info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: David Brooks - copyright infringer *multiple*
2 views
Skip to first unread message
Shadow
May 14, 2020, 9:30:20 PM5/14/20
to
On Thu, 14 May 2020 22:53:21 -0000 (UTC), Diesel <nob...@haph.org>
wrote:
>Shadow, Would you like to take bets on whether or not Snit calls
>David out for continuing to violate my copyright? Not only is David
>refusing to remove the unauthorized copy, he went ahead and uploaded
>another one to another site. Where's that little hypocrite Snit now?
>rofl!
Snit's sitting at a computer he bought with the taxes you and
other honest people pay, and uses it to break software protection.
Do you really think what snit thinks is important or even
relevant?
He "retired" claiming he's psychotic. It's possibly the ONLY
time he ever told the truth.
Still, it's one truth more than BD has ever told.
HTH
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012
wrote:
>Shadow, Would you like to take bets on whether or not Snit calls
>David out for continuing to violate my copyright? Not only is David
>refusing to remove the unauthorized copy, he went ahead and uploaded
>another one to another site. Where's that little hypocrite Snit now?
>rofl!
Snit's sitting at a computer he bought with the taxes you and
other honest people pay, and uses it to break software protection.
Do you really think what snit thinks is important or even
relevant?
He "retired" claiming he's psychotic. It's possibly the ONLY
time he ever told the truth.
Still, it's one truth more than BD has ever told.
HTH
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012
Diesel
May 15, 2020, 1:44:06 AM5/15/20
to
Shadow <S...@dow.br> news:imrrbf59lo1ouvr3b...@4ax.com
rhetorical questions. :) Okay, so short of modding a filter or using
google to see if Snit has replied about it, I can't verify any wajor;
but let's just say that I seriously doubt snit is going to express
any real dissatisfaction with Davids actions. I'd expect, if he does
reply, it'll be something to defend davids actions and excuse his
lack of comment when David does outright, illegal (hehe, forget
immoral) things to people and proceeds to gloat about it.
>He "retired" claiming he's psychotic. It's possibly the ONLY
>time he ever told the truth.
I'm having some trouble with a few posts I think originated from the
cola newsgroup. If Snit is the author of them, somethings wrong. If
it's a forgery, it's a fairly decent one. Anyways, several of these
supposed posts are from Snit stating that he doesn't have an IT
degree, that people assumed he did, wrongly. That he didn't claim he
did, again, others made the mistake and rolled with it. The confusion
had nothing to do with him.
Unless my memory is off (my days and nights are all upside down at
the moment), I recall Snit telling me, prior to my kfing his
dumbarse, that he did have a masters in IT..
See my confusion here?
maybe he's gotten the degree since those posts, prior to his first
interaction with me? It's not like he had much else to do, when
taxpayers such as myself are paying his way through life. Did I tell
you how much distain I have for freeloaders?
There are people with legimitate reasons for the help they get, and
there are people like snit; the latter piss me off.
> Still, it's one truth more than BD has ever told.
> HTH
> []'s
BD avoids the truth with the excuse, it's 'old news'
--
History repeats itself, but each time the price goes up.
Fri, 15 May 2020 01:29:22 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
> On Thu, 14 May 2020 22:53:21 -0000 (UTC), Diesel <nob...@haph.org>
> wrote:
>
>>Shadow, Would you like to take bets on whether or not Snit calls
>>David out for continuing to violate my copyright? Not only is
>>David refusing to remove the unauthorized copy, he went ahead and
>>uploaded another one to another site. Where's that little
>>hypocrite Snit now? rofl!
>
>Snit's sitting at a computer he bought with the taxes you and
>other honest people pay, and uses it to break software protection.
>Do you really think what snit thinks is important or even
>relevant?
I'm sorry, I wasn't clear in my previous post. Those are all
> On Thu, 14 May 2020 22:53:21 -0000 (UTC), Diesel <nob...@haph.org>
> wrote:
>
>>Shadow, Would you like to take bets on whether or not Snit calls
>>David out for continuing to violate my copyright? Not only is
>>David refusing to remove the unauthorized copy, he went ahead and
>>uploaded another one to another site. Where's that little
>>hypocrite Snit now? rofl!
>
>Snit's sitting at a computer he bought with the taxes you and
>other honest people pay, and uses it to break software protection.
>Do you really think what snit thinks is important or even
>relevant?
rhetorical questions. :) Okay, so short of modding a filter or using
google to see if Snit has replied about it, I can't verify any wajor;
but let's just say that I seriously doubt snit is going to express
any real dissatisfaction with Davids actions. I'd expect, if he does
reply, it'll be something to defend davids actions and excuse his
lack of comment when David does outright, illegal (hehe, forget
immoral) things to people and proceeds to gloat about it.
>He "retired" claiming he's psychotic. It's possibly the ONLY
>time he ever told the truth.
cola newsgroup. If Snit is the author of them, somethings wrong. If
it's a forgery, it's a fairly decent one. Anyways, several of these
supposed posts are from Snit stating that he doesn't have an IT
degree, that people assumed he did, wrongly. That he didn't claim he
did, again, others made the mistake and rolled with it. The confusion
had nothing to do with him.
Unless my memory is off (my days and nights are all upside down at
the moment), I recall Snit telling me, prior to my kfing his
dumbarse, that he did have a masters in IT..
See my confusion here?
maybe he's gotten the degree since those posts, prior to his first
interaction with me? It's not like he had much else to do, when
taxpayers such as myself are paying his way through life. Did I tell
you how much distain I have for freeloaders?
There are people with legimitate reasons for the help they get, and
there are people like snit; the latter piss me off.
> Still, it's one truth more than BD has ever told.
> HTH
> []'s
--
History repeats itself, but each time the price goes up.
Diesel
May 15, 2020, 1:49:01 AM5/15/20
to
David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid> news:9HkvG.57078$A41....@fx08.ams1
Thu, 14 May 2020 23:41:56 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
> On 14/05/2020 23:53, Diesel wrote:
>> I don't know what you mean by similar, as you well know, the
>> copyright owner of this picture granted permission for it to be
>> shared freely:
>
> The copyright owner of the image did NOT grant permission for it
> to be shared freely.
Yes, they did.
> Andrew Taylor put the image up on an Annexcafe newsgroup - from
> whence it was *STOLEN*! He should NEVER have done that without
> seeking my permission.
It wasn't stolen. You have no legal standing with the picture, David.
Your permission to share it or do anything else with it isn't
required. Again, YOU HAVE NO LEGAL STANDING with regard to this
picture:
https://upload.picpaste.me/image/ASN6T
>> OTH, At no time have I granted you permission to share or
>> otherwise retain copies of my things. Infact, I've repeatedly
>> denied you such permission. So, there's nothing similar about
>> this.
>
> You put your photograph in the public domain. More fool you.
I put my photograph on MY WEB SITE. That doesn't make it public
domain, idiot. You took a copy of the picture, knowingly without my
permission and uploaded it elsewhere. You're knowingly and
intentionally in violation of ANOTHER of my copyrights.
Since you want to go out of your way to be a dickhead, I'm going to
show you something else along the same lines as your .nfo education
you got a few years back. I know how much that surprised you, I would
have really enjoyed being a fly on the wall when you realized what
happened to your information at that point. The anticipation of you
knowing what was coming, had to have cost you some sleep. :)
Well, this surprise is going to make that one pale! by comparison,
it's my best one yet for you, David. I'm going to love it!
Details will be provided when I've confirmed it's happening, when
it's too late for you to do anything. <G> Stay tuned, you little
fuckhead.
> I'm not surprised, though, that you don't want folk to see what you
> looked like!
Red-herring attempt to evade what you did. The picture has a
considerable age on it, and even then, I was fit for my age. I'm
surprised that you're okay with folks seeing your man tits. You do
realize, that comes from excessive abuse of alcohol, right? You can
see the years of alcoholism in your face, too, David.
Do you still have all of your original adult teeth, or have you had
to have them replaced? Alcohol contributes to premature tooth loss.
> And the give-away grassy 'tufts' I found on Google
> StreetView! ;-)
Admission that you are, as I've always said, a stalker, confirmed.
Much appreciated. It doesn't matter that you continue to get the
wrong addresses, all that matters is that you tried. It's the intent,
not the outcome that matters to me in your case, David.
You've intended to dox me since I wouldn't commit felonious computer
tresspass for you. I responded to your initial effort, two years
after the fact in a way you couldn't possibly comprehend. I'm about
to give you another surprise like that, but this time, I've already
told you what's coming. And, I hope you think I'm bullshitting you or
otherwise, just 'kidding' with you about this.
So that when it happens, and it's going to, you can't say, but I
didn't know he'd do that; heh, yes you did, David, yes you did.
You've been dishonest in your attacks towards me from day one. It was
always about my refusing to help you gain unauthorized access to
servers with forums run by people you had a personal problem with.
You didn't pick me out at random for the job, you'd already been
stalking me and asking questions about me on various forums prior to
your first email.
I've been more than patient with you considering all the shit you've
been doing. It's beyond time I take things to real life with you,
outside of doxing, but remain within the law while doing so! You need
to have a talk with people who have the ability to make you follow
the law, and I WILL arrange that discussion for you.
I'd like to see Mike Easter or Apd claim you aren't one at this
point. It's clear as day, that you are, and that I've been right
about you the entire time. As has Shadow and various other people
you've stalked and slimed along the way on usenet and various online
forums where you continue to get yourself banned.
>> And, I'm not him,
>> so what you did with my picture isn't going to cause your
>> censored version to be removed anytime soon from your special
>> page.
