| Nomen Nescio 2005-08-07, 2:45 am |
| P.S.
Additionally, I think we can all agree that the real dilemma for the (former) Thrasher remailer user is the potential problem with citing the news group(s) which Thrasher has apparently blocked, whether the blocking began from the user's first test of Thr
asher, or more notably, subsequently, that is after the user had previously successfully posted one or more messages to the group(s) in question using Thrasher, and perhaps also using other remailers to post separate messages to the same groups over time,
thereby betraying that particular user's track record for posting to those groups using anonymous remailers.
Even if the user had consistently employed the "X-No-Archive" directive in most if not all of his/her posts to those groups, the savvy e-detective could then poll the suspect's frequented group(s), asking any long-time group regulars if they might recall
some "unpopular" user who'd often posted through the remailers, be it Thrasher or whatever. Usually, it's the one they disagreed with the most. That's the one who'd they most likely remember as being a "troublemaker."
While such a fishing expedition would prove difficult if not impossible in groups frequented by many dozens or even hundreds of unique anonymous posters who've used many various remailers, etc., it would be more conclusive to single out a particular poste
r if the groups in question have been regularly frequented by no more than, say, less than a dozen distinctively independent remailer users. It's the _regularity_ of posting history that would be the most glaring red flag to help identify some particular
user, at least by name, alias, agenda or writing style, obviously highlighting that user's objection to Thrasher blocking that user's favorite group(s).
But even those immature trolls who've used "sock-puppets", thereby abusing the remailers, to post messages to popular news groups, they've left telltale fingerprints which through casual or more rarely needed careful analysis of their writing habits can b
etray their identity and/or agenda. So whether you're a troll or not, your e-paper trail is telling in the eyes of a good e-detective.
This means that identifying anyone who has posted frequently to certain groups that may have been blocked by Thrasher would be wholeheartedly discouraged from citing those groups allegedly being blocked if those same groups have been only rarely frequente
d by other unique remailer users. This is because merely naming the group(s) could be easily construed as evidence that the one complaining about the remailer is also the same one who used to post, or may perhaps still post, to those groups through Thrash
er and possibly other anonymous remailers, the latter in conspicuous cases as a direct result of Thrasher's subsequent blockage of those groups which previously had worked successfully for that user.
|