| Author |
Tor node detect problem?
|
|
|
|
| Anonymous 2007-06-22, 7:14 pm |
| nobody wrote:
> I use http://www.showmyip.com/ to check my setup,
> but when I paste the IP into http://torlist.nullnetwork.net/
> there is often a "false" even though showmyip has
> declared the node a legit tor node... it's just
> happened again... what's going on ?
It's a Jewish conspiracy to make you look stupid.
Working better than expected.
| |
|
| On Sat, 23 Jun 2007 00:25:04 +0200 (CEST), Anonymous wrote:
> nobody wrote:
>
>
> It's a Jewish conspiracy to make you look stupid.
>
> Working better than expected.
NO way, Jews aren't that smart. heh
| |
| Anonymous 2007-06-22, 7:14 pm |
| nobody wrote:
> I use http://www.showmyip.com/ to check my setup,
> but when I paste the IP into http://torlist.nullnetwork.net/
> there is often a "false" even though showmyip has
> declared the node a legit tor node... it's just
> happened again... what's going on ?
Why would you believe a third party has up to date information about the
Tor network, especially when they tell you right up front they're using
MIT's flaky XXX data?
| |
| Anonymous 2007-06-23, 1:15 am |
| Ari wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Jun 2007 00:25:04 +0200 (CEST), Anonymous wrote:
>
>
> NO way, Jews aren't that smart. heh
Why do you think it's "working better than expected"? <g>
| |
| Gogarty 2007-06-25, 1:13 pm |
| In article < 6f72a093b826c04a4e79e691827be501@remaile
r.paranoici.org>,
nobody@remailer.paranoici.org says...
>
>
>nobody wrote:
>
>
>Why would you believe a third party has up to date information about the
>Tor network, especially when they tell you right up front they're using
>MIT's flaky XXX data?
>
Why is it the man asks a perfectly legitimate question and gets only
abuse in return?
| |
| Anonymous 2007-06-25, 7:13 pm |
| Gogarty wrote:
> In article < 6f72a093b826c04a4e79e691827be501@remaile
r.paranoici.org>,
> nobody@remailer.paranoici.org says...
> Why is it the man asks a perfectly legitimate question and gets only
> abuse in return?
Because he's a nymhopping cumbubble who made a fool of himself the day
before. Just like you.
Here cumbubble, let me clue you into something you obviously aren't able
to grasp on your own. You're using Tor, but you're too thick to keep from
letting your usage patterns out your sock puppets anyway. This is just
a tiny sample of raw data regarding your "close proximity" posts to various
groups. Enjoy.
195.71.90.10 bodyodorismything@yahoo.com
195.71.90.10 Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu>
195.71.90.10 puffies@mailinator.com
64.157.15.26 bodyodorismything@yahoo.com
64.157.15.26 Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu>
64.157.15.26 More FUD from Cyberiade <bullshit@mailinator.com>
85.214.91.152 bodyodorismything@yahoo.com
85.214.91.152 Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu>
85.214.91.152 More FUD from Cyberiade <bullshit@mailinator.com>
88.191.13.5 Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu>
88.191.13.5 wazup@mailinator.com
| |
| Borked Pseudo Mailed 2007-06-25, 7:13 pm |
| Gogarty wrote:
> In article < 6f72a093b826c04a4e79e691827be501@remaile
r.paranoici.org>,
> nobody@remailer.paranoici.org says...
> Why is it the man asks a perfectly legitimate question and gets only
> abuse in return?
What is it exactly that you find abusive about asking someone why they'd
blindly trust some web page with a questionable data source?
That's a pretty mild response given the facts.
1. It's common knowledge Tor node IP addresses shown in official router
lists aren't necessarily the address seen by the public when that Tor node
is used as an exit.
2. That reference in particular had just been proved embarrassingly
inaccurate less than 48 hours before the question was asked.
3. If the poster is using Tor and owns some software that can view text
files he has every tool he needs to verify whether an IP address is a Tor
node or not, much more accurately than a third party ever could.
4. It's easy to assume that this "innocent question" is being asked by the
very same rabid troll who embarrassed itself by caterwauling about how
some IP wasn't a Tor node because they trusted a obviously less than
accurate source of information.
Even if none of the above were true, it's not abusive to tell someone they
should think for themselves and question sources. Only the most fragile of
egos would be put off by it.
| |
| Gogarty 2007-06-25, 7:13 pm |
| In article <15c0433de47520e1e3f9dcd1ea337844@awxcnx.de>, mix@awxcnx.de
says...