>
> Do you know, Dustin - it sounds as if *you* are CONTROLLING what
> happens on someone else's website.
It sounds to me that you intend to blackmail me with the picture in
an effort to get BtS to censor the site he created for you. Here's
the thing, at this point, if he were to ever close the site, I'll
bring up a mirror copy of it that won't be. And, unlike his, mine
won't contain any censored pictures. People deserve to see for
themselves what an idiot looks like. That being, the person stupid
enough not only to marry you, but also have children with you.
> I've been led to believe that HACKERS can do such things - as can
> people who have no need to use AV software when using Windows XP -
> someone "beyond a Power User" I believe you said!
You were also led to believe that all hard drives started life as
18terabytes in size and scaled down until they stabilized. You
claimed a very reliable source provided you that information and
stuck by it. They were, obviously, more than a little bit mistaken
with that claim of theirs.
You do not for the most part, understand most/any of what I write
about on a daily basis, David. You're simply trying to continue
jerking myself and others around as you dance around the questions
I've asked you, because if you were to answer them honestly; there's
no fucking way you could still claim to be a good guy and expect to
be taken seriously.
> Has Apd seen the Google StreetView - the one which you had to get
> Google to blur out? But where they left the grassy tufts showing -
> and a small part of your tatty white van too?
You just can't stop lying your ass off today, eh? Are you trying to
emulate your new besttie snit or something, David? I didn't have
google blur anything; google still doesn't have a gsv of the property
I do own, thanks. I discussed in considerable detail previously what
my pad and the surrounding land looks like, David.
You've published every single address google tells you is mine in an
effort to dox me, all because I wouldn't use those blackhat skills
you ride me for now, to do some work specifically for your benefit,
and yours alone. You don't even care how many people you dox by
mistake, you don't even bother researching before you publish an
address. You'd make a shitty investigator, David.
Yea, David, you didn't have a problem with my past until it finally
dawned on your alcohol damaged brain that you couldn't CON ME into
hacking (cracking actually) into a couple of servers that you had a
personal issue with the site admins. An issue you no doubt, brought
upon yourself by doing the same known bullshit you do on usenet.
You already knew about my virus writing and various other things I'd
done, and you asked me about it in email. So, quit trying to give
your audience, and other suckers the false impression that what you
learned was after the fact, or 'news' to you in some manner. It
wasn't, you were already googling about me before you sent your first
email. And, it wasn't to set me up.
You were on a mission and you needed help and a particular skillset.
I have the skillset, but there's no fucking way I'd ever help you
with it. Not in the sense you wanted, unauthorized access to gear you
didn't own or have permission to use anymore. I was willing to assist
with anything you thought was malware, but again, I'll remind you and
your toadie audience, you never sent so much as one url; despite
claiming both sites were 'infested' and passing malware around to
unsuspecting users like candy.
Your entire attack on me for being a 'bad guy' has always been
nothing more than a smokescreen. A pathetically weak attempt by you
to whitewash how you came to know me, and why you've really been
trying to 'get me'. Which is for nothing more than the fact you
couldn't bullshit me into trusting you and doing some federally
ILLEGAL things to gear I did not own, and that you did not at any
point in time have the ability to give me legal permission to PEN
test in any way shape or form.
You recently stated that asking me to break federal law was okay,
because God told you it was. I didn't break federal laws by writing
viruses, but you continue to ride me for that, twenty something years
later; even after explaining that the reason you won't answer my
questions is because it has to do with the past and I should 'move
on'.
How is it in any way, possibly even remotely, okay for me to break
into servers per your requests (which were really demands), but it
wasn't okay to write code which didn't break the law in my country or
yours? I'm pretty sure what you demanded I do, and even offered to
pay me to do, is still illegal in your country, too, David.
I'm also pretty sure it's illegal to solicit a criminal act in both
countries. And you certainly solicited my help to break into two
servers which, if i'm not mistaken, are state side.
Come to think of it (I don't know why this didn't occur to me
before), not only did you solicit my help to commit crimes on more
than one occasion, you proceeded to try and blackmail me when I
refused to do so. I'm pretty sure both are considered illegal actions
on your part, in both of our countries.
--
How do I love thee? My accumulator overflows.
Thu, 14 May 2020 23:41:56 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
> On 14/05/2020 23:53, Diesel wrote:
>> I don't know what you mean by similar, as you well know, the
>> copyright owner of this picture granted permission for it to be
>> shared freely:
>
> The copyright owner of the image did NOT grant permission for it
> to be shared freely.
Yes, they did.
> Andrew Taylor put the image up on an Annexcafe newsgroup - from
> whence it was *STOLEN*! He should NEVER have done that without
> seeking my permission.
It wasn't stolen. You have no legal standing with the picture, David.
Your permission to share it or do anything else with it isn't
required. Again, YOU HAVE NO LEGAL STANDING with regard to this
picture:
https://upload.picpaste.me/image/ASN6T
>> OTH, At no time have I granted you permission to share or
>> otherwise retain copies of my things. Infact, I've repeatedly
>> denied you such permission. So, there's nothing similar about
>> this.
>
> You put your photograph in the public domain. More fool you.
I put my photograph on MY WEB SITE. That doesn't make it public
domain, idiot. You took a copy of the picture, knowingly without my
permission and uploaded it elsewhere. You're knowingly and
intentionally in violation of ANOTHER of my copyrights.
Since you want to go out of your way to be a dickhead, I'm going to
show you something else along the same lines as your .nfo education
you got a few years back. I know how much that surprised you, I would
have really enjoyed being a fly on the wall when you realized what
happened to your information at that point. The anticipation of you
knowing what was coming, had to have cost you some sleep. :)
Well, this surprise is going to make that one pale! by comparison,
it's my best one yet for you, David. I'm going to love it!
Details will be provided when I've confirmed it's happening, when
it's too late for you to do anything. <G> Stay tuned, you little
fuckhead.
> I'm not surprised, though, that you don't want folk to see what you
> looked like!
Red-herring attempt to evade what you did. The picture has a
considerable age on it, and even then, I was fit for my age. I'm
surprised that you're okay with folks seeing your man tits. You do
realize, that comes from excessive abuse of alcohol, right? You can
see the years of alcoholism in your face, too, David.
Do you still have all of your original adult teeth, or have you had
to have them replaced? Alcohol contributes to premature tooth loss.
> And the give-away grassy 'tufts' I found on Google
> StreetView! ;-)
Admission that you are, as I've always said, a stalker, confirmed.
Much appreciated. It doesn't matter that you continue to get the
wrong addresses, all that matters is that you tried. It's the intent,
not the outcome that matters to me in your case, David.
You've intended to dox me since I wouldn't commit felonious computer
tresspass for you. I responded to your initial effort, two years
after the fact in a way you couldn't possibly comprehend. I'm about
to give you another surprise like that, but this time, I've already
told you what's coming. And, I hope you think I'm bullshitting you or
otherwise, just 'kidding' with you about this.
So that when it happens, and it's going to, you can't say, but I
didn't know he'd do that; heh, yes you did, David, yes you did.
You've been dishonest in your attacks towards me from day one. It was
always about my refusing to help you gain unauthorized access to
servers with forums run by people you had a personal problem with.
You didn't pick me out at random for the job, you'd already been
stalking me and asking questions about me on various forums prior to
your first email.
I've been more than patient with you considering all the shit you've
been doing. It's beyond time I take things to real life with you,
outside of doxing, but remain within the law while doing so! You need
to have a talk with people who have the ability to make you follow
the law, and I WILL arrange that discussion for you.
I'd like to see Mike Easter or Apd claim you aren't one at this
point. It's clear as day, that you are, and that I've been right
about you the entire time. As has Shadow and various other people
you've stalked and slimed along the way on usenet and various online
forums where you continue to get yourself banned.
>> And, I'm not him,
>> so what you did with my picture isn't going to cause your
>> censored version to be removed anytime soon from your special
>> page.
>
> Do you know, Dustin - it sounds as if *you* are CONTROLLING what
> happens on someone else's website.
It sounds to me that you intend to blackmail me with the picture in
an effort to get BtS to censor the site he created for you. Here's
the thing, at this point, if he were to ever close the site, I'll
bring up a mirror copy of it that won't be. And, unlike his, mine
won't contain any censored pictures. People deserve to see for
themselves what an idiot looks like. That being, the person stupid
enough not only to marry you, but also have children with you.
> I've been led to believe that HACKERS can do such things - as can
> people who have no need to use AV software when using Windows XP -
> someone "beyond a Power User" I believe you said!
You were also led to believe that all hard drives started life as
18terabytes in size and scaled down until they stabilized. You
claimed a very reliable source provided you that information and
stuck by it. They were, obviously, more than a little bit mistaken
with that claim of theirs.
You do not for the most part, understand most/any of what I write
about on a daily basis, David. You're simply trying to continue
jerking myself and others around as you dance around the questions
I've asked you, because if you were to answer them honestly; there's
no fucking way you could still claim to be a good guy and expect to
be taken seriously.
> Has Apd seen the Google StreetView - the one which you had to get
> Google to blur out? But where they left the grassy tufts showing -
> and a small part of your tatty white van too?
You just can't stop lying your ass off today, eh? Are you trying to
emulate your new besttie snit or something, David? I didn't have
google blur anything; google still doesn't have a gsv of the property
I do own, thanks. I discussed in considerable detail previously what
my pad and the surrounding land looks like, David.
