Anonymous Servers - Major Revamps to TwistyCreek this weekend

Author

Major Revamps to TwistyCreek this weekend

TwistyCreek Admin

2006-02-17, 11:08 pm

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi all.

Major revamps to the TwistyCreek re-mailer are in the works. I hope to have
everything completed this week end.

For spammers that want to use this re-mailer for OT and inappropriate
spamming, your spam will be blocked and shown on the web site. It should
make you proud, RIGHT?

I have some changes planned. My headers will be different. I will get
around things to show all what goes on. By the finish of this weekend, I
should have most everything in place.

Just give me some time. Ethics do work.

BTW, my absolute last thoughts were ever to buy my wife her own computer. I
bought her a real nice Toshiba laptop yesterday. When she got home from
church last night (I set it up while she was gone) I told her I had a
surprise for her. She asked what, I told her to sit down in her lazy boy
and I would tell her.

Needless to say she loved it and %^@@%$@@^@26432 (lucky me

Your privacy is important to me. I'll get it right sooner or later.

BTW, as I was writing this, a complaint came in:

Really makes all of us RemOps proud not to filter on content, Right?
BTW, this is the same XXXXXXX that started me using the Mercury content
filtering in the first XXXXing place. Always a new IP and address. The
socsur.be and similar were all slightly different, just enough to get
around Reliable.

I hate this prick. If you don't think it is abuse of my re-mailer, then you
are the 0.000000000000001% and a XXXXhead. Stay the XXXX away from me.

Advertises http://www.socsur.be [217.70.180.17] connected by
gandi.net,
socsur.be NS (Nameserver) full1.gandi.net
socsur.be NS (Nameserver) full2.gandi.net

- -------- Original Message --------
Path:
news20.bellglobal.com!nf1.bellglobal.com!nf3.bellglobal.com!border2.nntp.dca
..giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news.glorb.com!news.aset.psu.edu!news.cse.ps
u.edu!elk.ncren.net!newsflash.concordia.ca!pitt.edu!nn.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfe
eder.srv.cs.cmu.edu!anon.
lcs.mit.edu!nym.alias.net!mail2news
Date: 17 Feb 2006 18:04:22 -0000
Message-ID: <W3OC7MY538765.5446990741@twistycreek.com>
From: synf07 <anon@comments.header>
Subject: Boys and sexually expressed friendships with older males
CC: mail2news_nospam@bananasplit.info, mail2news_nospam@dizum.com
Newsgroups: rec.music.filk
X-No-Archive: yes
Comments: This message did not originate from the above address.
It was automatically remailed by an anonymous re-mail service. If
you do not wish to receive further messages from this re-mailer:
Reply to admin^at^twistycreek.com with the subject: dest-block
Mail-To-News-Contact: postmaster@nym.alias.net
Organization: mail2news@nym.alias.net
Lines: 5
Xref: nf1.bellglobal.com rec.music.filk:123354

If you would like to participate is a scholarly study of the
boyhood sexual activities with older males which you
experienced, the URL is http://www.socsur.be

I can't keep up with the XXXXXXX.

TwistyCreek Admin

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQA/AwUBQ/Zl6/ 9qPDhkRaWyEQI1hQCg3NFKM7AZsOhPZBakleIoKX
FUg4UAn1Pn
NLBfXatPIpvA+hM/w8XFo7fX
=fUse
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Concerned User

2006-02-17, 11:08 pm

In Message <l5ncv116thagqo0ik46kc0ogud6ov3rvhs@4ax.com>
TwistyCreek Admin <admin^@^twistycreek^.^com> wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi all.
>
> Major revamps to the TwistyCreek re-mailer are in the works. I hope to have
> everything completed this week end.
>
> For spammers that want to use this re-mailer for OT and inappropriate
> spamming, your spam will be blocked and shown on the web site. It should
> make you proud, RIGHT?
>
> I have some changes planned. My headers will be different. I will get
> around things to show all what goes on. By the finish of this weekend, I
> should have most everything in place.
>
> Just give me some time. Ethics do work.
>
> BTW, my absolute last thoughts were ever to buy my wife her own computer. I
> bought her a real nice Toshiba laptop yesterday. When she got home from
> church last night (I set it up while she was gone) I told her I had a
> surprise for her. She asked what, I told her to sit down in her lazy boy
> and I would tell her.
>
> Needless to say she loved it and %^@@%$@@^@26432 (lucky me

>
> Your privacy is important to me. I'll get it right sooner or later.
>
> BTW, as I was writing this, a complaint came in:
>
> Really makes all of us RemOps proud not to filter on content, Right?
> BTW, this is the same XXXXXXX that started me using the Mercury content
> filtering in the first XXXXing place. Always a new IP and address. The
> socsur.be and similar were all slightly different, just enough to get
> around Reliable.
>
> I hate this prick. If you don't think it is abuse of my re-mailer, then you
> are the 0.000000000000001% and a XXXXhead. Stay the XXXX away from me.
>
<snipped>
>
> I can't keep up with the XXXXXXX.
>
> TwistyCreek Admin

Can't you see you are being manipulated into reacting exactly as you have
been by none other than our very own EELbash? I will bet you anything he is
the source of your so called spam, sent with the sole purpose of adding
your voice to that of his in calling for message content filtering.

Think long and hard Mr Twisted. I know the decision is yours to make and
yours alone but please make it a well thought out decision and not a knee
jerk reaction.

Thank you for your service.

2006-02-17, 11:08 pm

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

TwistyCreek Admin <admin^@^twistycreek^.^com> wrote in
news:l5ncv116thagqo0ik46kc0ogud6ov3rvhs@
4ax.com:

snip

> BTW, as I was writing this, a complaint came in:
>
> Really makes all of us RemOps proud not to filter on content, Right?
> BTW, this is the same XXXXXXX that started me using the Mercury
> content filtering in the first XXXXing place. Always a new IP and
> address. The socsur.be and similar were all slightly different, just
> enough to get around Reliable.
>
> I hate this prick. If you don't think it is abuse of my re-mailer,
> then you are the 0.000000000000001% and a XXXXhead. Stay the XXXX away
> from me.
>
>
> Advertises http://www.socsur.be [217.70.180.17] connected by
> gandi.net,
> socsur.be NS (Nameserver) full1.gandi.net
> socsur.be NS (Nameserver) full2.gandi.net
>
> - -------- Original Message --------

snip

Would it do any good to lookup the webhosting provider for the spamvertized
site and forward complaints and copies of spamvertizements that exit via
twisty to their abuse@ ? Seems to me if the host is worth anything at all
it should get the account yanked at least.