>
>
>Gogarty wrote:
>
>
>Because he's a nymhopping cumbubble who made a fool of himself the day
>before. Just like you.
>
>Here cumbubble, let me clue you into something you obviously aren't able
>to grasp on your own. You're using Tor, but you're too thick to keep from
>letting your usage patterns out your sock puppets anyway. This is just
>a tiny sample of raw data regarding your "close proximity" posts to various
>groups. Enjoy.
>
> 195.71.90.10 bodyodorismything@yahoo.com
> 195.71.90.10 Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu>
> 195.71.90.10 puffies@mailinator.com
>
> 64.157.15.26 bodyodorismything@yahoo.com
> 64.157.15.26 Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu>
> 64.157.15.26 More FUD from Cyberiade <bullshit@mailinator.com>
>
> 85.214.91.152 bodyodorismything@yahoo.com
> 85.214.91.152 Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu>
> 85.214.91.152 More FUD from Cyberiade <bullshit@mailinator.com>
>
> 88.191.13.5 Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu>
> 88.191.13.5 wazup@mailinator.com
>
More of the same. What's this supposed to prove?
| |
| Gogarty 2007-06-25, 7:13 pm |
| In article <6b7e37008226c7ea3493b54a641602f6@pseudo.borked.net>,
nobody@pseudo.borked.net says...
>
>Even if none of the above were true, it's not abusive to tell someone they
>should think for themselves and question sources. Only the most fragile of
>egos would be put off by it.
>
I agree. What I don't agree with is the ill-mannered contemptuous tone
usually seen here in response to the most innocuous questions.
| |
| Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer 2007-06-25, 7:13 pm |
| In article <MPydndc-o_EWYeLbnZ2dnUVZ_sWdnZ2d@bway.net>
Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu.ie> wrote:
>
> Why is it the man asks a perfectly legitimate question and gets only
> abuse in return?
Telling someone that the site they were citing isn't up to date is
hardly abuse.
Seriously maybe you should consider relocating to web forums instead.
They have moderation and nice shiny colorful emoticons to make you
feel nice and safe. Usenet is obviously too much of a culture shock
for you.
| |
| Gogarty 2007-06-25, 7:13 pm |
| In article < a2d0f636c36392850bf0de6e4b61b7c8@remaile
r.cyberiade.it>,
anonymous@remailer.cyberiade.it says...
>
>
>In article <MPydndc-o_EWYeLbnZ2dnUVZ_sWdnZ2d@bway.net>
>Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu.ie> wrote:
>
>Telling someone that the site they were citing isn't up to date is
>hardly abuse.
>
>Seriously maybe you should consider relocating to web forums instead.
>They have moderation and nice shiny colorful emoticons to make you
>feel nice and safe. Usenet is obviously too much of a culture shock
>for you.
>
Tsk, tsk. Hardly.
| |
| Anonymous 2007-06-25, 7:13 pm |
| On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 21:45:07 +0200, Anonymous wrote:
> Gogarty wrote:
>
>
> Because he's a nymhopping cumbubble who made a fool of himself the day
> before. Just like you.
There is an old saying, that when you lie down with lice, you get lousy.
And you are obviously one of the lice.
| |
| Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer 2007-06-25, 7:13 pm |
| In article <zpKdnVmsWpyurR3bnZ2dnUVZ_uLinZ2d@bway.net>
Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu.ie> wrote:
>
> In article <6b7e37008226c7ea3493b54a641602f6@pseudo.borked.net>,
> nobody@pseudo.borked.net says...
>
> I agree. What I don't agree with is the ill-mannered contemptuous tone
> usually seen here in response to the most innocuous questions.
Go play with your polite but child abusing friends. You're not welcome
here.
| |
| Borked Pseudo Mailed 2007-06-25, 7:13 pm |
| Gogarty wrote:
> In article <15c0433de47520e1e3f9dcd1ea337844@awxcnx.de>, mix@awxcnx.de
> says...
> More of the same. What's this supposed to prove?
I'd say it pretty much proves you're a nym hopping troll who can't use Tor
properly, but that's just a conclusion drawn from examining the facts.