You've published every single address google tells you is mine in an
effort to dox me, all because I wouldn't use those blackhat skills
you ride me for now, to do some work specifically for your benefit,
and yours alone. You don't even care how many people you dox by
mistake, you don't even bother researching before you publish an
address. You'd make a shitty investigator, David.
Yea, David, you didn't have a problem with my past until it finally
dawned on your alcohol damaged brain that you couldn't CON ME into
hacking (cracking actually) into a couple of servers that you had a
personal issue with the site admins. An issue you no doubt, brought
upon yourself by doing the same known bullshit you do on usenet.
You already knew about my virus writing and various other things I'd
done, and you asked me about it in email. So, quit trying to give
your audience, and other suckers the false impression that what you
learned was after the fact, or 'news' to you in some manner. It
wasn't, you were already googling about me before you sent your first
email. And, it wasn't to set me up.
You were on a mission and you needed help and a particular skillset.
I have the skillset, but there's no fucking way I'd ever help you
with it. Not in the sense you wanted, unauthorized access to gear you
didn't own or have permission to use anymore. I was willing to assist
with anything you thought was malware, but again, I'll remind you and
your toadie audience, you never sent so much as one url; despite
claiming both sites were 'infested' and passing malware around to
unsuspecting users like candy.
Your entire attack on me for being a 'bad guy' has always been
nothing more than a smokescreen. A pathetically weak attempt by you
to whitewash how you came to know me, and why you've really been
trying to 'get me'. Which is for nothing more than the fact you
couldn't bullshit me into trusting you and doing some federally
ILLEGAL things to gear I did not own, and that you did not at any
point in time have the ability to give me legal permission to PEN
test in any way shape or form.
You recently stated that asking me to break federal law was okay,
because God told you it was. I didn't break federal laws by writing
viruses, but you continue to ride me for that, twenty something years
later; even after explaining that the reason you won't answer my
questions is because it has to do with the past and I should 'move
on'.
How is it in any way, possibly even remotely, okay for me to break
into servers per your requests (which were really demands), but it
wasn't okay to write code which didn't break the law in my country or
yours? I'm pretty sure what you demanded I do, and even offered to
pay me to do, is still illegal in your country, too, David.
I'm also pretty sure it's illegal to solicit a criminal act in both
countries. And you certainly solicited my help to break into two
servers which, if i'm not mistaken, are state side.
Come to think of it (I don't know why this didn't occur to me
before), not only did you solicit my help to commit crimes on more
than one occasion, you proceeded to try and blackmail me when I
refused to do so. I'm pretty sure both are considered illegal actions
on your part, in both of our countries.
--
How do I love thee? My accumulator overflows.
David_B
May 15, 2020, 6:29:51 PM5/15/20
to
How long did it take Dustin to get Google to re-blur the StreetView
image of the property? He really does need to get a life - before it
expires! What a waste of his time. :-(
There is, of course, still the aerial shot! Ha! :-D
Shadow
May 15, 2020, 9:43:39 PM5/15/20
to
On Fri, 15 May 2020 23:29:46 +0100, David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid>
Subject line is a *LIE*
Should be:
Re: Now one has to ask the question ...... (David Brooks - copyright
infringer *multiple*)
There is no "was" about it.
-------------------------------------
BD: I want people to "get to know me better. I have nothing to
hide".
I'm always here to help, this page was put up at BD's request,
rather, he said "Do it *NOW*!":
<https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php>
65 confirmed #FAKE_NYMS, most used in cybercrimes!
Google "David Brooks Devon"
Subject line is a *LIE*
Should be:
Re: Now one has to ask the question ...... (David Brooks - copyright
infringer *multiple*)
There is no "was" about it.
-------------------------------------
BD: I want people to "get to know me better. I have nothing to
hide".
I'm always here to help, this page was put up at BD's request,
rather, he said "Do it *NOW*!":
<https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php>
65 confirmed #FAKE_NYMS, most used in cybercrimes!
Google "David Brooks Devon"
Diesel
May 16, 2020, 2:11:00 AM5/16/20
to
David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid>
news:vJEvG.101459$fk3....@fx26.ams1 Fri, 15 May 2020 22:29:46 GMT
in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
[snip, you didn't respond to anything anyway]
>> I'm also pretty sure it's illegal to solicit a criminal act in
>> both countries. And you certainly solicited my help to break into
>> two servers which, if i'm not mistaken, are state side.
>>
>> Come to think of it (I don't know why this didn't occur to me
>> before), not only did you solicit my help to commit crimes on
>> more than one occasion, you proceeded to try and blackmail me
>> when I refused to do so. I'm pretty sure both are considered
>> illegal actions on your part, in both of our countries.
>
>
> Do I send this post to Law Enforcement here - or in Kingsport,
> USA?
I had to double check those headers, David. :) I've never run across
someone willing to turn themselves in to their local law enforcement,
or ones across the pond. This is a first. I didn't even consider that
as a possibility, David. Well, don't wait for my permission or
anything, go ahead, turn yourself in. It's not like you aren't
already known to your local police for the gun threat you made to
another poster. Do let us all know how things turn out for you, ok?
> How long did it take Dustin to get Google to re-blur the
> StreetView image of the property? He really does need to get a
> life - before it expires! What a waste of his time. :-(
I have a life, thanks. Hows Nick? Seen him lately? rofl!
--
If you were a good liar, daydreamer, or troublemaker as a child,
you'll probably make a good fiction writer. Daydreams, lies, and
trouble -- that's the stuff of fiction. -Robin Hemley
news:vJEvG.101459$fk3....@fx26.ams1 Fri, 15 May 2020 22:29:46 GMT
in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
[snip, you didn't respond to anything anyway]
>> I'm also pretty sure it's illegal to solicit a criminal act in
>> both countries. And you certainly solicited my help to break into
>> two servers which, if i'm not mistaken, are state side.
>>
>> Come to think of it (I don't know why this didn't occur to me
>> before), not only did you solicit my help to commit crimes on
>> more than one occasion, you proceeded to try and blackmail me
>> when I refused to do so. I'm pretty sure both are considered
>> illegal actions on your part, in both of our countries.
>
>
> Do I send this post to Law Enforcement here - or in Kingsport,
> USA?
someone willing to turn themselves in to their local law enforcement,
or ones across the pond. This is a first. I didn't even consider that
as a possibility, David. Well, don't wait for my permission or
anything, go ahead, turn yourself in. It's not like you aren't
already known to your local police for the gun threat you made to
another poster. Do let us all know how things turn out for you, ok?
> How long did it take Dustin to get Google to re-blur the
> StreetView image of the property? He really does need to get a
> life - before it expires! What a waste of his time. :-(
--
If you were a good liar, daydreamer, or troublemaker as a child,
you'll probably make a good fiction writer. Daydreams, lies, and
trouble -- that's the stuff of fiction. -Robin Hemley
Shadow
May 16, 2020, 7:40:28 AM5/16/20
to
On Sat, 16 May 2020 09:41:18 +0100, David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid>
wrote:
><to his darling snit>
>You are getting the measure of the ....... (Oops - I nearly said man....
....hood?)
You'll have to ask snit for the details by email. I'd guess
about 4 inches, judging by snit's inferiority complex. But it could be
smaller.
On topic groups added.
wrote:
><to his darling snit>
>You are getting the measure of the ....... (Oops - I nearly said man....
....hood?)
You'll have to ask snit for the details by email. I'd guess
about 4 inches, judging by snit's inferiority complex. But it could be
smaller.
On topic groups added.
Shadow
May 16, 2020, 7:57:03 AM5/16/20
to
On Sat, 16 May 2020 10:35:15 +0100, David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid>
wrote:
>On 16/05/2020 09:45, FromTheRafters wrote:
>> Diesel wrote :
>>> David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid> news:5%DvG.27516$tS4....@fx18.ams1
>>> Fri, 15 May 2020 21:40:17 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
>>>
>>>> Nobody here cares, <redacted>.
>>>>
>>>> Ride on! :-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Since when do you speak for others, David?
>>
>> He talks to bots.
>
>I also kiss frogs!
snit was probably hurt by that revelation.... try to keep
intimate details between the two of you to emails. This is Usenet.
HTH
wrote:
>On 16/05/2020 09:45, FromTheRafters wrote:
>> Diesel wrote :
>>> Fri, 15 May 2020 21:40:17 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
>>>
>>>> Nobody here cares, <redacted>.
>>>>
>>>> Ride on! :-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Since when do you speak for others, David?
>>
>> He talks to bots.
>
>I also kiss frogs!
snit was probably hurt by that revelation.... try to keep
intimate details between the two of you to emails. This is Usenet.
HTH
Shadow
May 20, 2020, 7:29:39 AM5/20/20
to
On Wed, 20 May 2020 11:38:54 +0100, David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid>
wrote:
>>> Do whatever you wish in other groups, but do NOT flood UCW again.
>>>
>>> Near Denver IIRC. I'll find you if necessary.
>>> https://www.whitepages.com/name/Steve-Carroll/CO
>>
>> Hey Mike, tell us again how David Brooks isn't a stalker. :) Go
>> ahead, explain this fuckup of his as something else entirely.
>>
>> Why do you threaten to do such things, anyway?
>
> From what *I* have seen, Carroll is a 'bad guy'.
99% of people here would disagree.
Present your PROOF snit isn't the bot-masterbator or stop
sliming.
wrote:
>>> Do whatever you wish in other groups, but do NOT flood UCW again.
>>>
>>> Near Denver IIRC. I'll find you if necessary.
>>> https://www.whitepages.com/name/Steve-Carroll/CO
>>
>> Hey Mike, tell us again how David Brooks isn't a stalker. :) Go
>> ahead, explain this fuckup of his as something else entirely.
