Mx is now forging other peoples monikers - beware!

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

On Mar 25, 2:15 am, Larry Dighera wrote:
On Sat, 24 Mar 2007 14:07:46 -0500, "CRaSH"
wrote in :

Mx has forged my moniker on several postings in the sim group, ...

Identity theft is a serious crime. Unless you are able to support
your allegation with incontestable fact, you are guilty of libel, for
which you are open to prosecution, sir.

Forging a usenet post isn't anything like a crime, and believe me,
I've seen plenty of it. Unless the forger actually uses another
poster's e-mail addie, it isn't even forging. It's known as "frogging"
in fact.... Making statements like you just have above will get you
nothing but a CNOTM award.

Didn't stop you imposting me once did it ?

Graham

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"buttman" wrote

so do you have any actual proof that it was him that forged
your name, or did your mind just go "hmm, someone posted a
message on a usenet group using my internet chit-chat name
AND I AM SO HURT, who will I blame it on, OH I KNOW IT MUST
BE THAT MX GUY EVERYONE HATES!!!"

What a rude, stoopid ass you are. A waste of breathing good air.

Butt out, buttman. Grow up. Throw a temper tantrum elsewhere.

plonk.

You're just a little turd, not worthy of any capital letters in the plonk.

Not even worthy of my sig line.



Absolutely priceless. Buttman posts an excellent synopsis of the incident,
and simultaneously describes a good portion of the Usenet aviation
"community", and this fool throws a temper tantrum. He heard the truth and
cannot accept it, so he plonks the messenger. Absolutely priceless.

Super Dave wrote:
Absolutely priceless. Buttman posts an excellent synopsis of the incident,

Even you can do the simple header comparisons. Unless there really is
someone who lives in France, uses the same ISP, lives in the same area,
subscribes to Giganews, uses Forte, has identical propogation paths,
/AND/ has had scuffs with Don before, /WITH/ the intent to cause mayhem
in the group, then there is only one likely conclusion.

Either it's him, or one of you coots is a really good hacker.

But of course, why verify fact when you can run to the rescue of your
butt-buddy!

TheSmokingGnu

TheSmokingGnu writes:

Even you can do the simple header comparisons. Unless there really is
someone who lives in France, uses the same ISP, lives in the same area,
subscribes to Giganews, uses Forte, has identical propogation paths,
/AND/ has had scuffs with Don before, /WITH/ the intent to cause mayhem
in the group, then there is only one likely conclusion.

Either it's him, or one of you coots is a really good hacker.

A third possibility is that you don't know how to read USENET headers.

But of course, why verify fact when you can run to the rescue of your
butt-buddy!

Odd that you should suggest verifying something when you are wildly
speculating without any verification yourself.

Why don't you send all the headers of the forged posts to GigaNews and ask
them where the posts actually came from? They might tell you, although forged
posts are so common and generally so innocuous that a lot of providers will
simply throw away most complaints. If they do tell you, report back here.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic wrote:
A third possibility is that you don't know how to read USENET headers.

There is no third possibility, only that it was you or was not you. And
buddy, you suck at not being you.

Odd that you should suggest verifying something when you are wildly
speculating without any verification yourself.

I could send you a copy of the OED and a first-year book on logic, but
quite frankly, I don't have enough faith in your intrinsic ability to
read, let alone understand.

forged
posts are so common and generally so innocuous that a lot of providers will
simply throw away most complaints.

Why offer justification for actions you "didn't" do?

What's next, going to play cancel wars? Those are "common" and
"innocuous", too.

TheSmokingGnu

MXMORON writes:

I see your NNTP header analysis skills match your piloting and fishing
skills (non-existent).

I've already explained how to complain to the provider. You won't find out
who forged the posts by complaining about it here.

You hope.

It makes no difference to me. I don't forge posts myself, and if someone does
something that actually damages me in some way, I don't depend on e-mail to
get things done.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

TheSmokingGnu writes:

forged
posts are so common and generally so innocuous that a lot of providers will
simply throw away most complaints.

Why offer justification for actions you "didn't" do?

I'm not. I don't usually use e-mail for complaints, and I explained why.
People complain _constantly_ to service providers, and most of the complaints
are trivial and baseless. Impersonation is usually not a big deal, because
most people use pseudonyms, anyway, and it's hard to connect a pseudonym to a
person. Additionally, unless the impersonation has consequences in the real
world, there's not much basis for any real-world action. People get upset and
feel that "something must be done," but apart from hurt feelings and egos,
typically the impersonation has no effect.

I recommend that people who really don't want to be impersonated rely upon
digital signatures to establish their online identities. If I want to show
unambiguously that I wrote a post, I digitally sign it. If it doesn't matter,
I don't (the usual case). Any post not digitally signed by me may be a
forgery.

What's next, going to play cancel wars? Those are "common" and
"innocuous", too.

You're operating under a number of misconceptions.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

On 26 Mar, 01:59, Mxsmanic wrote:
TheSmokingGnu writes:
forged
posts are so common and generally so innocuous that a lot of providers will
simply throw away most complaints.

Why offer justification for actions you "didn't" do?

I'm not. I don't usually use e-mail for complaints, and I explained why.
People complain _constantly_ to service providers, and most of the complaints
are trivial and baseless

We have somethng you're expert in finally! #




Being trivial and baseless.


Bertie

On 25 Mar, 06:48, Eeyore
wrote:
Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
On Mar 25, 2:15 am, Larry Dighera wrote:
On Sat, 24 Mar 2007 14:07:46 -0500, "CRaSH"
wrote in :

Mx has forged my moniker on several postings in the sim group, ...

Identity theft is a serious crime. Unless you are able to support
your allegation with incontestable fact, you are guilty of libel, for
which you are open to prosecution, sir.

Forging a usenet post isn't anything like a crime, and believe me,
I've seen plenty of it. Unless the forger actually uses another
poster's e-mail addie, it isn't even forging. It's known as "frogging"
in fact.... Making statements like you just have above will get you
nothing but a CNOTM award.

Didn't stop you imposting me once did it ?


Another fjukkwit heard from .


Did you even read the post you retard netkkkkop?



Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip writes:

We have somethng you're expert in finally!

I've done a lot of system administration in the past.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.