- --
http://peculiarplace.com
http://lurasbookcase.com
http://purrfectdomains.com

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32) - GPGshell v3.47

iQEVAwUBQ/ aIsfu4FzRyppzVAQi88Qf+POkOYvXEn2Ucndxcd2
Pumxiounsf8JfF
FrTD6mQK0UaJ6V2AHOwEaOzLanBPHpc3rMkXX4T5
ZMh3sPPzA8lIINRX00pmAXbj
zmC+vYV7sOUN8X0K0VwpmRh+fLP2arJXcZbdDRsd
gKUO3aYUIHIIzDK74yMqcTkm
C6Ygek/ hRp5gMyk7rrkQDee3ZoKBzGuqalsvk43QO5Le7Tk
DLEnt55oBVtFXoShH
OYcy81Pn51HPF0QLdd+FgHiYQBKuRcz/pIJAf33AeE7mI8xtJbsFSeLmqT5I4YsU
0Lgg8Ueic2NVCqSTu+QgATVf3X6+RNcdfXl/s5hKbBk6bQuAb88yYA==
=mjVv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Thrasher Remailer

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

In article <l5ncv116thagqo0ik46kc0ogud6ov3rvhs@4ax.com>
TwistyCreek Admin <admin^@^twistycreek^.^com> wrote:
>
> Hi all.
>
> Major revamps to the TwistyCreek re-mailer are in the works. I hope to have
> everything completed this week end.
>
> For spammers that want to use this re-mailer for OT and inappropriate
> spamming, your spam will be blocked and shown on the web site. It should
> make you proud, RIGHT?
>
> I have some changes planned. My headers will be different. I will get
> around things to show all what goes on. By the finish of this weekend, I
> should have most everything in place.
>
> Just give me some time. Ethics do work.
>
> BTW, my absolute last thoughts were ever to buy my wife her own computer. I
> bought her a real nice Toshiba laptop yesterday. When she got home from
> church last night (I set it up while she was gone) I told her I had a
> surprise for her. She asked what, I told her to sit down in her lazy boy
> and I would tell her.
>
> Needless to say she loved it and %^@@%$@@^@26432 (lucky me

Nomen Nescio

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

In article <l5ncv116thagqo0ik46kc0ogud6ov3rvhs@4ax.com>
TwistyCreek Admin <admin^@^twistycreek^.^com> wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi all.
>
> Major revamps to the TwistyCreek re-mailer are in the works. I hope to have
> everything completed this week end.
>
> For spammers that want to use this re-mailer for OT and inappropriate
> spamming, your spam will be blocked and shown on the web site. It should
> make you proud, RIGHT?
>
> I have some changes planned. My headers will be different. I will get
> around things to show all what goes on. By the finish of this weekend, I
> should have most everything in place.
>
> Just give me some time. Ethics do work.
>
> BTW, my absolute last thoughts were ever to buy my wife her own computer. I
> bought her a real nice Toshiba laptop yesterday. When she got home from
> church last night (I set it up while she was gone) I told her I had a
> surprise for her. She asked what, I told her to sit down in her lazy boy
> and I would tell her.
>
> Needless to say she loved it and %^@@%$@@^@26432 (lucky me

Anonymous

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

In article <l5ncv116thagqo0ik46kc0ogud6ov3rvhs@4ax.com>
TwistyCreek Admin <admin^@^twistycreek^.^com> wrote:

> Major revamps to the TwistyCreek re-mailer are in the works. I hope to have
> everything completed this week end.
>
> For spammers that want to use this re-mailer for OT and inappropriate
> spamming, your spam will be blocked and shown on the web site. It should
> make you proud, RIGHT?

IMHO that's not on. At some point you (or even worse, automated
software) will get it wrong and a piece of private email will
end up on your web site.

No-one gives a shit about spam and will not want the ability to
read it on your website. Some wierd people may get a thrill from
reading any abusive messages that you;ve blocked, but IMHO
better that you just silently drop them.

Non scrivetemi

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

In article <l5ncv116thagqo0ik46kc0ogud6ov3rvhs@4ax.com>
TwistyCreek Admin <admin^@^twistycreek^.^com> wrote:
>
> I hate this prick. If you don't think it is abuse of my re-mailer, then you
> are the 0.000000000000001% and a XXXXhead. Stay the XXXX away from me.

Then complain to the company hosting socsur.be
If it's child pornography then it's probably been set up as a sting to
catch people looking for it.
Nobody would really advertise an illegal porn site using a remailer.
They can't use remailers to actually host the site, so they wouldn't
have anonymity anyway.

Borked Pseudo Mailed

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

Non scrivetemi

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

> Really makes all of us RemOps proud not to filter on content, Right?

You have been running your remailer just months. Not even a year, yet
you feel you have the right to criticize remops who have run their
remailers for many years, without content filtering, or naming and
shaming suspected spam mail on their web sites.

Unbelievable! I suggest you calm down from yet another temper tantrum
so you can see that you are _not_ at war with the other remops. Your
current attitude toward anyone that disagrees with you leaves a lot
to be desired.

Anonymous

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

Thrasher Remailer

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

In article <l5ncv116thagqo0ik46kc0ogud6ov3rvhs@4ax.com>
TwistyCreek Admin <admin^@^twistycreek^.^com> wrote:
>
> Hi all.

Hi. Thanks for letting us know that you are turning into another bad
apple of the remailer network. Content filtering and outing people, with
mood swings that make women suffering PMS look like Mother Theresa, I
think I'll avoid your remailer. I wouldn't want to have my mail published
on a web site because you're having a bad day and hate me.

Borked Pseudo Mailed

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

TwistyCreek Admin wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi all.
>
> Major revamps to the TwistyCreek re-mailer are in the works. I hope to
> have everything completed this week end.
>
> For spammers that want to use this re-mailer for OT and inappropriate
> spamming, your spam will be blocked and shown on the web site. It should
> make you proud, RIGHT?

That's just... well... wrong. It's contrary to everything RemOp. A real
slap in the face to Operators and a joke or source of more canon fodder to
abusers.

Twisty ol' bean, if you want to block abuse then by all means do it. But
don't "display your trophies" like some borderline eelbashesque hunter or
something. And yes, that really is the way you sound sometimes, although
it seems people can talk you down and eelbash just stays completely loony
all the time. ;) I don't really want to piss you off, but you need your
attention grabbed so you'll think this one through. This really IS
something eelbash would do.