>>
>> Why do you threaten to do such things, anyway?
>
> From what *I* have seen, Carroll is a 'bad guy'.
99% of people here would disagree.
Present your PROOF snit isn't the bot-masterbator or stop
sliming.
Shadow
May 21, 2020, 7:38:17 AM5/21/20
to
On Thu, 21 May 2020 12:15:08 +0100, David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid>
wrote:
>What have you been busy doing, <STALKING_TARGET_05>?
>
>Not prying - just interested in what you've been doing during lockdown.
LOL.
Drink less.
(mass OT cross-posting removed. Dead groups added to
follow-up)
wrote:
>What have you been busy doing, <STALKING_TARGET_05>?
>
>Not prying - just interested in what you've been doing during lockdown.
LOL.
Drink less.
(mass OT cross-posting removed. Dead groups added to
follow-up)
Shadow
May 21, 2020, 9:50:17 AM5/21/20
to
On Thu, 21 May 2020 14:33:54 +0100, David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid>
wrote:
>You said this, Dustin:
>
>"He hasn't posted links pointing to a known windows based
>executable malware. *You have though*, and you knew what the file was,
>because you told him, since he didn't use a machine that would run
>it, he was safe. That was so nice of you, David. What about the
>machines that could run it? Any word of advice for them? :) "
>
>=
>
>Neither Shadow nor you have *ever* shown the MID confirming that I have
>EVER posted a link to a "known windows based executable malware".
Because it was a STALKING thread which you would "love" the
BOTS to register and for people to click on the link to the malware.
Posting links to known malware, even if it's re-posting is a
serious cybercrime.
"Investigate" NOW!
>
>I would NEVER have deliberately done such a thing.
You *LIE* all the time.
You'll say you forgot, apologize, and post more STALKING.
>
>Please provide the evidence for your claim.
Like when you claimed the site below contains malware. Do you
deny the page is an accurate, truthful, malware-free public service?
wrote:
>You said this, Dustin:
>
>"He hasn't posted links pointing to a known windows based
>executable malware. *You have though*, and you knew what the file was,
>because you told him, since he didn't use a machine that would run
>it, he was safe. That was so nice of you, David. What about the
>machines that could run it? Any word of advice for them? :) "
>
>=
>
>Neither Shadow nor you have *ever* shown the MID confirming that I have
>EVER posted a link to a "known windows based executable malware".
Because it was a STALKING thread which you would "love" the
BOTS to register and for people to click on the link to the malware.
Posting links to known malware, even if it's re-posting is a
serious cybercrime.
"Investigate" NOW!
>
>I would NEVER have deliberately done such a thing.
You *LIE* all the time.
You'll say you forgot, apologize, and post more STALKING.
>
>Please provide the evidence for your claim.
Like when you claimed the site below contains malware. Do you
deny the page is an accurate, truthful, malware-free public service?
Shadow
May 21, 2020, 5:56:48 PM5/21/20
to
On Thu, 21 May 2020 21:25:47 +0100, David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid>
wrote:
>I have no explanation to offer.
Make that your tagline. It will be the ONLY true part of your
messages.
wrote:
>I have no explanation to offer.
Make that your tagline. It will be the ONLY true part of your
messages.
Shadow
May 21, 2020, 6:01:59 PM5/21/20
to
On Thu, 21 May 2020 22:39:57 +0100, David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid>
wrote:
>You have absolutely no idea who you have been lying to.
You *LIE* to everyone ALL the time.
><shaking head>
It won't make you sober.
wrote:
>You have absolutely no idea who you have been lying to.
You *LIE* to everyone ALL the time.
><shaking head>
It won't make you sober.
Shadow
May 21, 2020, 6:05:59 PM5/21/20
to
On Thu, 21 May 2020 21:56:08 +0100, David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid>
wrote:
>>> From what *I* have seen, Carroll is a 'bad guy'.
>>
>> What have you seen that makes you believe so, David? Provide MIDs so
>> the rest of us can view the material.
>
>I understand your requirement.
No you don't. Nobody believes your *LIES* anymore. You have
ZERO credibility. Even that statement was a *LIE*. The other person
was giving you a chance to redeem yourself, and you botched it.
Drink much?
wrote:
>>> From what *I* have seen, Carroll is a 'bad guy'.
>>
>> the rest of us can view the material.
>
>I understand your requirement.
No you don't. Nobody believes your *LIES* anymore. You have
ZERO credibility. Even that statement was a *LIE*. The other person
was giving you a chance to redeem yourself, and you botched it.
Drink much?
Shadow
May 21, 2020, 6:09:10 PM5/21/20
to
On Thu, 21 May 2020 22:45:16 +0100, David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid>
wrote:
>I will personally vouch for Snit.
I'm sure he won't appreciate the insult.
Please don't EVER vouch for me, no matter how drunk you are.
I have a reputation to maintain.
wrote:
>I will personally vouch for Snit.
I'm sure he won't appreciate the insult.
Please don't EVER vouch for me, no matter how drunk you are.
I have a reputation to maintain.
Diesel
May 23, 2020, 4:52:33 AM5/23/20
to
Shadow <S...@dow.br> news:8cudcfha0vehca0f2...@4ax.com Thu,
--
How to interpret a Pregnancy Test kit:
Blue means not pregnant.
Pink means pregnant.
Brown means you had it in the wrong hole.
21 May 2020 22:01:04 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
> On Thu, 21 May 2020 22:39:57 +0100, David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>>You have absolutely no idea who you have been lying to.
>
> You *LIE* to everyone ALL the time.
>><shaking head>
>
> It won't make you sober.
Large amounts of coffee won't either.
> On Thu, 21 May 2020 22:39:57 +0100, David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>>You have absolutely no idea who you have been lying to.
>
> You *LIE* to everyone ALL the time.
>><shaking head>
>
> It won't make you sober.
--
How to interpret a Pregnancy Test kit:
Blue means not pregnant.
Pink means pregnant.
Brown means you had it in the wrong hole.
Shadow
May 23, 2020, 4:43:03 PM5/23/20
to
On Sat, 23 May 2020 15:02:53 +0100, David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid>
wrote:
>> frelw...@gmail.com should be fretw...@gmail.com
>
>I've not received a response from EITHER address
LOL. So you could track the sender's IP?
snit wasn't born yesterday.
No wonder you've NEVER taken any "bad guys" to court.
Why don't you sit down a READ something about hacking?
Oh, the letters blur?
Drink less.
HTH
wrote:
>> frelw...@gmail.com should be fretw...@gmail.com
>
>I've not received a response from EITHER address
LOL. So you could track the sender's IP?
snit wasn't born yesterday.
No wonder you've NEVER taken any "bad guys" to court.
Why don't you sit down a READ something about hacking?
Oh, the letters blur?
Drink less.
HTH
Shadow
May 23, 2020, 5:05:25 PM5/23/20
to
On Sat, 23 May 2020 20:59:54 +0100, David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid>
wrote:
>As I've explained to you, I've been trying to ruffle the feathers of the
>bad actors on the Internet - investigating small things which don't add
>up.
Try sobering up before trying math. 20 years of "ruffling
feathers" AKA cyberstalking, and not a single "bad guy" taken to
court.
On the contrary, you spam for the real "bad guys" and slime
innocent people/companies.
20 years is so long I'm inclined to think it's deliberate.
>I've really appreciated the things which you have done to help me
He cracked a commercial software for you. And then denied it,
until I furnished the MSG_ID(s). Then he ran.
So how else has he "helped" you? Does he send you booze?
Nudes(selfies) maybe?
wrote:
>As I've explained to you, I've been trying to ruffle the feathers of the
>bad actors on the Internet - investigating small things which don't add
>up.
Try sobering up before trying math. 20 years of "ruffling
feathers" AKA cyberstalking, and not a single "bad guy" taken to
court.
On the contrary, you spam for the real "bad guys" and slime
innocent people/companies.
20 years is so long I'm inclined to think it's deliberate.
>I've really appreciated the things which you have done to help me
He cracked a commercial software for you. And then denied it,
until I furnished the MSG_ID(s). Then he ran.
So how else has he "helped" you? Does he send you booze?
Nudes(selfies) maybe?
Shadow
May 23, 2020, 6:36:14 PM5/23/20
to
On Sat, 23 May 2020 23:24:41 +0100, David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid>
wrote:
><re: forging a STALKING_TARGET's headers>
>>> I have no explanation to offer.
>>
>> ROFL, I do. You added it.
>
>Certainly not deliberately.
Your fingers did it?
You did it and "forgot"?
Someone posting under one of your > 60 #FAKE_NYMs did it and
passed it off as yours?
Did I leave out any non-malicious reason?
Advise.
wrote:
><re: forging a STALKING_TARGET's headers>
>>> I have no explanation to offer.
>>
>
>Certainly not deliberately.
Your fingers did it?
You did it and "forgot"?
Someone posting under one of your > 60 #FAKE_NYMs did it and
passed it off as yours?
Did I leave out any non-malicious reason?
Advise.
David_B
May 23, 2020, 6:47:31 PM5/23/20
to
On 23/05/2020 09:52, Diesel wrote:
> Shadow <S...@dow.br> news:8cudcfha0vehca0f2...@4ax.com Thu,
> 21 May 2020 22:01:04 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 21 May 2020 22:39:57 +0100, David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> You have absolutely no idea who you have been lying to.
>>
>> You *LIE* to everyone ALL the time.
>>> <shaking head>
>>
>> It won't make you sober.
>
> Large amounts of coffee won't either.
