THIS UNWANTED GARBAGE ORIGINATED FROM AND BROUGHT TO YOU COURTESY OF:
PATRICK PARIS -- STINKING PIECE OF FRENCH PIG SHIT
PATRICK PARIS -- CONVICTED SEX OFFENDER
PATRICK PARIS -- FAILED HUMAN BEING
PATRICK PARIS -- PEDOPHILE
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 20:57:13 +0000, Howard wrote:
On Tue, 08 Nov 2005, Eelbash Admin <admin@eelbash.yi.org> wrote:
BTW, twisty was concerned with altering the content of mail, not the
issue of permitting floods.
No kidding? I could have sworn he blocked me because I announced I had
put in filters to block floods - nothing about altering the content of
mail
Maybe twisty misunderstood what he read. Or did I phrase it confusingly?
Well, here it is again:
Agressive flood filters are in place. If you send too many messages in
too rapid succession to the same email address or newsgroup, some of
them may not make it. Sorry about that, but, the psychos have been busy
and I am sure you will understand the need to keep them from disrupting
newsgroups or preying on individuals
I don't see anything there that talks about altering the content of
email, but that's the notice that twisty reacted to.
I happen to be a close friend of twisty. You can tell by my other posts
today.
Which ones were they? I don't recall seeing any.
Here is what my friend wrote:
"The twisty re-mailer operates as a common carrier. It is a fully legal
service operating under a business class static IP. The ToS for the ISP
permit business class clients to operate their own mail systems as well
as domain hosting.
By operating a re-mailer, I am legally bound to operate as a common
carrier. To maintain my status as a common carrier and avoid potential
legal problems, under the direct advice of my corporate legal counsel, I
cannot nor will not tamper with any messages sent through this
re-mailer.
However, I am permitted to block incoming or outgoing IPs or addresses
to prevent abuse or flooding, or other re-mailers that may be complicit
in violating the common carrier laws.
Since this re-mailer operates within the USA, it is subject to the
applicable laws for a common carrier.
To avoid potential conflict with these laws, I have no choice but to
source and destination block the Eelbash re-mailer as it may at any time
decide to be in violation of the common carrier laws.
I apologize for the inconvenience, but avoiding a possible legal
violation takes precedence."
As you can plainly see, it was not a concern about flooding or flood
filters. He was concerned about altering of message content.
I don't see that, plainly or murkily. Hiis blocking of my remailer was a
direct result of my announcement that I was putting in flood filters.
Not that I care what his reason was. He can block for any reason.
But my announcement a day or two later that I was removing the flood
filters resulted in him unblocking me.
What else can anybody, even a lawyer, conclude but that the block was put
in as a result of the flood filters?
And why the need to keep announcing this legal gobbledygook?
For example
when you started the "civil remailer", you violated your common carrier
status under the US laws.
I've got to tell you, that I have never seen such an irruption of legalese
as I have since Twisty arrived on the scene, and now you.
I have always thought of the remailer system as an informal group of
individuals, who, with little more than a list of the other remailers,
could independently work to provide an effective encrypted comm system for
anybody who needed to post anonymously.
Having a lawyer, or whoever you are, come in here to tell us what may
and may not be done is a bit chilling.
I doubt that any of the operators, certainly not me, have the financial
wherewithal to withstand some legal challenge thrown at them.
If the advent of the Twisty Admin and his friend Howard are harbingers of
what is in store for remops, it will mean the end of the remailer system,
at least in the US.
By adding disclaimers to messages sent to some, but not all newsgroups,
you may find yourself in a position that conflicts with the US laws. In
effect, you are changing the message content by acting as a censor to
some groups but not applying it equally to all. That is his dilemma. As
I mentioned before, he is a close friend. We talked about this last
night. On the advice of others and his counsel, he will not write
anything more about it.
Amazing. A remop who will not even talk about his hobby.
Twisty, old man, if you are reading this, let me say that you seem like a
nice fellow, and your apparently strong interest in preserving privacy is
very welcome in a society where it is daily being shredded.
You appear to be somebody who works a lot with lawyers, while most of us
avoid them like the plague, and simply run our remailers out of our homes,
using whatever common sense and decency we can bring to the job.
This group is supposed to be a forum for an informal peer-to-peer
discussion among remops, as well as a source of information for people
wanting to know about remailers.
If one of the remops refuses to come here because of the 'advice of others
and his counsel', and instead, sends a friend to act as his spokesman,
then there is something very very wrong.
I hope you can see how odd your action appears compared to the way other
remops express themselves here.