> I have some changes planned. My headers will be different. I will get
> around things to show all what goes on. By the finish of this weekend, I
> should have most everything in place.
>
> Just give me some time. Ethics do work.

Sanity works. Ethics can be taken to the extreme. Terrorists, for
instance, believe they're acting ethically. ;-)

> BTW, my absolute last thoughts were ever to buy my wife her own computer.
> I bought her a real nice Toshiba laptop yesterday. When she got home from
> church last night (I set it up while she was gone) I told her I had a
> surprise for her. She asked what, I told her to sit down in her lazy boy
> and I would tell her.
>
> Needless to say she loved it and %^@@%$@@^@26432 (lucky me

No shit. When your wife wants to show appreciation she's something else.

Ooops... did I say that out loud?

<grinning and ducking>

Just kidding with you guy. Your wife's not really that good.

<grinning and running>

> Your privacy is important to me. I'll get it right sooner or later.

Just run your remailer and deal with complaints as they come, as sanely as
you can. Real simple. You have nobody to answer to but you. Satisfy
yourself and to hell with everyone else. Well, satisfy your wife too. ;)

> BTW, as I was writing this, a complaint came in:

<snip>

You take things too personally. Screw'm. Bunch of winers anyway.

Fritz Wuehler

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

In article <l5ncv116thagqo0ik46kc0ogud6ov3rvhs@4ax.com>
TwistyCreek Admin <admin^@^twistycreek^.^com> wrote:
>
> For spammers that want to use this re-mailer for OT and inappropriate
> spamming, your spam will be blocked and shown on the web site. It should
> make you proud, RIGHT?

That is such an over reaction. It will not make you popular. Why would
someone use your remailer when their mail might be caught by one of
your secret content filters and published on your web site?

Added to block list.

George Orwell

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

In article < 234edf2f4b2187ebe336f7a88bf11614@remaile
r.org.uk>
Anonymous <devnull@remailer.org.uk> wrote:
>
> IMHO that's not on. At some point you (or even worse, automated
> software) will get it wrong and a piece of private email will
> end up on your web site.

Yep. His temper makes him implement the most stupid of ideas. I was
prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt before, but I no longer
trust any of my mail to be delivered by someone who now content filters
and places mail on web sites that he doesn't like. I'm glad QS makes
it so easy to block these bad remailers.

Nomen Nescio

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

TwistyCreek Admin wrote:
>
> For spammers that want to use this re-mailer for OT and inappropriate
> spamming, your spam will be blocked and shown on the web site. It should
> make you proud, RIGHT?

Bad. Bad. Bad.

anonymous@remailer.hastio.org

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

admin^@^twistycreek^.^com wrote:

> Really makes all of us RemOps proud not to filter on content, Right?

Yes, I am very proud not to content filter. Looking calmly at an abuse
complaint and dealing with it in a calm manner is better than adding
secret content filters in a burst of anger.

TwistyCreek Admin

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 18 Feb 2006 02:33:37 -0000, Concerned User <anon@comments.header> wrote:
snipped
>
>Can't you see you are being manipulated into reacting exactly as you have
>been by none other than our very own EELbash? I will bet you anything he
>is the source of your so called spam, sent with the sole purpose of
>adding
>your voice to that of his in calling for message content filtering.
>
>Think long and hard Mr Twisted. I know the decision is yours to make and
>yours alone but please make it a well thought out decision and not a knee
>jerk reaction.
>
>Thank you for your service.
>
Maybe. But the web site is there. If this had the slightest tone of
legitamacy to it, they wouldn't be posting through re-mailers. They would
provide a contact for abuse, etc. on their site.

Using dnsstuff I found an abuse contact. I have sent an abuse E-mail to
that address.

My reaction is based on a large number of posts to many unrelated groups
and the large number of complaints I have received. Some were pretty nasty
towards me. This guy did not cause a knee jerk reaction. He has been at it
for sometime now. My reaction is based on the large number of similar
complaints and frustration on not being able to stop him.

Maybe since I posted that here, he has seen it and realizes the trouble he
is causing for me.

I have not trapped any more of his posts. I'll turn the content filtering
off and see what happens. Hopefully he will have decided it is not worth
the effort.

I sure hope he gives it up.

TwistyCreek Admin

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQA/AwUBQ/ c6hv9qPDhkRaWyEQK8pACg2IRCpBSve9l4sE1RLL
PywNavO1gAnjHv
TGAIPipeTlgIaC6iUFMONT5G
=jRSV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Nomen Nescio

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 14:55:23 +0100, George Orwell wrote:

> In article < 234edf2f4b2187ebe336f7a88bf11614@remaile
r.org.uk> Anonymous
> <devnull@remailer.org.uk> wrote:
>
> Yep. His temper makes him implement the most stupid of ideas. I was
> prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt before, but I no longer
> trust any of my mail to be delivered by someone who now content filters

If you are not willing to filter on content, I take it you would handle
abusive or spam messages by blocking the newsgroups they go to.

What if somebody sends his abusive message to one newsgroup, and a bit
later sends the same message, with some random garbage added to get past
the duplicate detector, to another newsgroup, and a bit later to another
newsgroup, etc.

If he ends up sending it to 30 newsgroups, will you block all 30 of them?

> and places mail on web sites that he doesn't like. I'm glad QS makes it so
> easy to block these bad remailers.

Anonymous

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

"Nomen Nescio" <nobody@dizum.com> wrote in message
news:b08851d03a306ed7b998b845a95c0845@di
zum.com...
> On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 14:55:23 +0100, George Orwell wrote:
>
>
> If you are not willing to filter on content, I take it you would handle
> abusive or spam messages by blocking the newsgroups they go to.
>
> What if somebody sends his abusive message to one newsgroup, and a bit
> later sends the same message, with some random garbage added to get past
> the duplicate detector, to another newsgroup, and a bit later to another
> newsgroup, etc.
>
> If he ends up sending it to 30 newsgroups, will you block all 30 of them?

If the people who frequent those groups complain legitimately about
legitimate abuse (not just whine about the odd message here and there), then
yes, I think newsgroup blocking ALWAYS is a much better solution that
content filtering.

I know twisty has the best of intentions. I value his fast, dependable
service. With his particular emotional makeup it would be far better for
him to not even personally look at the message content referenced in the
complaints but rather judge the complaints on merit and entirely block
any/all newsgroups based on that judgement.
Just my opinion.