I have imbibed next to *NO* alcohol since 21st March 2018
> Shadow <S...@dow.br> news:8cudcfha0vehca0f2...@4ax.com Thu,
> 21 May 2020 22:01:04 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 21 May 2020 22:39:57 +0100, David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> You have absolutely no idea who you have been lying to.
>>
>> You *LIE* to everyone ALL the time.
>>> <shaking head>
>>
>> It won't make you sober.
>
> Large amounts of coffee won't either.
Shadow
May 23, 2020, 7:05:46 PM5/23/20
to
On Sat, 23 May 2020 23:47:25 +0100, David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid>
wrote:
"Next to NO alcohol"?
Guess what sits right "next to no alcohol"?
Alcohol!!
You are either drinking or you are not drinking. As a
self-confessed alcoholic, you KNOW that's true.
wrote:
Guess what sits right "next to no alcohol"?
Alcohol!!
You are either drinking or you are not drinking. As a
self-confessed alcoholic, you KNOW that's true.
David_B
May 23, 2020, 7:12:07 PM5/23/20
to
Shadow plainly doesn't understand that wine taken at Holy Communion is
actually alcoholic. Sadly, I rarely attend such services nowadays, so
the quantity consumed is miniscule (hence "next to no").
HTH
Shadow
May 23, 2020, 7:55:41 PM5/23/20
to
On Sun, 24 May 2020 00:12:02 +0100, David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid>
wrote:
>On 23/05/2020 23:47, David_B wrote:
>> On 23/05/2020 09:52, Diesel wrote:
>>> Shadow <S...@dow.br> news:8cudcfha0vehca0f2...@4ax.com Thu,
>>> 21 May 2020 22:01:04 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 21 May 2020 22:39:57 +0100, David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> You have absolutely no idea who you have been lying to.
>>>>
>>>> You *LIE* to everyone ALL the time.
>>>>> <shaking head>
>>>>
>>>> It won't make you sober.
>>>
>>> Large amounts of coffee won't either.
>>
>> I have imbibed next to *NO* alcohol since 21st March 2018
>
>ADDENDUM:
>
>Shadow plainly doesn't understand that wine taken at Holy Communion is
>actually alcoholic.
You don't have to drink it. You can ask for grape juice or
just ignore the wine. Talk to your church's "leader". If the god of
your church encourages drinking, change gods (there are over 2000 of
them to choose from).
HTH
wrote:
>On 23/05/2020 23:47, David_B wrote:
>> On 23/05/2020 09:52, Diesel wrote:
>>> Shadow <S...@dow.br> news:8cudcfha0vehca0f2...@4ax.com Thu,
>>> 21 May 2020 22:01:04 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 21 May 2020 22:39:57 +0100, David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> You have absolutely no idea who you have been lying to.
>>>>
>>>> You *LIE* to everyone ALL the time.
>>>>> <shaking head>
>>>>
>>>> It won't make you sober.
>>>
>>> Large amounts of coffee won't either.
>>
>> I have imbibed next to *NO* alcohol since 21st March 2018
>
>ADDENDUM:
>
>Shadow plainly doesn't understand that wine taken at Holy Communion is
>actually alcoholic.
just ignore the wine. Talk to your church's "leader". If the god of
your church encourages drinking, change gods (there are over 2000 of
them to choose from).
HTH
Shadow
May 24, 2020, 8:36:31 AM5/24/20
to
On Sun, 24 May 2020 08:00:34 +0100, David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid>
wrote:
>On 24/05/2020 00:18, Snit wrote:
>> I am happy to offer advice where I can.
>
>I know!
It'll be free and worth every penny!!!
Beware, it's Sunday. Crystal Meth day for some. Not the best
day to allow remote access to your backdoor.
HTH
Dating on Usenet should have an [OT] set. So you get your
special page for not following etiquette.
wrote:
>On 24/05/2020 00:18, Snit wrote:
>> I am happy to offer advice where I can.
>
>I know!
It'll be free and worth every penny!!!
Beware, it's Sunday. Crystal Meth day for some. Not the best
day to allow remote access to your backdoor.
HTH
Dating on Usenet should have an [OT] set. So you get your
special page for not following etiquette.
Shadow
May 27, 2020, 1:21:42 PM5/27/20
to
On Wed, 27 May 2020 16:00:45 +0100, David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid>
wrote:
>>> I'm an Officer,<redacted>. I only 'lie' when I'm teasing!
>>
>> Heh. Do you tease often?
>
>On Usenet? Yes - quite often.
So you *LIE* often?
First truth in months!!!
GRATZ!!!
><further_teasing_AKA_lying_snitted>
OT groups corrected.
wrote:
>>> I'm an Officer,<redacted>. I only 'lie' when I'm teasing!
>>
>> Heh. Do you tease often?
>
>On Usenet? Yes - quite often.
So you *LIE* often?
First truth in months!!!
GRATZ!!!
><further_teasing_AKA_lying_snitted>
OT groups corrected.
Shadow
May 27, 2020, 1:25:43 PM5/27/20
to
On Wed, 27 May 2020 16:08:34 +0100, David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid>
wrote:
>> Are you having trouble parsing the questions or something?
>
>I think perhaps I am!
BD never changes. He has trouble "parsing" the answers too.
>
>I wonder why you don't spend more time HELPING people.
STOP talking to yourself. People might think you're drunk.
HTH
wrote:
>> Are you having trouble parsing the questions or something?
>
>I think perhaps I am!
BD never changes. He has trouble "parsing" the answers too.
>
>I wonder why you don't spend more time HELPING people.
STOP talking to yourself. People might think you're drunk.
HTH
Shadow
May 27, 2020, 1:30:43 PM5/27/20
to
On Wed, 27 May 2020 16:18:26 +0100, David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid>
wrote:
>I put my life on the line for my queen and country, <redacted>.
snit won't like being referred to as a "queen", however true
that might be.
Drink less before you post that kind of stuff.
OT groups removed *AGAIN*
wrote:
>I put my life on the line for my queen and country, <redacted>.
snit won't like being referred to as a "queen", however true
that might be.
Drink less before you post that kind of stuff.
OT groups removed *AGAIN*
Shadow
May 27, 2020, 1:38:44 PM5/27/20
to
On Wed, 27 May 2020 16:30:08 +0100, David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid>
wrote:
>> Just like you didn't deliberately edit a video of mine, and somehow,
>> lose the entire audio track in the process. right? Just like you
>> accidently uploaded the modified video, knowingly without my
>> permission to various places right? And unlike this time, I had to
>> file DMCA notifications to have them removed, multiple times; it was
>> playing whack a mole, until you risked account disabling on some of
>> them. That's when you atleast, stopped publishing urls to my things
>> that weren't on my own site where they originated from...
>
>You have treated me as a fool. A fool cannot do the things you describe.
A fool can't wreck a video trying to alter it to falsely
incriminate others? A fool can't upload stolen copyrighted material? A
fool can't keep posting unethical URLs?
You sub estimate your capabilities.
You've done all three. You don't deny it.
>
>I HAVE stolen your time. That was my plan.
Say the guy that gave his *word* he'd never hurt anyone, in
*ANY* way. Unlike snit, Diesel WORKS for a living, TIME is an asset.
Think about it. On second thoughts, don't bother. Re-read the
paragraph above. You've probably forgotten it.
Drinking less might help.
wrote:
>> Just like you didn't deliberately edit a video of mine, and somehow,
>> lose the entire audio track in the process. right? Just like you
>> accidently uploaded the modified video, knowingly without my
>> permission to various places right? And unlike this time, I had to
>> file DMCA notifications to have them removed, multiple times; it was
>> playing whack a mole, until you risked account disabling on some of
>> them. That's when you atleast, stopped publishing urls to my things
>> that weren't on my own site where they originated from...
>
>You have treated me as a fool. A fool cannot do the things you describe.
A fool can't wreck a video trying to alter it to falsely
incriminate others? A fool can't upload stolen copyrighted material? A
fool can't keep posting unethical URLs?
You sub estimate your capabilities.
You've done all three. You don't deny it.
>
>I HAVE stolen your time. That was my plan.
Say the guy that gave his *word* he'd never hurt anyone, in
*ANY* way. Unlike snit, Diesel WORKS for a living, TIME is an asset.
Think about it. On second thoughts, don't bother. Re-read the
paragraph above. You've probably forgotten it.
Drinking less might help.
Diesel
May 29, 2020, 4:49:45 AM5/29/20
to
David_B <Dav...@ddress.invalid>
news:75iyG.72321$Cj4....@fx32.ams1 Sat, 23 May 2020 23:12:02 GMT
'teasing' on usenet, and having partaken in religious ceremonies, you
cannot claim that you haven't touched alcohol in two years. Don't
worry, none of the regulars who know you believed you. :)
--
The average speed of a boy's ejaculation is 28 miles (45.05 km) per
hour.
The average speed of a city bus is 25 miles (40.22 km) per hour.
news:75iyG.72321$Cj4....@fx32.ams1 Sat, 23 May 2020 23:12:02 GMT
in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
> On 23/05/2020 23:47, David_B wrote:
>> On 23/05/2020 09:52, Diesel wrote:
>>> Shadow <S...@dow.br>
>>> news:8cudcfha0vehca0f2...@4ax.com Thu, 21 May 2020
>>> 22:01:04 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 21 May 2020 22:39:57 +0100, David_B
>>>> <Dav...@ddress.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> You have absolutely no idea who you have been lying to.
>>>>
>>>> You *LIE* to everyone ALL the time.
>>>>> <shaking head>
>>>>
>>>> It won't make you sober.
