>themselves. It is immoral and really pretty vulgar.
I'll go a step further than that. If, on SorceryNet, I knew that an admin
was snooping on private conversations without a really good reason
(tracking lawbreakers, etc), I'd see them delinked. I wouldn't wag my
finger at them saying "naughty naughty!". If I was unable to delink them,
I'd delink myself.
I take our users' privacy very seriously, and am willing to put my nuts
on the block to protect it. Any of the privacy invading operserv commands
are globoped, and any privacy invading commands in the future will be
globoped. That is the check and balance we settle for between being able
to invade privacy, and doing it with a very good reason.
>Emma
Emma
>I'll go a step further than that. If, on SorceryNet, I knew that an
>admin was snooping on private conversations without a really good reason
>(tracking lawbreakers, etc), I'd see them delinked. I wouldn't wag my
>finger at them saying "naughty naughty!". If I was unable to delink
>them, I'd delink myself.
I'm not *that* partialled to the smell of my own burning flesh. In the
final analysis I run IRC servers because i'm paid to do so. I'll fight for
what I believe in..but marytr myself for it? Bugger that lol. I also
would not delink over it. I don't run a server for my own vanity, I run it
because the ISP see IRC as a good service to invest in - in the final
analysis they're going to invest in it regardless of what politics,
nefarious activies or whatever else goes on and at that point I put aside
my personal feelings and stick on my 'I'm just doing my job mate' hat.
Emma
ni...@my-deja.com
hundred percent correct. People reserve the right
to have privacy. Logging all traffic on DAL.net
then grepping conversations is leading a sence to
an illegal activity. What type of an IRC Server
have you administrators changed it to. It was
pathetic in the first place enough already and
now it is getting ridiculous.
Let's just say for an example, UserA and UserB
have been suspected once of sending multi-packets
to DALnet IRCd's and Services. The DALnet team is
now suspecting them for reason why DALnet's
Server and Services have been failing lately (Not
like they are any good anyway. The way the
network works make's me laugh. This issue I will
talk about later). You decided to try a snoop
method on them. You end up grepping their
information and reading their private
conversations. It ends up that it was not them
and you have found something out in the log like
their credit card information, address, telephone
number, where they go to school, where they work
or any strictly private information you would
stress if anyone else found out. There is no way
you can tell me that is not wrong.
I must say to end this off that the way DALnet
works is pretty GAY, with a capitol G. That is
the reason why ISP such as BigPond.COM don't want
to link an IRCd Server to the DALnet Network.
Instead they made their own one and have crusaded
with the EFnet team.
Regards, Paul (nint).
Tony Miller
This is one of the reasons that I'm very fortunate that IRC is a hobby for
me.. My job and morgatge payments won't be on the line for my refusal to
kiss a specific non-job-related "arse" ;)
>Emma
You're all right, Emma :) It's actually refreshing to see a unapologetic
pragmatist here at DALnet. I was accused of 'selling out' because I was a
proponent of the new list filtering and nick email idea. I lost my
"idealistic IRC cherry" years ago, and now understand that many times you
have to break a few eggs to make an omelette. I try to draw the line at
"killing the chicken" :)
B0P
<snip>
>
>If you were as concerned about DALnet as others are, you would not be so
>QUICK to judge, without FIRST investigating to the best of your
>abilities the information that I have provided you herein.
>
Troll, go away.
You're the one presenting an abundance of statements that you have not
done *anything* to even remotely prove, not even hint at proving,
you're trying to stir up a discussion and managing it. The only sad
thing about this is that you have so little to do that you bother, and
that people bother replying (like me ;). You've had your fun, go play
in the traffic.
B0P
--
B0P@HelpDesk (DALnet)
URL: http://mirc-egg.net
Email: bop@theurl
ICQ: On request
Mark R.
wrote:
>On Mon, 28 Aug 2000 08:04:53 GMT, killah_...@my-deja.com in
><8od6et$fv7$1...@nnrp1.deja.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Concerned DALnet citizen
>>
>>
>>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>>Before you buy.
>
>Not a bad troll. On a scale of 100- I'd give it a 93 or so.
>Now do the one on gun-control.
skrilla..... when are you gunna fucking learn?
there is NO ROOM on dalnet for the packet kiddie, dos kiddie, script
kiddie, ect. (that is you and me)
the difference between me and you is that i dont blast dalnet servers,
or opers into a pulp, you do
leave these fuckers alone and they will let you alone, got it?
or do i have to ram it down your throat?
just let it die, your not going to win
Jim Murray
mo...@bloukieurg.net wrote:
>
> it is common knowledge that bahamut has a snoop feature compiled in
> it.
>
> wether it is used or not is up to the server admin.
>
> all you have to do is look at bahamut.
>
> dalnet admins who deny this are either unknowing and uninformed, or
> liars.
Strange, I don't see anything of that nature in the source I have, perhaps you'd
care to tell me where you obtained your copy?
Jim.
--
Jim Murray = j...@digitaldaemons.net = jim...@dal.net
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bozone (n.) The substance surrounding stupid people that stops bright
ideas from penetrating. The bozone layer, unfortunately, shows little
sign of breaking down in the near future.
Phil Casimiri
--
-Casimiri@DALnet
S@#Casual
a+#DALnetHelp
S@#Miami
--
<mo...@bloukieurg.net> wrote in message
news:c25dus0gjvmieuomv...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 28 Aug 2000 12:47:34 +0200, "Michael Bracker" <mi...@gmx.net>
> amazed us with his/her particular brand of stupidity in
> <8odfu2$ajl30$1...@ID-144.news.cis.dfn.de> in alt.irc.dalnet when he/she
> wrote:
>
> >hi killah or whatever your Real name is...,
> > (this is USEnet and not DALnet btw ...)
> >
> ><killah_...@my-deja.com> wrote in news:8od6et$fv7$1...@nnrp1.deja.com
> >> DALnet IS, and WILL be using emails collected by
> >> nickserv for spam purposes. It has already been
> >> confirmed that this practice has already started.
> >
> >1) false
> >2) false
> >
> >would be great if you can tell us the source. There is _no_ spamming or
> >commercial email-address-collecting going on on DALnet. Please just take
it
> >as it is and believe it. Thank you.
> >
> >
> >> DALnet IS using snooping techniques to get rid of
> >> ANY staff member that does not go with the flow of
> >> the EB.
> >
> >again wrong. If I have got a opinion I voice it and if they don't like
it -
> >bad luck. And if they don't like me then - bad luck. When I want to go
(like
> >LadyMorgaine) it is their decision. You actually can't be forced not to
use
> >DALnet. Therefor there are too many ip's around the world ...