Stephen K. Gielda

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

In article <hrcev1tf08d19hlbb9sbclrfc4o9vv8p3s@4ax.com>,
admin^@^twistycreek^.^com says...
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 18 Feb 2006 02:33:37 -0000, Concerned User <anon@comments.header> wrote:
> snipped
> Maybe. But the web site is there. If this had the slightest tone of
> legitamacy to it, they wouldn't be posting through re-mailers. They would
> provide a contact for abuse, etc. on their site.
>
> Using dnsstuff I found an abuse contact. I have sent an abuse E-mail to
> that address.
>
>
> My reaction is based on a large number of posts to many unrelated groups
> and the large number of complaints I have received. Some were pretty nasty
> towards me. This guy did not cause a knee jerk reaction. He has been at it
> for sometime now. My reaction is based on the large number of similar
> complaints and frustration on not being able to stop him.
>
> Maybe since I posted that here, he has seen it and realizes the trouble he
> is causing for me.
>
> I have not trapped any more of his posts. I'll turn the content filtering
> off and see what happens. Hopefully he will have decided it is not worth
> the effort.
>
> I sure hope he gives it up.

You are up against two things. One, if the content of the message you
are exposing was destined for the public forum of usenet he isn't going
to care that it's on a web page. It may even be of benefit. Second, if
you are going to filter you'll end up chasing your tail as he keeping
morphing to avoid them. The dupe check at the m2n gate should catch any
floods, beyond that there currently isn't much that can be done but
block the newsgroup or rethink allowing posts to usenet.

/steve
--
The Missing Amendment
The Right To Privacy
http://www.themissingamendment.org

Thrasher Remailer

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

In <b08851d03a306ed7b998b845a95c0845@dizum.com>, nobody@dizum.com wrote:
>On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 14:55:23 +0100, George Orwell wrote:
>
>
>If you are not willing to filter on content, I take it you would handle
>abusive or spam messages by blocking the newsgroups they go to.
>
>What if somebody sends his abusive message to one newsgroup, and a bit
>later sends the same message, with some random garbage added to get past
>the duplicate detector, to another newsgroup, and a bit later to another
>newsgroup, etc.
>
>If he ends up sending it to 30 newsgroups, will you block all 30 of them?

SHUT UP EELBASH!

Thrasher Remailer

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

In article <b08851d03a306ed7b998b845a95c0845@dizum.com>
Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
> If you are not willing to filter on content, I take it you would handle

Hey look, it's an eelbash sock puppet!

Fritz Wuehler

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

TwistyCreek Admin <admin^@^twistycreek^.^com> wrote:

> I have not trapped any more of his posts. I'll turn the content filtering
> off and see what happens.

Geez, you change your remailer configuration faster than eelbash.

anonymous@remailer.hastio.org

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

In article <l5ncv116thagqo0ik46kc0ogud6ov3rvhs@4ax.com>
TwistyCreek Admin <admin^@^twistycreek^.^com> wrote:

> Just give me some time. "Ethics do work."
>
> "BTW, my absolute last thoughts were ever to buy my wife her own
computer."
> "When she got home from church last night"
>
> "Your privacy is important to me."

Twisty, the above are excerpt quotes from your last posting. There
is something quite smarmy, unctuous, and rather sickening about you.
Something about you, perhaps it is your writing style, perhaps it is
your self-aggrandizing histrionics, disgusts me. I know that if I
ever met you that I would certainly not like you. You sound like a
foolish, fatuous, and silly little rich boy. You sound like someone
possessed of the most conventional and conformist of belief systems,
someone born with a silver spoon in his mouth and without even the
slightest real world experience.

There is a haughty, shallow, petulant, feminine, and overly earnest
quality to your presence that causes me to want to recoil. You sound
like a pig who is trying too hard to pass.

I find you repellant and repugnant; you do very much disgust me, as
I have said. I don't trust you and will make you middleman only.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
is unverified.

Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

anonymous@remailer.hastio.org wrote:

> There is a haughty, shallow, petulant, feminine, and overly earnest
> quality to your presence that causes me to want to recoil. You sound
> like a pig who is trying too hard to pass.

SHUT UP EELBASH!

Fritz Wuehler

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 09:19:39 -0700, Anonymous wrote:

>
> "Nomen Nescio" <nobody@dizum.com> wrote in message
>
> If the people who frequent those groups complain legitimately about
> legitimate abuse (not just whine about the odd message here and there),
> then yes, I think newsgroup blocking ALWAYS is a much better solution that
> content filtering.

I was thinking of abuse against one person. For example, some remop
mentioned a couple of weeks ago that somebody had used his remailer to
post to some newsgroup that a man was a child molestor.

If you thought that was inappropriate enough, you would, I suppose, block
that newsgroup so the message couldn't be repeated there.

And if the sender of the message sent it to newsgroup after newsgroup, you
would block every one of them. Is that correct?

It seems to me that it makes more sense to put in one content filter.

But there seems to be an almost religious dislike of using content
filters, with nobody able to say what is wrong with using them, just that
they are, somehow, bad.

TwistyCreek

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

>But there seems to be an almost religious dislike of using content
>filters, with nobody able to say what is wrong with using them, just that
>they are, somehow, bad.

SHUT UP EELBASH!!!!

Thrasher Remailer

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

In article <ab48ec25c4a6f50d8659bb6f1c5b966f@msgid.frell.theremailer.net>
Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-200602.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 09:19:39 -0700, Anonymous wrote:
>
>
> I was thinking of abuse against one person. For example, some remop
> mentioned a couple of weeks ago that somebody had used his remailer to
> post to some newsgroup that a man was a child molestor.
>
> If you thought that was inappropriate enough, you would, I suppose, block
> that newsgroup so the message couldn't be repeated there.
>
> And if the sender of the message sent it to newsgroup after newsgroup, you
> would block every one of them. Is that correct?
>
> It seems to me that it makes more sense to put in one content filter.
>
> But there seems to be an almost religious dislike of using content
> filters, with nobody able to say what is wrong with using them, just that
> they are, somehow, bad.

Shut up Eelbash. You shit me. Actually, you shit everybody.

The one thing I have noticed in this whole saga is the silence of most of
the remops.
Zax said something that amounted to sitting in the fence.
Thrasher said he didn't filter on content but didn't say if he never would.
Bikikii disaproved of content filtering, but only in passing.
The multiple Eelbashes never shut up...
..and Twisty changes his view more often than he changes his underware.

What is so hard to understand?