>>>
>>> Large amounts of coffee won't either.
>>
>> I have imbibed next to *NO* alcohol since 21st March 2018
>
> ADDENDUM:
>
> Shadow plainly doesn't understand that wine taken at Holy
> Communion is actually alcoholic. Sadly, I rarely attend such
> services nowadays, so the quantity consumed is miniscule (hence
> "next to no").
>
> HTH
next to none still doesn't equal none. So, by your own admission of
> On 23/05/2020 23:47, David_B wrote:
>> On 23/05/2020 09:52, Diesel wrote:
>>> Shadow <S...@dow.br>
>>> news:8cudcfha0vehca0f2...@4ax.com Thu, 21 May 2020
>>> 22:01:04 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 21 May 2020 22:39:57 +0100, David_B
>>>> <Dav...@ddress.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> You have absolutely no idea who you have been lying to.
>>>>
>>>> You *LIE* to everyone ALL the time.
>>>>> <shaking head>
>>>>
>>>> It won't make you sober.
>>>
>>> Large amounts of coffee won't either.
>>
>> I have imbibed next to *NO* alcohol since 21st March 2018
>
> ADDENDUM:
>
> Shadow plainly doesn't understand that wine taken at Holy
> Communion is actually alcoholic. Sadly, I rarely attend such
> services nowadays, so the quantity consumed is miniscule (hence
> "next to no").
>
> HTH
'teasing' on usenet, and having partaken in religious ceremonies, you
cannot claim that you haven't touched alcohol in two years. Don't
worry, none of the regulars who know you believed you. :)
--
The average speed of a boy's ejaculation is 28 miles (45.05 km) per
hour.
The average speed of a city bus is 25 miles (40.22 km) per hour.
Diesel
May 29, 2020, 4:49:47 AM5/29/20
to
Shadow <S...@dow.br> news:ba2jcf9meak28ur2q...@4ax.com
comprehension level, let alone the sub aspects related.
> -------------------------------------
> BD: I want people to "get to know me better. I have nothing to
> hide".
> I'm always here to help, this page was put up at BD's request,
> rather, he said "Do it *NOW*!":
>
> <https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php>
>
> 65 confirmed #FAKE_NYMS, most used in cybercrimes!
> Google "David Brooks Devon"
> []'s
--
Oxymoron: Sweet Pickle.
Sat, 23 May 2020 20:40:44 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
> On Sat, 23 May 2020 15:02:53 +0100, David_B
<Dav...@ddress.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>>> frelw...@gmail.com should be fretw...@gmail.com
>>
>>I've not received a response from EITHER address
>
> LOL. So you could track the sender's IP?
> snit wasn't born yesterday.
> No wonder you've NEVER taken any "bad guys" to court.
> Why don't you sit down a READ something about hacking?
> Oh, the letters blur?
> Drink less.
> HTH
LOL. I think the main subject of hacking is beyond his reading
> On Sat, 23 May 2020 15:02:53 +0100, David_B
<Dav...@ddress.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>>> frelw...@gmail.com should be fretw...@gmail.com
>>
>>I've not received a response from EITHER address
>
> LOL. So you could track the sender's IP?
> snit wasn't born yesterday.
> No wonder you've NEVER taken any "bad guys" to court.
> Why don't you sit down a READ something about hacking?
> Oh, the letters blur?
> Drink less.
> HTH
comprehension level, let alone the sub aspects related.
> -------------------------------------
> BD: I want people to "get to know me better. I have nothing to
> hide".
> I'm always here to help, this page was put up at BD's request,
> rather, he said "Do it *NOW*!":
>
> <https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php>
>
> 65 confirmed #FAKE_NYMS, most used in cybercrimes!
> Google "David Brooks Devon"
> []'s
--
Shadow
May 30, 2020, 5:25:25 PM5/30/20
to
On Sat, 30 May 2020 19:50:32 +0100, David_B <Dav...@nomail.afraid.org>
wrote:
>On 30/05/2020 19:45, Snit wrote:
><habitual trollish attacks snitted>
>
>Agreed!
+1
The subject line is *TRUE*.
As is this:
wrote:
>On 30/05/2020 19:45, Snit wrote:
><habitual trollish attacks snitted>
>
>Agreed!
+1
The subject line is *TRUE*.
As is this:
-------------------------------------
BD: I want people to "get to know me better. I have nothing to
hide".
I'm always here to help, this page was put up at BD's request,
rather, he said "Do it *NOW*!":
<https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php>
65 confirmed #FAKE_NYMS, most used in cybercrimes!
Google "David Brooks Devon"
[]'s
--
BD: I want people to "get to know me better. I have nothing to
hide".
I'm always here to help, this page was put up at BD's request,
rather, he said "Do it *NOW*!":
<https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php>
65 confirmed #FAKE_NYMS, most used in cybercrimes!
Google "David Brooks Devon"
[]'s
--
Diesel
Jun 11, 2020, 6:17:47 AM6/11/20
to
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
news:hkdfec...@mid.individual.net Thu, 11 Jun 2020 01:24:28 GMT
in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
> On 6/10/20 5:49 PM, Diesel wrote:
>> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
>> news:hk678b...@mid.individual.net Mon, 08 Jun 2020 07:21:47
>> GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
>>
>>> If you provided a direct answer as to why Carroll would like so
>>> much about things tied to the bot if the bot was not him I did
>>> not see it.
>>
>> You haven't provided anything which supports the accusation,
>
> Sure I have:
Hmm. Perhaps it's a simple communications issue between us. A
language barrier of sorts. You asked me my opinion concerning
Carrolls accused of being a liar, a claim made by you; not me.
I have since asked for proof that supports what you wrote. This is
where we run into the communications link problem. I don't know if
it's the result of distance and so a weak signal causing packet loss
or some interference (gotta love wireless technologies), or,
something is damaged/out of alignment on your transceiver. It's not
acknowledging that it got the coordinates we sent. Verification
failure, you see.
It's early morning AM or so this computer is telling me, and I've not
had much sleep.. so... excuse my attempt to ligten up the mood a bit
as once again, I waste the time with a reply knowing in advance based
only on prior interaction how the reply to this is going to turn out,
if there is one to be read later. End result: not gewd el captain.
What you've offered several times now doesn't meet this courts
requirements to be considered as anything in higher standing than
hearsay. And, sadly, this court also has your previous case and is
waiting for your replies over that matter concerning your evidence
processes and understand of what constitutes evidence. There's also
the matter of lying about the court. Until that's resolved to the
courts satisfaction, this case cannot proceed further.
> 1) Carrolll repeatedly lied to get me to talk about what I
> said could be done with AppleScript:
> <b498827e-ee8d-45e7...@googlegroups.com>
> <f47a48e6-1c74-4cfa...@googlegroups.com>
> <62b1764e-f84b-458d...@googlegroups.com>
> <aa20334a-9970-4dc3...@googlegroups.com>
>
> 2) Carroll posted with multiple versions of his name: "Steve
> Carroll - fretwizzer", "fretw...@gmail.com", and "Steve
> Carroll"
>
> 3) The bot changed names ONCE and posted with that name 12 times
> in rapid succession (1-3 minutes apart)
>
> 4) Carroll spoke of altering his GG script to deal with such
> name changes:
> <d278fe60-ce88-403d...@googlegroups.com>
> -----
> And now that stupid bot is making me have to
> change the plugin again. Why doesn't it use your name
> for the next 6-7 years?!
> -----
>
> Carroll went into more detail here:
> <cfdaff72-cc8a-4186...@googlegroups.com>
> ------
> > Carroll, wouldn't it be easier for your script to parse
> > the from line, specifically looking for a matching email
> > address?
>
> Of course, but that slowed the plugin down considerably.
> Remember, this is GG, not something like slrn (which I
> also use).
> -----
> Note: not it WOULD slow it down... it DID.
>
> And still later (after the rapid name changing):
> <8fa8f193-7470-4360...@googlegroups.com>
> -----
> I don't see floodbot posts unless i want to so I miss this
> stuff.
> -----
>
> Amazing that right as Carroll is finding a way to be able
> to block the bot's new name-change trick the bot happens
> to be using that trick.
>
> 5) The bot started changing names with every post.
>
> 6) Carroll denied his comment about his GG script:
> <07c19d79-ec94-4c27...@googlegroups.com>
> -----
> I actually never mentioned what it was that prompted me to
> change my plugin, despite it possibly appearing that way.
> -----
>
> 7) Carroll worked to confuse the timeline:
> <4831f570-da42-4869...@googlegroups.com>
> -----
> LOL! You *just* used the term"after", not "right before",
> even in *your* version of the timeline
> -----
>
> 8) Carroll predicted the bot would start wrapping lines:
> <2c51348f-5b6b-46a7...@googlegroups.com>
> -----
> Injection-Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2020 00:13:39 +0000
> ...
> As soon as Snit works out the carriage return/line feed
> issue on the 'AZ code' he's working on in ACW, he'll add
> it to his flood bot.
> -----
> And, gee, another prediction by Carroll comes true:
>
> <7a734216-a0b7-4d29...@googlegroups.com>
> Injection-Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2020 03:02:57 +0000
>
> The prior posts, at the very least in COLA, did not wrap:
> <918fa752-fc26-43d7...@googlegroups.com>
> <75449fb9-1514-4122...@googlegroups.com>
> <794c783f-70a1-4128...@googlegroups.com>
>
> Less than three hours after his "prediction" the bot made a
> very specific change based on a design goal Carroll spoke
> of. I cannot find where this goal was mentioned before.
