Nitram

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 10:14:27 +0100, Earl Evleth <[email protected]>
wrote:

    > Now allowing one`s
    >postings to be permanently archives is a solution but then one denies
    >history something that might be of archival value (who knows what
    >academic will be going over early 21st century postings 500 years
    >from now?).

In the same way that most of us don't publish every letter written and
provide a recording of every word ever spoken.
--
Martin

Nitram

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 02:19:23 +0100, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
wrote:

    >Earl Evleth writes:
    >> It is a Federal Crime to use somebody else's address???
    >That depends on the purpose for which it is used.
    >In any case, don't expect any SWAT teams to flood the university any
    >time soon.

If the university has any sort of sense of responsibility at all it
will track down and terminate the account of the poster and kick
him/her out.
--
Martin

Icono Clast

EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) wrote:
    > But if the ADDRESS for a legitmiate poster is forged, the ISP that
    > appears in the "Normal" header is that of the person whose
    > identity is being forged, too! (That's why you should display the
    > "Full" headers before you make any "abuse" reports.)

I wouldn't report someone else's forged post. I reported mine. I told
you about yours, as you've said. I presume you reported it as I
presume all the other victims did.
__________________________________________________ __________
Un San Francisqueño en San Francisco
http://geocities.com/dancefest/ http://geocities.com/iconoc/
ICQ: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/19098103 IClast at SFbay Net

Deep Frayed Morgues

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 10:14:27 +0100, Earl Evleth <[email protected]>
wrote:

    >Whatever, if one allows one's posts to be archived on google, those
    >will be found by using the name of the person. A forged post
    >has the same archival value as a true post.

Which is next to nil. A usenet post has all the credibility of a piece
of graffiti.

    >Forged postings is a form of identity theft. As such it should be illegal
    >according to US Federal law, certainly if committed on US
    >territory and possibly generally if the posting enters US territory (which
    >is will) It is a possible form of slander.

And next to impossible to enforce. For example, how can you possibly
prove who typed and sent a post, even if you can trace the exact
computer it came from?

    >The newsgroups are new institutions of communication. They eventually
    >will be subject to legally established rules of use.

I could not disagree more. There will never be accountability in the
world of newsgroups, and that's one of it's best/worst traits.
--
---
DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com
---
--

Deep Frayed Morgues

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 02:50:07 -0600, [email protected] (Miguel Cruz)
wrote:

    >gpg: Signature made Tue Dec 28 09:17:21 2004 MYT using DSA key ID 12D0323A
    >gpg: key 12D0323A: public key "Mxsmanic <[email protected]>" imported
    >gpg: Total number processed: 1
    >gpg: imported: 1
    >gpg: BAD signature from "Mxsmanic <[email protected]>"

LOL!

I got imitated a few years ago, and that's when I started to change
screen names regularly knowing that people would know who I am by
other means.

Now I do it just for mild amusement value.
--
---
DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com
---
--

Deep Frayed Morgues

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 10:40:28 +0100, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
wrote:

    >Mike O'Sullivan writes:
    >> But who, on a newsgroup, is likely to care enough to take that amount of
    >> trouble?
    >Someone who really wants to know if a given message was written by a
    >given person. In some contexts, particularly if litigation arises, this
    >can be important.

I remember asking this question a few years back, possibly even with
you Mixi.

Have you ever known any litigation to have ever arisen from usenet?

(note, I said usenet, NOT email, website content etc.)
--
---
DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com
---
--

Deep Frayed Morgues

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 03:23:21 GMT, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
wrote:

    >Fresh Sausage

I notice that the header contains:

"Followup-To: news.admin.net-abuse.email"

thus ensuring news.admin.net-abuse.email is filled to the brim with
crap. From Google their is at least 1000 posts for the 27th of Dec
alone.

http://groups.google.com.au/groups?q...Dabuse%2Eemail

Note: I used the .au Google to circumvent the new interface.
--
---
DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com
---
--

Jim Ley

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 12:27:18 GMT, Deep Frayed Morgues
<deepfreudmoors@eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu> wrote:

    >On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 10:40:28 +0100, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
    >wrote:
    >>Mike O'Sullivan writes:
    >>> But who, on a newsgroup, is likely to care enough to take that amount of
    >>> trouble?
    >>Someone who really wants to know if a given message was written by a
    >>given person. In some contexts, particularly if litigation arises, this
    >>can be important.
    >I remember asking this question a few years back, possibly even with
    >you Mixi.
    >Have you ever known any litigation to have ever arisen from usenet?

Yep, Godfrey vs Demon, specifically relevant to forged posts aswell,
although signing would I doubt have had any bearing on the case.

http://www.cyber-rights.org/reports/demon.htm

Jim.

Deep Frayed Morgues

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 12:55:53 GMT, [email protected] (Jim Ley) wrote:

    >On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 12:27:18 GMT, Deep Frayed Morgues
    ><deepfreudmoors@eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu> wrote:
    >>On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 10:40:28 +0100, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
    >>wrote:
    >>>Mike O'Sullivan writes:
    >>>> But who, on a newsgroup, is likely to care enough to take that amount of
    >>>> trouble?
    >>>Someone who really wants to know if a given message was written by a
    >>>given person. In some contexts, particularly if litigation arises, this
    >>>can be important.
    >>I remember asking this question a few years back, possibly even with
    >>you Mixi.
    >>Have you ever known any litigation to have ever arisen from usenet?
    >Yep, Godfrey vs Demon, specifically relevant to forged posts aswell,
    >although signing would I doubt have had any bearing on the case.
    >http://www.cyber-rights.org/reports/demon.htm

Nice one.