As a remop, isn't it a given that you guys support everyone's right to
privacy,and isn't it an invasion of that privacy to examin someone's
communication BEFORE it is posted to a public forum? Of course it is. It is
not the Remailer's job to examin the text of a message and then decide if
it should be forwarded to a news server or a mail2nnews gateway. It's the
remailers job to do just that, REMAIL. Once it has left the remailer for a
news server or mail2news service, then, and only then, has it entered the
domain of the public news server and it is up to the news service if it is
delivered to usenet or not.

Zax

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 19 Feb 2006 07:25:17 -0000, Thrasher Remailer wrote in
Message-Id: <GVY6D4PX38767.6425578704@reece.net.au>:

> The one thing I have noticed in this whole saga is the silence of most of
> the remops.
> Zax said something that amounted to sitting in the fence.

I'm in a slightly different position because I run a mail2news and a
news service. Because of this, I never apply any filters at the
remailer except stright-forward group blocks. On the news service I
filter various things from time to time, some of them based on content.
As somebody pointed out in this thread, there's no point in blocking
thousands of newsgroups because one clever abuser is posting the same
URL to them all. These filters effect everything that goes through the
news server, not just locally posted articles.

Since apa-s stopped bein repeatedly flooded, I think I've only applied
three filters at the news server. Two were spammed URL's and the other
was a persistent attack on somebody called Pappas. I've also
blacklisted some non-anonymous sources from using my mail2news.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iQEVAwUBQ/hUxWoLu9HNUqmMAQre8gf8DhH3qdW5/UYPxW/eI2fC1QZ1cjR/UIDw
vAokXg4j23ToHVcyr6JXpP0MnNKHvSQzU2UxCUE7
R6DbMqmkvAYEnoJJnr7kl+gK
Zh/ 0mwWcoCSYps31N1pSP9DyH5u7pSx9Oi1TnBlpawL
jzam2it8I0B4ZIKYbCY+e
QIBHl9z81NvtVRILu0EFjBsAwFyP+oBa2BpyH0PP
grmGXFN2Q/yovGlLKHUoIXMZ
nu5xO6ZPs2/ zvxqevXxmxrFnePPSlD3krGLyjr5KBWcWZ9RglYW
L0v+fyOEJ27l/
UBa37pzyHel5oJ22gFPc/e5fVbM7gWtKoZfF7ALVOzLbkCjdi3lVtA==
=327S
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
pub 1024D/8ED57743 2003-07-08 Bananasplit Operator
Key fingerprint = 796F 67E0 E890 A0BB BDAE EBB4 94A6 7A09 8ED5 7743
uid Admin <admin.bananasplit.info>

Thrasher Remailer

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

In article <dt9kc5$uoq$1@bananasplit.info>
Zax <fleegle@bananasplit.info> wrote:
>
> On 19 Feb 2006 07:25:17 -0000, Thrasher Remailer wrote in
> Message-Id: <GVY6D4PX38767.6425578704@reece.net.au>:
>
>
> I'm in a slightly different position because I run a mail2news and a
> news service. Because of this, I never apply any filters at the
> remailer except stright-forward group blocks. On the news service I
> filter various things from time to time, some of them based on content.
> As somebody pointed out in this thread, there's no point in blocking
> thousands of newsgroups because one clever abuser is posting the same
> URL to them all. These filters effect everything that goes through the
> news server, not just locally posted articles.
>
> Since apa-s stopped bein repeatedly flooded, I think I've only applied
> three filters at the news server. Two were spammed URL's and the other
> was a persistent attack on somebody called Pappas. I've also
> blacklisted some non-anonymous sources from using my mail2news.
>
>

Your news service and your mail2news server are separate from your
remailer. To clarify, do you do any content filtering on your remailer?

TwistyCreek

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-200602.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> writes:

> But there seems to be an almost religious dislike of using content
> filters, with nobody able to say what is wrong with using them, just that
> they are, somehow, bad.

There was a play/movie some years ago, _Little Murders_, where the protagonist was having his mail intercepted by the FBI. So he started writing letters to himself, but talking to the FBI agent opening the mail, telling him that what he (the agent) was do
ing (reading someone else's mail) was wrong and so on and eventually the FBI agent committed suicide.

Maybe we could flood this Twisted Cocksucker with stuff that he thinks he needs to filter out (I mean, he's sick in the head, you know he sits there reading every XXXXing stupid message comes through his remailer), just fill his head up with garbage and F
UD and maybe he'll shut his XXXXing remailer down. Same thing with this EelBastard. On the other hand, both those remailers make reliable first or middle hops. These shit-eaters can't censor what they can't read.

Allah sucks cock, and Mohammed does too.

--
Noah Carriere

Borked Pseudo Mailed

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

In article <GVY6D4PX38767.6425578704@reece.net.au>
Thrasher Remailer <thrasher@reece.net.au> wrote:
>
> The one thing I have noticed in this whole saga is the silence of most of
> the remops.
> Zax said something that amounted to sitting in the fence.
> Thrasher said he didn't filter on content but didn't say if he never would.
> Bikikii disaproved of content filtering, but only in passing.
> The multiple Eelbashes never shut up...
> .and Twisty changes his view more often than he changes his underware.

Most remops don't participate in this newsgroup. The ones that do
said they don't filter on content. We've yet to hear from Bigapple and
Marco of Winston Smith project. Bigapple hasn't posted here for ages
so I wouldn't expect an answer soon. It would be good if Marco could
respond though, as the winston smith project runs about 5 remailers.

Nomen Nescio

2006-02-19, 8:22 am

On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 13:14:47 +0000, TwistyCreek wrote:

> Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-200602.rodent.frell.theremailer.net>
> writes:
>
>
>
> Maybe we could flood this Twisted Cocksucker with stuff that he thinks he
> needs to filter out

You just don't get it. Filtering on content isn't a pre-emptive activity,
it is reacting to a justified complaint.

Here is an example: somebody complains to the exit remailer operator that
messages are being posted to a newsgroup that the man is an arsonist who
has been setting fires in this town or that town, and that he has a cellar
full of flammable material, etc., etc.

Now that is pretty nasty stuff and could cause real problems for the
victim.

So the remailer operator puts in a filter to block out mention of the
victim's name, his home address - whatever the criminal who is posting the
stuff has put into his messages.

Now the messages no longer appear and the criminal goes somewhere else.

Do you see how that is different from your idea of what 'content
filtering' is?

Now that you have, I hope, a correct idea of content filtering, do you
still think it is a bad thing?

If you do, can you tell us why?