>
> Carroll tried to tie this to *me* here:
> <6decab0d-349f-4d92...@googlegroups.com>
> -----
> > It mostly works but ignores line breaks.
>
> Imagine that! You have a line break issue... now what else
> have we seen a lot of that has the same problem? I just
> know it'll come to me <eyeroll>.
> -----
>
> My comment was about INPUT for reading lines where it was
> not seeing the line breaks. NOTHING to do with ANYTHING
> Carroll pushed it as. Once again he takes things out of
> context and shows he is able to make predictions about the
> flood bot in amazingly specific ways.
>
>
>
>> so, as I
>> already wrote; I have nothing to comment on concerning that. My
>> comments were in relation to your first question, not your second
>> one which was an accusation towards Carroll disguised as a
>> question for me.
>>
>>> To be clear, that is not a request for a denial or a side issue.
>>> And in case things have been buried for you, here are the
>>> specific posts I was referencing with his lies (which is not to
>>> imply those are anywhere close to his only ones!)
>>
>> Due to your tendency of quoting material out of context, not
>> understanding what was written, and attempting to claim otherwise
>> when nothing supports it, I see no point in reviewing them again.
>> They most likely are not what you claim them to be, just as my
>> posts you carefully selected aren't what you claimed they were in
>> relation to the bot. I have absolutely no reason to think you
>> haven't done the same exact thing with Carroll as you did with
>> me. It's more likely that's exactly what you've done here.
>>
>
>
--
If you want to be a success in life, just show up 80 percent of the
time. --Woody Allen
news:hkdfec...@mid.individual.net Thu, 11 Jun 2020 01:24:28 GMT
in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
> On 6/10/20 5:49 PM, Diesel wrote:
>> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
>> news:hk678b...@mid.individual.net Mon, 08 Jun 2020 07:21:47
>> GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
>>
>>> If you provided a direct answer as to why Carroll would like so
>>> much about things tied to the bot if the bot was not him I did
>>> not see it.
>>
>> You haven't provided anything which supports the accusation,
>
> Sure I have:
Hmm. Perhaps it's a simple communications issue between us. A
language barrier of sorts. You asked me my opinion concerning
Carrolls accused of being a liar, a claim made by you; not me.
I have since asked for proof that supports what you wrote. This is
where we run into the communications link problem. I don't know if
it's the result of distance and so a weak signal causing packet loss
or some interference (gotta love wireless technologies), or,
something is damaged/out of alignment on your transceiver. It's not
acknowledging that it got the coordinates we sent. Verification
failure, you see.
It's early morning AM or so this computer is telling me, and I've not
had much sleep.. so... excuse my attempt to ligten up the mood a bit
as once again, I waste the time with a reply knowing in advance based
only on prior interaction how the reply to this is going to turn out,
if there is one to be read later. End result: not gewd el captain.
What you've offered several times now doesn't meet this courts
requirements to be considered as anything in higher standing than
hearsay. And, sadly, this court also has your previous case and is
waiting for your replies over that matter concerning your evidence
processes and understand of what constitutes evidence. There's also
the matter of lying about the court. Until that's resolved to the
courts satisfaction, this case cannot proceed further.
> 1) Carrolll repeatedly lied to get me to talk about what I
> said could be done with AppleScript:
> <b498827e-ee8d-45e7...@googlegroups.com>
> <f47a48e6-1c74-4cfa...@googlegroups.com>
> <62b1764e-f84b-458d...@googlegroups.com>
> <aa20334a-9970-4dc3...@googlegroups.com>
>
> 2) Carroll posted with multiple versions of his name: "Steve
> Carroll - fretwizzer", "fretw...@gmail.com", and "Steve
> Carroll"
>
> 3) The bot changed names ONCE and posted with that name 12 times
> in rapid succession (1-3 minutes apart)
>
> 4) Carroll spoke of altering his GG script to deal with such
> name changes:
> <d278fe60-ce88-403d...@googlegroups.com>
> -----
> And now that stupid bot is making me have to
> change the plugin again. Why doesn't it use your name
> for the next 6-7 years?!
> -----
>
> Carroll went into more detail here:
> <cfdaff72-cc8a-4186...@googlegroups.com>
> ------
> > Carroll, wouldn't it be easier for your script to parse
> > the from line, specifically looking for a matching email
> > address?
>
> Of course, but that slowed the plugin down considerably.
> Remember, this is GG, not something like slrn (which I
> also use).
> -----
> Note: not it WOULD slow it down... it DID.
>
> And still later (after the rapid name changing):
> <8fa8f193-7470-4360...@googlegroups.com>
> -----
> I don't see floodbot posts unless i want to so I miss this
> stuff.
> -----
>
> Amazing that right as Carroll is finding a way to be able
> to block the bot's new name-change trick the bot happens
> to be using that trick.
>
> 5) The bot started changing names with every post.
>
> 6) Carroll denied his comment about his GG script:
> <07c19d79-ec94-4c27...@googlegroups.com>
> -----
> I actually never mentioned what it was that prompted me to
> change my plugin, despite it possibly appearing that way.
> -----
>
> 7) Carroll worked to confuse the timeline:
> <4831f570-da42-4869...@googlegroups.com>
> -----
> LOL! You *just* used the term"after", not "right before",
> even in *your* version of the timeline
> -----
>
> 8) Carroll predicted the bot would start wrapping lines:
> <2c51348f-5b6b-46a7...@googlegroups.com>
> -----
> Injection-Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2020 00:13:39 +0000
> ...
> As soon as Snit works out the carriage return/line feed
> issue on the 'AZ code' he's working on in ACW, he'll add
> it to his flood bot.
> -----
> And, gee, another prediction by Carroll comes true:
>
> <7a734216-a0b7-4d29...@googlegroups.com>
> Injection-Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2020 03:02:57 +0000
>
> The prior posts, at the very least in COLA, did not wrap:
> <918fa752-fc26-43d7...@googlegroups.com>
> <75449fb9-1514-4122...@googlegroups.com>
> <794c783f-70a1-4128...@googlegroups.com>
>
> Less than three hours after his "prediction" the bot made a
> very specific change based on a design goal Carroll spoke
> of. I cannot find where this goal was mentioned before.
>
> Carroll tried to tie this to *me* here:
> <6decab0d-349f-4d92...@googlegroups.com>
> -----
> > It mostly works but ignores line breaks.
>
> Imagine that! You have a line break issue... now what else
> have we seen a lot of that has the same problem? I just
> know it'll come to me <eyeroll>.
> -----
>
> My comment was about INPUT for reading lines where it was
> not seeing the line breaks. NOTHING to do with ANYTHING
> Carroll pushed it as. Once again he takes things out of
> context and shows he is able to make predictions about the
> flood bot in amazingly specific ways.
>
>
>
>> so, as I
>> already wrote; I have nothing to comment on concerning that. My
>> comments were in relation to your first question, not your second
>> one which was an accusation towards Carroll disguised as a
>> question for me.
>>
>>> To be clear, that is not a request for a denial or a side issue.
>>> And in case things have been buried for you, here are the
>>> specific posts I was referencing with his lies (which is not to
>>> imply those are anywhere close to his only ones!)
>>
>> Due to your tendency of quoting material out of context, not
>> understanding what was written, and attempting to claim otherwise
>> when nothing supports it, I see no point in reviewing them again.
>> They most likely are not what you claim them to be, just as my
>> posts you carefully selected aren't what you claimed they were in
>> relation to the bot. I have absolutely no reason to think you
>> haven't done the same exact thing with Carroll as you did with
>> me. It's more likely that's exactly what you've done here.
>>
>
>
--
If you want to be a success in life, just show up 80 percent of the
time. --Woody Allen
Diesel
Jun 11, 2020, 6:17:48 AM6/11/20
to
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
news:hkdfd2...@mid.individual.net Thu, 11 Jun 2020 01:23:45 GMT
>> news:f5d2cfd0-0e18-496a...@googlegroups.com Mon,
>> 08 Jun 2020 16:31:50 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
>>>>>> 09:05:31 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
>>>>>>>> news:hjiar0...@mid.individual.net Sun, 31 May 2020
>>>>>>>> 18:20:17 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Diesel: feel free to comment. Why would Carroll lie so
>>>>>>>>> much if it was not him?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Okay...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't believe you understand what proof beyond a
>>>>>>>> reasonable doubt actually means, going by what you called
>>>>>>>> evidence that you took the time to share, here. I also
>>>>>>>> disagree with you concerning what you called evidence, or
>>>>>>>> what you thought it proved.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is your belief. And you are welcome to it.... but I am
>>>>>>> talking about evidence. Again, the question was why would
>>>>>>> Carroll lie so much if it was not him? That does not answer
>>>>>>> the question. Nor does the below.
>>>>>
>>>>> You have no answer. And that in itself is sold -- neither you
>>>>> nor I nor Carroll can explain why he feels the need to lie so
>>>>> often about things as he tries to tie his bot to me.
>>>>
>>>> I provided one, you evidently didn't like it...
>>>>
>>>>> If you want to pretend otherwise that is your right... but at
>>>>> this point it becomes arguing to argue. Not biting.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not pretending...
>>>
>>> Here's what real pretending looks like:
>>>
>>> <D47369FD.84719%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
>>>
>>> Insane... but it pales in comparison to:
>>>
>>> <CAD8A354.AC5DE%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
>>>
>>> Read the entirety of both posts to get the full 'effect' ;)
>>
>> I'd rather watch paint dry, or see if dead grass really can grow.