A couple of things though, this was back in 1997, and usenet has grown
a lot since then. Also, it was really action against the ISP for not
removing the post. I can't see how this would work nowadays, as a post
is quickly copied to all the other news servers, and deleting it from
one would be useless.

I wonder if similar cases have been repeated in recent years.
--
---
DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com
---
--

Kevin S . Wilson

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 12:37:16 GMT, Deep Frayed Morgues
<deepfreudmoors@eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu> wrote:

    >On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 03:23:21 GMT, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
    >wrote:
    >>Fresh Sausage
    >I notice that the header contains:
    >"Followup-To: news.admin.net-abuse.email"
    >thus ensuring news.admin.net-abuse.email is filled to the brim with
    >crap.

So why didn't you snip NANAE from your reply?

These forged posts are the work of a piece of software designed to
flood news.admin.net-abuse.email with off-topic posts. Most of the
forgeries have follow-ups set to news.admin.net-abuse.email. If you
must argue with or talk about this piece of software, take NANAE out
of the newsgroups field; otherwise, you are only helping some Net
abuser disrupt news.admin.net-abuse.email.

--
Kevin S. Wilson
Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho
"When you can't do something completely impractical and intrinsically
useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." --J. Furr

Donna Evleth

Dans l'article <[email protected]>, nitram
<[email protected]> a écrit :


    > On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 02:19:23 +0100, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
    > wrote:
    >>Earl Evleth writes:
    >>> It is a Federal Crime to use somebody else's address???
    >>That depends on the purpose for which it is used.
    >>In any case, don't expect any SWAT teams to flood the university any
    >>time soon.
    > If the university has any sort of sense of responsibility at all it
    > will track down and terminate the account of the poster and kick
    > him/her out.
    > --
    > Martin

I should like to hope so. This gives a terrible image of the kind of
education this university is dispensing. They should want to think of their
reputation.

Donna Evleth

Earl Evleth

in article [email protected], Miguel Cruz at
[email protected] wrote on 28/12/04 11:15:

    > This seems to present a rationale for forging many ridiculous posts in one's
    > own name. That creates plausible deniability for other slightly less
    > ridiculous things one might have said in seriousness.


That is true if one knows about it. But potential employer can
reject a candidate without explaining exactly why. So this
kind of information becomes a part of one's real professional dossier
without one knowing it is having an effect.

At my wife`s and my own age, this does not play a role, we
are either privately employed or retired.

Earl

Earl Evleth

in article [email protected], nitram at
[email protected] wrote on 28/12/04 11:22:

    >> Now allowing one`s
    >> postings to be permanently archives is a solution but then one denies
    >> history something that might be of archival value (who knows what
    >> academic will be going over early 21st century postings 500 years
    >> from now?).
    >
    > In the same way that most of us don't publish every letter written and
    > provide a recording of every word ever spoken.


My sentence should have had a "not" for the Now.

Typo.


Most people do not value what they write much, I throw all letters away
and my wife only keeps those having professional use from or to clients.

I just finished a book of transcribed letters from the period of the
Roman Empire. Even mundane communications then have a value now!

And, of course, my mother tossed out the collection of late 1930s
comic books I had 50 years ago. I even had the first Captain Midnight,
now a collector's item.

Lastly, I sometimes go through Google to look at something I wrote
years ago. It is faster that my computer and usually I have, lost the
files with a software upgrade. So I use Google for archive searchers
of my own stuff, and other people's.

Earl



Earl

Earl Evleth

in article [email protected], nitram at
[email protected] wrote on 28/12/04 11:24:

    > If the university has any sort of sense of responsibility at all it
    > will track down and terminate the account of the poster and kick
    > him/her out.
    > --


These postings have a variety of addresses, the guy is wandering around
the internet countryside. The culprit has a juvenile mind, to be sure
and probably is some nerd who things he is being cute. I traced back
a number of the other people's stuff and it is varied; Wisconsin, Virginia
etc.

I don't think it is a European, even an east European.

Earl

Earl Evleth

in article [email protected], Deep Frayed Morgues
at deepfreudmoors@eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu wrote on 28/12/04 13:27:

    > Have you ever known any litigation to have ever arisen from usenet?


I know of one guy who, although using a false name, got a visit
from Federal authorities about something he posted.

What happened to him I don`t know, that I could not find out about.
He was "informed" on by another member of the group, not me.

Some things you write could get you into trouble. I claim this
since I once once picked up and questioned by the French police for
something I had posted 10 minutes previously in a Paris Cyber cafe.
I am careful in what I write.

That experience indicates we are, in some manner, all under surveillance.
It is not individual being listen full time in but "key words" will run up
red flags somewhere, the bells go off and bingo, your are targeted.

Earl