BigappleAdmin

2006-02-19, 10:58 am

In article <e46d6fdfee6fc5ee09366c2be9018ee3@pseudo.borked.net>
Borked Pseudo Mailed <nobody@pseudo.borked.net> wrote:
>
> In article <GVY6D4PX38767.6425578704@reece.net.au>
> Thrasher Remailer <thrasher@reece.net.au> wrote:
>
> Most remops don't participate in this newsgroup. The ones that do
> said they don't filter on content. We've yet to hear from Bigapple and
> Marco of Winston Smith project. Bigapple hasn't posted here for ages
> so I wouldn't expect an answer soon. It would be good if Marco could
> respond though, as the winston smith project runs about 5 remailers.

I don't filter on content.

-=-
This message was sent via two or more anonymous remailing services.

admin

2006-02-19, 10:58 am

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I'd just like to mention that I've left off filtering on content and
will see if blocking newsgroups is really better than putting in filters.

While I'm at it:

bounces are automatically deleted every couple of hours. I don't even look
at them, let alone try to reformat and resend them, as I once did.

Spam filters are in place, but spam is simply deleted. I never see it.

No records are kept of any messages. Everything is either sent on or
deleted, except for the bounces, which, as I said, are deleted every few
hours.

*
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFD+KGLEC+g9Qawm6QRAiMsAKDJnil7Gtpc
5NKfGqTU4aj4pu1vfACfW26w
zVBUYZbXPb4fQj8NU9RpD8c=
=Dcpy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

A.Melon

2006-02-19, 5:46 pm

In article <pan.2006.02.19.16.49.50.693107@eelbash.org>
admin <admin@eelbash.org> wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> I'd just like to mention that I've left off filtering on content and
> will see if blocking newsgroups is really better than putting in filters.
>
> While I'm at it:
>
> bounces are automatically deleted every couple of hours. I don't even look
> at them, let alone try to reformat and resend them, as I once did.
>
> Spam filters are in place, but spam is simply deleted. I never see it.
>
> No records are kept of any messages. Everything is either sent on or
> deleted, except for the bounces, which, as I said, are deleted every few
> hours.
>
> *
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFD+KGLEC+g9Qawm6QRAiMsAKDJnil7Gtpc
5NKfGqTU4aj4pu1vfACfW26w
> zVBUYZbXPb4fQj8NU9RpD8c=
> =Dcpy
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Lying prick!

From Blowjay's page
http://www.cotse.net/users/bluejay/frog/eelbash.html

Eelbash: Contents of posts must be looked at
http://www.cotse.net/users/bluejay/...e-looked-at.txt

Eelbash outs five people
http://www.cotse.net/users/bluejay/...h-outs-five.txt

Eelbash expresses a wish to hack Reliable software
http://www.cotse.net/users/bluejay/...ck-reliable.txt

Eelbash quote: "By the way, boys, I apologize in advance, but in
throwing away the naughty French version of Reliable, and going back to
the good old American version, I neglected to say that I make no
representations as to the length of time that will pass before I again
embrace the delectable French Reliable.

If I see too many instances of nastiness showing up on the net, I may
feel the need to jump back in and start monitoring again; blocking
follows from that ('censorship' to the Shyster); and after that, making
known the id of the scumbags responsible. It goes without saying that
more sophisticated monitoring will follow: keyword searches of content;
monitoring the input to the remailer, etc., etc." (
http://www.cotse.net/users/bluejay/frog/signed-post.txt )

Lying prick!

Non scrivetemi

2006-02-19, 5:46 pm

>
> I was thinking of abuse against one person. For example, some remop
> mentioned a couple of weeks ago that somebody had used his remailer
to
> post to some newsgroup that a man was a child molestor.

What is this? I missed this, what is this about? Was it here, I
didn't see it, where was it?

Nomen Nescio

2006-02-19, 5:46 pm

"Non scrivetemi" <nonscrivetemi@pboxmix.winstonsmith.info> wrote in message
news:d52b129699e19b53d334971bb597a452@pb
oxmix.winstonsmith.info...
> to
>
> What is this? I missed this, what is this about? Was it here, I
> didn't see it, where was it?

<dpmiic$cj6$1@bananasplit.info>

Thrasher Admin

2006-02-19, 5:46 pm

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <GVY6D4PX38767.6425578704@reece.net.au>
Thrasher Remailer <thrasher@reece.net.au> wrote:
>
>
> Thrasher said he didn't filter on content but didn't say if he never would.

Don't and won't.

- --
Cheers,
Thrasher...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A

iQEVAwUBQ/hd3Ge9vBuCUlx7AQHoeQgAoUA/ekdtGhAam+RyXKdty9XWBAZQMofv
tYM0uSs2UO5qvNC08zUXWihX+iesZD0BIbuP7WEv
5LUoZPZYYDyiaKFo5Ju3CUKF
IKrh2PUJ/XjLGNRK4dGqH/FFLiVLziBdylm/Coxi7n9d6EW3l70BwqSx9e4codcM
T3tZ5pCa3O5xnBszf+d4tAkW0dkT9bS5DYarqZ1L
XiK74C0cDX9A+IyD62vaVazr
1+oQTDHKHHimI4v6NO27rDCxuLiJ7oGQniPqVsQ+
299WgSDAlWGEBsL3/3k3phtI
Z7hPez6/bNuzUR5wcu9cLTr1Qdc6nClCLbLkyb2e+og/Zq5pcoCOpQ==
=eEqB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

TwistyCreek

2006-02-19, 5:46 pm

In article <YFZAK3SO38767.343599537@twistycreek.com>
TwistyCreek <anon@comments.header> wrote:
>
> Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-200602.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> writes:
>
>
> There was a play/movie some years ago, _Little Murders_, where the protagonist was having his mail intercepted by the FBI. So he started writing letters to himself, but talking to the FBI agent opening the mail, telling him that what he (the agent) was
doing (reading someone else's mail) was wrong and so on and eventually the FBI agent committed suicide.
>
> Maybe we could flood this Twisted Cocksucker with stuff that he thinks he needs to filter out (I mean, he's sick in the head, you know he sits there reading every XXXXing stupid message comes through his remailer), just fill his head up with garbage and
FUD and maybe he'll shut his XXXXing remailer down. Same thing with this EelBastard. On the other hand, both those remailers make reliable first or middle hops. These shit-eaters can't censor what they can't read.
>
> Allah sucks cock, and Mohammed does too.
>
> --
> Noah Carriere

Noah Carriere sucks cock, and Noah Carriere takes cock in the XXX.