If people feel they are walking through a legal minefield whenever they
speak to you, and you are calling your legal counsel and chewing over
every syllable, how do you expect them to act toward you?
The only way I can think of to act, is, with regret, to have nothing to
say to you. In fact, it might be best if you put your block of my remailer
back in place; I am thinking of doing the same with your remailer.
I am exempted. I do not operate a remailer and have no intention of
doing so.
My suggestions are simple, if you alter message content, you can be in
trouble. If you add lines to some messages, but not all, you are acting
as a censor
Well, I put disclaimers in messages going to certain newsgroups that are
being disrupted; the idea being to discourage the psychopaths from using
the remailer to torment that group. All messages going through the
remailer to such newsgroups have the disclaimer, so maybe that makes it
kosher in a lawyer's eyes, but who knows?
and can be in violation of certain aspects of the law. if you add a
universal disclaimer to the message body that is added to all messages,
you are OK. Blocking floods is OK. Blocking harrassment mail is OK.
The biggest problem is selectively adding additional comments. That in
effect makes you a censor.
See my comment just above.
Take that into consideration please for your
own well being.
Thanks for the free advice.
Howard M.
A copy of this message is at
http://eelbash.yi.org:81/miscx/post/20051108005
<<==========>>
Subject: Re: What Did He Do?
In <C1HYY73H38647.8993287037@reece.net.au>, anonymous@invalid.com wrote:
Anonymous <anonymous@invalid.com> wrote:
In article <43597cbd$0$11078$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>
"Thomas J. Boschloo" <nospam@hccnet.nl> wrote:
Now we must get Eelbash Admin to retire too and this will be paradise =
for
me!
=20
Eelbash must not retire! He is the single most entertaining person in
Fl.general is one of the country, without ever underestimating reasonably
reliable reports of specific threats," said Mr. Pisanu in a Sept. 29 inter=
view
with Finmeccanica Magazine. Pisanu has also called for developing sophisti=
cated
technology to combat terror on Italian soil.=20
here although he doesn't intend to be.
Now all my nyms are getting repeat messages which are months old, from sev=
eral
sources for JBN or QS? I was able to enjoy APA-S now..=20
=20
I read apas once a week and get great amusement out of reading
Thomas Paine and his "Common Sense" is a complete fabrication of your witt=
le
mind, Wittle Jeffrey.
And if you cant manage to wank better than that, here goes the chain on the=
rest of your childish performance.
Yikes!=A0=A0I=A0just=A0had=A0a=A0horrible=A0thought.=A0=A0What=A0if=A0you=
=A0should=A0procreate?=A0=A0I would
think the result would be nothing new or
different.=A0=A0If=A0this=A0wasn't=A0the=A0option,=A0something=A0else=A0 w=
ould be.=20
Pathetic really, even you should be able to bullshit better than that boy. =
If you enrol in a course in wanking, anyway.
Eelbash's silly ideas for censoring (sorry I mean "stopping the
psychos"). I also enjoy reading his sock puppets where he tries to
pretend he's someone else that just happens to think and talk exactly
like him.
=20
I think someone who is interested in privacy is a role model for me. A few=
of
the best technological applications," Pisanu affirmed. As a result, Pisanu=
has
formed the Strategic Anti-terrorism Analysis Committee, which aims to exam=
ine
and take action against all terror threats. Due to new measures, more than=
a
little by providing a low latency.=20
Dunno, only summary execution of all the thieving povs using stolen mobile =
phones is likely to help and I dont think thats legal anymore.
He is my internet soap opera. Eelbash must stay.
You get to like that or lump it. Thats the way we do it here.
<<==========>>
Subject: Re: Spooks
Jeffrey F. Bloss wrote:
Olitoktali Mihnjihnfui wrote:
Well, it surely has been asked before, but, how is one to know (believe)
that the CIA spooks are completely plugged into the mixmaster network?
You can't know. That's the reason the remailer software is designed with
the idea that at least some of the network is compromised. Why layered
encryption, remixing, latency, and fragmentation exist. And it's pretty
tough to wrap your brain around the possibility that the *whole* remailer
network is CIA owned... but I suppose it's a possibility.
So run your own remailer if you're ultra paranoid. You'll know that at
least *one* node is safe to use. <g>
The problem with the paranoid imagination is that it has no boundaries.
So. As a paranoid, to close the loop, I would need to understand the
very source code and algorithm of mixmaster to be certain that there was
no backdoor key. And that, I am afraid, is an impossibility for this
here individual. Thus, the paranoia. Paranoia is inherent in this
whole process of anonymous remailing, isn't it!