Your delusions may lead you down a different path.
| |
| Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer 2007-06-25, 7:13 pm |
| Gogarty wrote:
> In article <6b7e37008226c7ea3493b54a641602f6@pseudo.borked.net>,
> nobody@pseudo.borked.net says...
>
> I agree. What I don't agree with is the ill-mannered contemptuous tone
> usually seen here in response to the most innocuous questions.
That's really special.
Now tell us again why we should care what you agree with?
| |
| Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer 2007-06-26, 1:14 am |
| Gogarty wrote:
> In article < a2d0f636c36392850bf0de6e4b61b7c8@remaile
r.cyberiade.it>,
> anonymous@remailer.cyberiade.it says...
> Tsk, tsk. Hardly.
Hardly my XXX. 99% of what you post is pantie wetting about how offended
you are by the way people post. Even when it's civil. And the remainder of
your "contribution" is you making a fool of yourself with gross
incompetence and dumb ideas.
You're like the fat ugly chick in HS wasting her life constantly bitching
about how snobby the cheerleaders are because she was to much of a
butterball to fit in the uniform on tryout day.
| |
| Gogarty 2007-06-26, 1:14 am |
| In article <35482fb5a7b2c5114dadb2c97b1bdc67@anon.mixmaster.mixmin.net>,
nobody@mixmin.net says...
>
>
>On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 21:45:07 +0200, Anonymous wrote:
>
>
>There is an old saying, that when you lie down with lice, you get lousy.
>And you are obviously one of the lice.
You people just can't get that expression correct, can you? Why would anyone
pay attention to you?
It's "Lie down with dogs; get up with fleas."
| |
| Gogarty 2007-06-26, 1:14 am |
| In article <35482fb5a7b2c5114dadb2c97b1bdc67@anon.mixmaster.mixmin.net>,
nobody@mixmin.net says...
>
>
>There is an old saying, that when you lie down with lice, you get lousy.
>And you are obviously one of the lice.
And oh yes ... you never fail to rise to the bait.
| |
|
| > Why is it the man asks a perfectly legitimate question and gets only
> abuse in return?
Stephen K. Gielda aswered this question nicely in a recent
post:
"Usenet is just a giant day care center
full of unruly children with sociopathic egos."
Excellently well put.
| |
| Anonymous 2007-06-26, 7:13 pm |
| In article <a858069be74c6f1716ac9c916ace57bd@anon.mixmaster.mixmin.net>
<nobody@mixmin.net> wrote:
>
>
> Stephen K. Gielda aswered this question nicely in a recent
> post:
>
> "Usenet is just a giant day care center
> full of unruly children with sociopathic egos."
Something wrong with that?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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 Sender 2007-06-27, 1:14 am |
| nobody wrote:
>
> Stephen K. Gielda aswered this question nicely in a recent
> post:
>
> "Usenet is just a giant day care center
> full of unruly children with sociopathic egos."
Quoted "nobody", from underneath a Winnie The Pooh blanket over by the
sandbox.
If y'all think Usenet is such a distressing place to be, why are you here
whining about it? Is someone squeezing your little gonads making you post,
or are you just calling yourselves adolescent sociopaths?
| |
| George Orwell 2007-06-27, 1:14 am |
| nobody wrote:
>
> Stephen K. Gielda aswered this question nicely in a recent
> post:
>
> "Usenet is just a giant day care center
> full of unruly children with sociopathic egos."
>
> Excellently well put.
So someones holding a gun to your head making you stay around?
Moron.
| |
| Gogarty 2007-06-27, 1:14 am |
| In article < f9d092f4cdf4abdeff281f8d736b174f@mixmast
er.it>,
nobody@mixmaster.it says...
>
>
>nobody wrote:
>
>
>So someones holding a gun to your head making you stay around?
>
>Moron.
>
Uhhm -- moron? Not the poster.
| |
| Nomen Nescio 2007-06-27, 1:14 am |
| In article <a858069be74c6f1716ac9c916ace57bd@anon.mixmaster.mixmin.net>
<nobody@mixmin.net> wrote:
>
>
> Stephen K. Gielda aswered this question nicely in a recent
> post:
>
> "Usenet is just a giant day care center
> full of unruly children with sociopathic egos."
>
> Excellently well put.
I don't care what you guys say.