George Orwell

2006-02-19, 5:46 pm

On 19 Feb 2006, TwistyCreek <anon@comments.header> wrote:
>
>Allah sucks cock, and Mohammed does too.
>

Mohammed was a fraud, and his followers are the idiots who are too stupid
to see it. Kill all the muslims, and raise the planetary IQ.

Non scrivetemi

2006-02-20, 2:45 am

In article < fe5192e02b8d205b188aa48245c787c0@mixmast
er.it>
George Orwell <nobody@mixmaster.it> wrote:
>
> On 19 Feb 2006, TwistyCreek <anon@comments.header> wrote:
>
> Mohammed was a fraud, and his followers are the idiots who are too stupid
> to see it. Kill all the muslims, and raise the planetary IQ.

That's fine, just don't draw any cartoons.

Anonymous

2006-02-20, 2:45 am

In article <GLMBQLV038767.7291898148@twistycreek.com>
TwistyCreek <anon@comments.header> wrote:
>
> Noah Carriere sucks cock, and Noah Carriere takes cock in the XXX.

Oh my goodness! Not at the same time I hope.

BiKiKii Admin

2006-02-20, 2:45 am

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On 19 Feb 2006, Thrasher Remailer wrote:

[content filters]

>The one thing I have noticed in this whole saga is the silence of most of the remops.
>
>Bikikii disaproved of content filtering, but only in passing.
>

BiKiKii has/does/will not employ any content filters.

Only some transaction level and some HTML/attachment rules.
These are only applied to inbound messages and do not affect remailer messages.

We've posted examples before and here again.
See below.

Ciao!

BiKiKii

Here are some Tranaction level filtering rules:

S, "*erection*", BS-, "554 Rejected - No Limp Dick! - Message Refused."
S, "*weightloss*", BS-, "554 Rejected - Pound This! - Message Refused."
S, "*win*xp*", BS-, "554 Rejected - We Don't Need No Stink'n Wares. - Message Refused."

Here are some General filtering rules:

If attachment ExtnPart lists "gif,zip" Delete ""
If attachment ExtnPart lists " ade,adp,asx,bas,bat,chm,cmd,cnf,com,cpl,
crt,eml,exe" Delete ""
If attachment ExtnPart lists " hlp,hta,inf,ins,isp,js,jse,lnk,mhtml,ole
,ops,pcd,pif" Delete ""
If attachment ExtnPart lists " prf,reg,scr,sct,shb,shs,url,vb,vbe,vbs,w
md,wmf,wmz,xnk" Delete ""
If attachment ExtnPart matches "ma[dfgmqrstvw]" Delete ""
If attachment ExtnPart matches "md[abetwz]" Delete ""
If attachment ExtnPart matches "ms[cipt]" Delete ""
If attachment ExtnPart matches "ws[cfh]" Delete ""

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A

iQEVAwUBQ/lFQvRwi/QFFzi5AQENSwf/XNZp0J/OuwmwsHO2mW08edkpSgxTcBHM
oJQCGJiUr7fhSmSCIiw6NmxI4pfG0YtI45VYSTzP
nXrXiyrRp6Y2vyYMT7m6+cNv
MeiPAAl4S5ecwlTFg41f8E9YIImuynNePbJwrTTx
4eneQ71Y17+9LIrvvzZ0RX/b
uB2QSFq79fxfNWvGdeWLclGu8MNoyoEL7RLzs0uH
nrN45U4ml8p4ffTLXj2F1+Dp
uXucz2UYWh0C8E8tiCAO7LDiUix8SqOZtBxxqFV8
h4C0PKH5ZBblrVyOkMEu8vKh
8KlMoj57BD8cRpAG6ljqH44TW3VnfsQi8PUimL0Y
+ArCwpP1/KREoQ==
=aRJ6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

privacy.at Anonymous Remailer

2006-02-20, 5:47 pm

"Borked Pseudo Mailed" <nobody@pseudo.borked.net> wrote in message
news:e46d6fdfee6fc5ee09366c2be9018ee3@ps
eudo.borked.net...
> In article <GVY6D4PX38767.6425578704@reece.net.au>
> Thrasher Remailer <thrasher@reece.net.au> wrote:
>
> Most remops don't participate in this newsgroup. The ones that do
> said they don't filter on content. We've yet to hear from Bigapple and
> Marco of Winston Smith project. Bigapple hasn't posted here for ages
> so I wouldn't expect an answer soon. It would be good if Marco could
> respond though, as the winston smith project runs about 5 remailers.

Over the years I've seen every remop who does participate here get raked
over the coals for some reason or another. Seems to go with the territory.
There's only been a couple who deserved it. Some got reamed and saw the
light (or at least got quiet about what they needed to do) others, ahem,
just continue to be as dense as lead.

I appreciate those remops who do write here from time to time. It's one of
the only ways we have of deciding whom to trust.

Dingo Admin

2006-02-20, 5:47 pm

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On Mon, 20 Feb 2006, "privacy.at Anonymous Remailer"
<mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> wrote:
>
>I appreciate those remops who do write here from time to time. It's one of
>the only ways we have of deciding whom to trust.

Hello.

Dingo Admin
dingoadmin@dingoremailer.com

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A

iQEVAwUBQ/ oO+sP4uvjsmaBlAQEzBQf+PbJG2oPIAdPfLqK3Tw
ercoNftaWFeJIV
SAjDtZAnzWtFQKQuEdsksBO6sDAL2QHO+lDvwT8F
9ZIUbPpz0QShgubXHuuf3iyd
P/jWPQnFYIPSqa9R9hSM55w/ stelDCaQTOoxcHa2M313U52mrFQldK4kWyfGQDJf

M8u5fbnbYezJ7uVi1ZUQzlBliyjPZYo9264Cxv9Q
gjKojOfVxIk45z2/uVzWB+iv
IOFP5j5Bs7rKhulAVkcqO88iclbB07gc9qYIDBE6
6p7zHut5fFZ5luJuCJhE1LFR
arK0EahgOdsaVnTw0q1B8mf1JlnbsnmKafNVgTkJ
1r5GADiQonyWUA==
=Xi/t
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Zax

2006-02-20, 8:46 pm

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On Mon, 20 Feb 2006 06:56:26 -0700, privacy.at Anonymous Remailer wrote in
Message-Id: < e32becec0891378bbb51132639665713@remaile
r.privacy.at>:

> I appreciate those remops who do write here from time to time. It's one of
> the only ways we have of deciding whom to trust.