>>
>> I've already experienced the snit effect of quoting out of
>> context, not understanding what they read, claiming you said this
>> or that, and 'agreed' with them and other such utter nonsense.
>>
>>> (cue up more BS by Snit)
>>
>> No, please. I've had enough for the day already.
>>
>>
>> -- Only two of my personalities are schizophrenic, but one of
>> them is paranoid, and the other one is out to get him.
>>
>
> You keep saying I quoted you out of context as we discussed
> Carroll's bot code. I have accept this is POSSIBLE, but if it is
> then some other code would have to have been in discussion (of
> course... otherwise then the context was that code alone).
Oh, it's more than possible. See here:
You are being *very dishonest*, Snit
Here's the first two paragraphs above what you isolated to show as
'proof' that I had the bot. And anyone, even you, can clearly see
that what I wrote HAD NOTHING to do with ANY specific bot or other
type of program. What you've isolated was the third paragraph of a
reply from me to you about coding. As I've told you, repeatedly, YOU
DID NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT I WAS WRITING ABOUT. Something you either
intentionally tried to avoid by the section you snipped, or your
comprehension is worse than I've given you credit for, previously.
Or, after reviewing my own post, you actually did, but pulled a David
on me and carefully lifted a single piece of my reply to support your
unfounded claim against me.
Either way, you lied about my involvement with the bot, and you lied
about the so called evidence being what you thought it was. And,
you're continuing to try and avoid having to apologize; because, well
that would mean you were wrong about something AND accepted that as a
fact.
http://al.howardknight.net/?ID=158278349300
Message-ID: <XnsAB6E44...@ZdS859K14.7p1JRyU90Zyd>
You wrote this, showing that you have next to no useful/practical
knowledge of how reverse engineering works:
> Without knowing more of the purpose we cannot say if the output
> shows the code to be good or not. One has to see the code to know
> that.
I responded with this:
How long have you been writing code of any kind? The resulting output
(most programmers, and all coders know this) certainly does give an
individual a very good idea of the coding behind it. Ie: how it's
being generated, what algorithms are likely in use.
One doesn't have to see original source code to be able to determine
what the program most likely is, if the programs output can be
sampled.
Do you think when you disassemble something that you're provided the
original source code that was compiled/assembled by the author? You
aren't, what you're given looks nothing like the original source
code, but it still tells you *everything* about the program.
*** end share
Now, when you see the first two paragraphs, it makes a lot more sense
to anyone who can read AND understand what they are reading. It was
NOT about any specific bot.
As I repeatedly told you, it was NOT about the usenet bot; you lifted
the third and only the third paragraph of a reply I wrote to you,
rightfully questioning your understanding of reverse engineering
principles and processes because your reply (which is quoted)
indicated you were more than slightly clueless about the subject.
I was trying to explain something to you, Snit! And there you go, not
understanding a single word of it, thinking it's something else
entirely. 'proof' as you claimed it to be. Yea, it's proof alright.
Proof you're either "misunderstanding" people on purpose, or you have
a legitimate, severe level, life long learning disability; and if
that's the case, likely more than one.
> But, really, I am happy to let your error go. It is not that
> important to me. I can't understand why, other than ego, you
> cannot move on.
My error? My ego? For someone as ignorant as you clearly are on
most/all? of the subjects I've had the torture of interacting with
you on so far, you are a very arrogant person. It's undeserved
arrogance though, Snit - you lack the knowledge and skills that would
otherwise give you the right to 'talk down' to me as you've been
trying to do in one of your replies with the 'can I understand" style
questions.
--
This is a 'Tagline for the sake of a tagline' tagline.
news:hkdfd2...@mid.individual.net Thu, 11 Jun 2020 01:23:45 GMT
in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
> On 6/10/20 5:49 PM, Diesel wrote:
>> Steve Carroll - fretwizzer <fretw...@gmail.com>
> On 6/10/20 5:49 PM, Diesel wrote:
>> news:f5d2cfd0-0e18-496a...@googlegroups.com Mon,
>> 08 Jun 2020 16:31:50 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
>>
>>> On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 11:38:14 PM UTC-6, Diesel wrote:
>>>> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
>>>> news:hk5o4c...@mid.individual.net Mon, 08 Jun 2020 03:03:38
>>> On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 11:38:14 PM UTC-6, Diesel wrote:
>>>> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
>>>> GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 6/7/20 6:32 PM, Diesel wrote:
>>>>>> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
>>>>>> news:hk14ir...@mid.individual.net Sat, 06 Jun 2020
>>>>
>>>>> On 6/7/20 6:32 PM, Diesel wrote:
>>>>>> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
>>>>>> 09:05:31 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
>>>>>>>> news:hjiar0...@mid.individual.net Sun, 31 May 2020
>>>>>>>> 18:20:17 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Diesel: feel free to comment. Why would Carroll lie so
>>>>>>>>> much if it was not him?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Okay...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't believe you understand what proof beyond a
>>>>>>>> reasonable doubt actually means, going by what you called
>>>>>>>> evidence that you took the time to share, here. I also
>>>>>>>> disagree with you concerning what you called evidence, or
>>>>>>>> what you thought it proved.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is your belief. And you are welcome to it.... but I am
>>>>>>> talking about evidence. Again, the question was why would
>>>>>>> Carroll lie so much if it was not him? That does not answer
>>>>>>> the question. Nor does the below.
>>>>>
>>>>> You have no answer. And that in itself is sold -- neither you
>>>>> nor I nor Carroll can explain why he feels the need to lie so
>>>>> often about things as he tries to tie his bot to me.
>>>>
>>>> I provided one, you evidently didn't like it...
>>>>
>>>>> If you want to pretend otherwise that is your right... but at
>>>>> this point it becomes arguing to argue. Not biting.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not pretending...
>>>
>>> Here's what real pretending looks like:
>>>
>>> <D47369FD.84719%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
>>>
>>> Insane... but it pales in comparison to:
>>>
>>> <CAD8A354.AC5DE%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>
>>>
>>> Read the entirety of both posts to get the full 'effect' ;)
>>
>> I'd rather watch paint dry, or see if dead grass really can grow.
>>
>> I've already experienced the snit effect of quoting out of
>> context, not understanding what they read, claiming you said this
>> or that, and 'agreed' with them and other such utter nonsense.
>>
>>> (cue up more BS by Snit)
>>
>> No, please. I've had enough for the day already.
>>
>>
>> -- Only two of my personalities are schizophrenic, but one of
>> them is paranoid, and the other one is out to get him.
>>
>
> You keep saying I quoted you out of context as we discussed
> Carroll's bot code. I have accept this is POSSIBLE, but if it is
> then some other code would have to have been in discussion (of
> course... otherwise then the context was that code alone).
Oh, it's more than possible. See here:
You are being *very dishonest*, Snit
Here's the first two paragraphs above what you isolated to show as
'proof' that I had the bot. And anyone, even you, can clearly see
that what I wrote HAD NOTHING to do with ANY specific bot or other
type of program. What you've isolated was the third paragraph of a
reply from me to you about coding. As I've told you, repeatedly, YOU
DID NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT I WAS WRITING ABOUT. Something you either
intentionally tried to avoid by the section you snipped, or your
comprehension is worse than I've given you credit for, previously.
Or, after reviewing my own post, you actually did, but pulled a David
on me and carefully lifted a single piece of my reply to support your
unfounded claim against me.
Either way, you lied about my involvement with the bot, and you lied
about the so called evidence being what you thought it was. And,
you're continuing to try and avoid having to apologize; because, well
that would mean you were wrong about something AND accepted that as a
fact.
http://al.howardknight.net/?ID=158278349300
Message-ID: <XnsAB6E44...@ZdS859K14.7p1JRyU90Zyd>
You wrote this, showing that you have next to no useful/practical
knowledge of how reverse engineering works:
> Without knowing more of the purpose we cannot say if the output
> shows the code to be good or not. One has to see the code to know
> that.
I responded with this:
How long have you been writing code of any kind? The resulting output
(most programmers, and all coders know this) certainly does give an
individual a very good idea of the coding behind it. Ie: how it's
being generated, what algorithms are likely in use.
One doesn't have to see original source code to be able to determine
what the program most likely is, if the programs output can be
sampled.
Do you think when you disassemble something that you're provided the
original source code that was compiled/assembled by the author? You
aren't, what you're given looks nothing like the original source
code, but it still tells you *everything* about the program.
*** end share
Now, when you see the first two paragraphs, it makes a lot more sense
to anyone who can read AND understand what they are reading. It was
NOT about any specific bot.
As I repeatedly told you, it was NOT about the usenet bot; you lifted
the third and only the third paragraph of a reply I wrote to you,
rightfully questioning your understanding of reverse engineering
principles and processes because your reply (which is quoted)
indicated you were more than slightly clueless about the subject.
I was trying to explain something to you, Snit! And there you go, not
understanding a single word of it, thinking it's something else
entirely. 'proof' as you claimed it to be. Yea, it's proof alright.
Proof you're either "misunderstanding" people on purpose, or you have
a legitimate, severe level, life long learning disability; and if
that's the case, likely more than one.
> But, really, I am happy to let your error go. It is not that
> important to me. I can't understand why, other than ego, you
> cannot move on.
My error? My ego? For someone as ignorant as you clearly are on
most/all? of the subjects I've had the torture of interacting with
you on so far, you are a very arrogant person. It's undeserved
arrogance though, Snit - you lack the knowledge and skills that would
otherwise give you the right to 'talk down' to me as you've been
trying to do in one of your replies with the 'can I understand" style
questions.
--
This is a 'Tagline for the sake of a tagline' tagline.
0 new messages