PATRICK PARIS -- WE HATE YOUR STINKING ASS. GET THE FUCK OUT YOU FILTHY PEDOPHILE! 11.02.08 20.03.02
Anonymous
THIS UNWANTED GARBAGE ORIGINATED FROM AND BROUGHT TO YOU COURTESY OF:
PATRICK PARIS -- GET THE FUCK OUT YOU FILTHY SCUMBAG PEDOPHILE!
PATRICK PARIS -- WORTHLESS PIECE OF GARBAGE, GET OUT YOU STINKING PEDOPHILE!
PATRICK PARIS -- FILTHY STINKING PEDOPHILE, GET THE FUCK OUT!
PATRICK PARIS -- STINKING HUMAN WASTE, GET THE FUCK OUT NOW PEDOPHILE!
meanpossibly and in the
Subject: PATRICK PARIS -- FILTHY STINKING HUMAN GARBAGE PEDOPHILE, GET OUT NOW! 11.02.08 20.03.02
Nomen Nescio wrote:
> Anonymous <Use-Author-Supplied-Address@[127.1]> wrote:
>
>
>>Zax is not blocking any posts from being sent. He is filtering them
>>from his news server so that people that choose to use him to *read*
>>news get the clean feed.
>
>
> You forget that Zax' mail2news and remailer also post through his news
> server.
Someone already pointed out that Zax' remailer has middle in the caps.
$remailer{"banana"} = "<mi...@bananasplit.info> mix middle remix inflt50
rhop5 reord klen100";
Since all traffic is mix encrypted, what will Zax filter on? There is no
non pgp-only alternative for mixmaster! And the mixmaster client
software doesn't make the mistake of using Banana as an exit unless you
deliberately mutilate its caps string.
> Now, when Frog-Admin did the same, it was bad. Right?
What Frog-Admin did was filter at his remailer
http://web.archive.org/web/20021207215020/frogadmin.yi.org/Trash/index.html
http://web.archive.org/web/20030219141730/http://www.privacyresources.org/frogadmin/PotatoX_Gen.html
(mod to reliable but not filter in his caps strings as RProcess would
have wanted him to do)
Specifically he filtered on , Champerty, Secure Beer, Kenneth
Pangborn, Garry Burnore, Catdog, Average Guy, Evidence Eliminator and
Bluejay (from the message body which is obvious if you look at the
floods from back then or the filters that Zax put on it
http://www.bananasplit.info/filter.html). See for his weekly
announcement of FA's flood/troll free newsserver
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.privacy.anon-server/msg/1626242ad44fb95e
I am not saying it was bad. It was the blackest page in remailer
history! I hope you do not repeat the mistakes made by Frog-Admin (for
your own twisted legal reasoning).
Start running a true remailer and you will actually win people over to
using and trusting it.
And if you are really serious about stopping abuse, don't allow custom
from lines,
Thomas
- --
Gothika: "How can you trust someone who thinks you are crazy"
Subject: PATRICK PARIS -- WE HATE YOUR STINKING ASS. GET THE FUCK OUT YOU FILTHY PEDOPHILE! 11.02.08 20.03.02
On 8 Nov 2005, Anonymous <Use-Author-Supplied-Address@[127.1]> wrote:
>On Tue, 08 Nov 2005, Eelbash Admin <ad...@eelbash.yi.org> wrote:
>>
>>On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 18:30:05 +0100, Nomen Nescio wrote:
>>
>>Some very angry and disturbed tripe, below.
>>
>>
>>>>The Eelbash remailer is a last-hop remailer.
>>>
>>>>It provides full FROM headers.
>>>
>>>>Disclaimers are put into newsgroups as needed.
>>> Oh great, tampering with mail again. Fuck you.
>>>
>>>>If all else fails, the newsgroup will be temporarily blocked.
>>> How the hell are we supposed to know if they are blocked?
>>
>>I'll let you know here.
>>
>>>
>>>>The Eelbash remailer allows PLAIN TEXT messages only.
>>> All the easier for you to read them. You perverted fucking asshole.
>>
>>Don't talk nonsense; all it means is that html is not allowed, and
>>binaries are not allowed.
>
>Eelbash, you are a liar. LIAR.
>
>What it actually means is that messages do not have to be encrypted to be
>accepted. HTML and binaries ARE accepted, if they are encrypted.
I have not bothered to look at his cap string. Nor will I. But the way he
stated it implies that he will not accept encrypted messages. Only plain
text:
"The Eelbash remailer allows PLAIN TEXT messages only."
Can anyone really feel safe using his re-mailer? I sure as hell don't. Does
he have any clue what he is doing? Do you want to trust your confidential
mail to him?
BTW, twisty was concerned with altering the content of mail, not the issue
of permitting floods. Read his comments again. He has blocked attempted
floods. Freedom of speech does not give one the right to flood. Freedom of
speech does mean that the contents of a message cannot be altered by a
self-appointed censor.