There are some very good remops who rarely post here. This group has
gone through hard times over the last few years and many of the old
Cypherpunks just moved their discussions elsewhere. We need something
new, like Mixminion, to stimulate new discussions and engage new people
in threads. The current political times certainly warrant interest in
privacy.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iQEVAwUBQ/pdo2oLu9HNUqmMAQoUpQf/UPQuReLItY2QdetcgkJuqY28Li0Df8ys
9SXLEj51D1U6QH0cyG1tdLJuahDTwl9skhwYptf7
5s1AYb1+yQSdiWd8PlU0wcWD
6T71pG4JDcjvIuNrARff54c7t2pI7y4zqd3/US/2asPQfCMW+FTFf3CdvQqS+ZMN
4nRDmsttBpDVe0+0jAzuXwzHk1CQD7g0coCQ3e3B
rX1cktgaOegzBwXy1gfVAIUj
0FedjrkREeQlKsEO+bImI51pCwXvIo86xRR8pBL6
FR4SEpXbvwm3n9RvhWLch8hH
p6IAfWErgPGZWgzg48WfZckLttxcX+V+oe3s0QkD
PjYhc+C7tLZgEQ==
=N7vZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
pub 1024D/8ED57743 2003-07-08 Bananasplit Operator
Key fingerprint = 796F 67E0 E890 A0BB BDAE EBB4 94A6 7A09 8ED5 7743
uid Admin <admin.bananasplit.info>

TwistyCreek

2006-02-21, 2:46 am

>Hello

Now that's a trust inspiring post. Not some shifty Hi, not a cavalier
Howdy, but a rock solid, "you can trust me" Hello.

My new chain is Dingo,Dingo,Dingo.

Borked Pseudo Mailed

2006-02-21, 2:46 am

In article <GGU7OXC038768.5368055556@anonymous.poster>,
dingoadmin@dingoremailer.com says...
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> On Mon, 20 Feb 2006, "privacy.at Anonymous Remailer"
> <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> wrote:
>
> Hello.

'sup

Dingo Admin

2006-02-21, 2:46 am

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On 21 Feb 2006, TwistyCreek <thrasher@reece.net.au> wrote:
>
>Now that's a trust inspiring post. Not some shifty Hi, not a cavalier
>Howdy, but a rock solid, "you can trust me" Hello.
>
>My new chain is Dingo,Dingo,Dingo.

<G>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: N/A

iQEVAwUBQ/rOdsP4uvjsmaBlAQHKmQgAlFCoqflT//qgW2ODJ0T5uqiRQDvpyA5n
/wGqzDdDX0yZ0QBvGDHZZtTZdSsknbQ/CCv4OIGUeu5xIb6l789B4LAKer9xYBVe
z8jnuCIGeO1GrK9v9DLlYKf7TjqBfJqlWceNJ8ZX
5jes0O4IC9EKKyq+nGeqxetB
44HTLqHwazi+DLqs02KhhnNXQOQU5xu72KbiTLSu
K7sgQk3FusxScwmuAFXFbZtb
0zBtTNKofRZU2nqTK1/ Nr4xQClgEV3ANKG5MozydtdqiPzjQUmFiGvOIUI0
hjkwy
t0N2fhdSYmVvsXAr1STIKgoicLcZtiQ62MHZsBhc
zk1sQKy9R9UB/A==
=ljJl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Borked Pseudo Mailed

2006-02-21, 7:46 am

Dingo Admin wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> On 21 Feb 2006, TwistyCreek <thrasher@reece.net.au> wrote:
>
> <G>

Oh, you think that's funny do you?

Don't for one second fool yourself into believing we didn't see that smug
little smirk on your face. Are you all impressed with your ability to
sucker the newbies with that transparently fake "hello" of yours?

We got your number now pal. You're obviously a TLA puppet!

<grinning>

Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer

2006-02-21, 5:47 pm

In article <499SCKRO38769.5963078704@reece.net.au>
TwistyCreek <thrasher@reece.net.au> wrote:
>
> My new chain is Dingo,Dingo,Dingo.

What actually happens when you use a remailer1,remailer1 type chain?
Does it get sent out only to get sent back again, or does the remailer
process it all in one go.

Zax

2006-02-21, 5:47 pm

On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 16:44:16 +0100 (CET), Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer wrote in
Message-Id: <20060221154416.18B351709E@mail.cypherpunks.to>:

> In article <499SCKRO38769.5963078704@reece.net.au>
> TwistyCreek <thrasher@reece.net.au> wrote:
>
> What actually happens when you use a remailer1,remailer1 type chain?
> Does it get sent out only to get sent back again, or does the remailer
> process it all in one go.

It gets sent out and back again, although it doesn't go beyond the local
MX. Just the same as sending an email to yourself.

--
pub 1024D/8ED57743 2003-07-08 Bananasplit Operator
Key fingerprint = 796F 67E0 E890 A0BB BDAE EBB4 94A6 7A09 8ED5 7743
uid Admin <admin.bananasplit.info>

Anonymous

2006-02-21, 5:47 pm

In article <dtdmj3$dt7$2@bananasplit.info>
Zax <fleegle@bananasplit.info> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 20 Feb 2006 06:56:26 -0700, privacy.at Anonymous Remailer wrote in
> Message-Id: < e32becec0891378bbb51132639665713@remaile
r.privacy.at>:
>
>
> There are some very good remops who rarely post here. This group has
> gone through hard times over the last few years and many of the old
> Cypherpunks just moved their discussions elsewhere. We need something
> new, like Mixminion, to stimulate new discussions and engage new people
> in threads. The current political times certainly warrant interest in
> privacy.

Another thing about the topic of mix remailers is that it is boring, and
not in a bad way. This system is so GOOD. It's so mature. Whether or not
this group's gunk drove people off, there's not a whole lot to talk about.
The remops list is quiet.
Mixminion? Where do people talk about it? The mixminion list seems more
dead than apas. I'd like to become more educated on it and use it more,
but my current state of ignorance has me believing that it's merely an
intellectual toy.
So does all cypherpunk discussion take place on IRC?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
is unverified. You need a valid hashcash token to post to groups other
than alt.test and alt.anonymous.messages. Visit www.panta-rhei.eu.org
for abuse and hashcash info.

Anonymous

2006-02-21, 5:47 pm

Zax <fleegle@bananasplit.info> wrote:

> It gets sent out and back again, although it doesn't go beyond the local
> MX.

It doesn't go beyond the remailer domain's MX, which could be a remote POP
server.

Different with Reliable. Reliable recognizes messages adressed to itself
and processes them in one go.