Even after all these years, in this group there are still a large number of
brilliant people continuing to think, tweak, develop and help the users of
various anonymous services. I give my thanks to all of them, they know who
they are even if I don't.
| |
| George Orwell 2007-06-27, 7:13 am |
| Nomen Nescio wrote:
> In article <a858069be74c6f1716ac9c916ace57bd@anon.mixmaster.mixmin.net>
> <nobody@mixmin.net> wrote:
>
> I don't care what you guys say.
Nobody does. That's why they're pissing and moaning about how badly
they've been treated while they hang around still trying to impress
someone.
It's rather pathetic actually.
> Even after all these years, in this group there are still a large number of
> brilliant people continuing to think, tweak, develop and help the users of
> various anonymous services. I give my thanks to all of them, they know who
> they are even if I don't.
| |
| Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer 2007-06-27, 1:13 pm |
| Gogarty wrote:
> In article < f9d092f4cdf4abdeff281f8d736b174f@mixmast
er.it>,
> nobody@mixmaster.it says...
> Uhhm -- moron? Not the poster.
You're voluntarily standing in a room you weren't even invited into to
begin with, incessantly whining about what a zoo it is, and you honestly
don't believe you look like supporting talent in the afternoon monkey show
matinee?
I wouldn't exactly call that Mensa material there kiddo...
| |
|
| "Usenet is just a giant day care center
full of unruly children with sociopathic egos."
around?[vbcol=seagreen]
Nicely proved - again. LOL.
[vbcol=seagreen]
> You're voluntarily standing in a room you weren't even
>invited into
This is Usenet. Nobody needs an invitation from a twat.
> incessantly whining about what a zoo it is, and you
> honestly don't believe you look like supporting talent
> in the afternoon monkey show matinee?
> I wouldn't exactly call that Mensa material there kiddo...
What are you talking about? Apparently you're trying to be
smart. I'd guess 17 or 18 perhaps, and that's being
generous.
If you're older - you'd better not reply and just and shut
the XXXX up, because you've got a problem, and the more you
post the stupider you look.
| |
| George Orwell 2007-06-27, 1:13 pm |
| Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote:
> Gogarty wrote:
>
>
> You're voluntarily standing in a room you weren't even invited into to
> begin with, incessantly whining about what a zoo it is, and you honestly
> don't believe you look like supporting talent in the afternoon monkey show
> matinee?
ROTFL!
How big of a moron does someone actually have to be to stick around just to
keep telling everyone how bad they don't want to be here?
>
> I wouldn't exactly call that Mensa material there kiddo...
| |
| Anonymous Sender 2007-06-27, 1:13 pm |
| nobody wrote:
> "Usenet is just a giant day care center
> full of unruly children with sociopathic egos."
>
> around?
>
> Nicely proved - again. LOL.
>
>
> This is Usenet. Nobody needs an invitation from a twat.
ROTFLMAO!!!!!
Somebody just got their little bottom **SPANKED**. 
>
>
>
> What are you talking about? Apparently you're trying to be
> smart. I'd guess 17 or 18 perhaps, and that's being
> generous.
> If you're older - you'd better not reply and just and shut
> the XXXX up, because you've got a problem, and the more you
> post the stupider you look.
| |
| Borked Pseudo Mailed 2007-06-27, 1:13 pm |
| nobody wrote:
> "Usenet is just a giant day care center
> full of unruly children with sociopathic egos."
>
> around?
>
> Nicely proved - again. LOL.
>
>
> This is Usenet. Nobody needs an invitation from a twat.
Uh, dumbXXXX, that's the point. You don't need an invitation to come OR go.
The only reason someone who whines like you do could possibly have to stick
around is some sadistic need to have your dumbXXXX ego pummeled by the
"twats" you're whining about.
You're about three steps further down on the evolutionary scale than the
people you're ragging about sonny, because you're the same breed of cat
but you don't even like it here. Sorry your pathetic "you're all the same"
rant turned around and took a chunk out of your dumbXXXX XXX, but that's
just the way it is. You're at least twice as pathetic as someone who is
here just to be a dick.
| |
| George Orwell 2007-06-27, 7:13 pm |
| nobody wrote:
> "Usenet is just a giant day care center
> full of unruly children with sociopathic egos."
>
> around?
>
> Nicely proved - again. LOL.
Yeah.... "I can't quit replying to everything even though I claim there's
no reason for anyone to be here".
Nicely proved indeed you poor, pathetic, moron.
>
>
> This is Usenet. Nobody needs an invitation from a twat.
>
>
>
> What are you talking about? Apparently you're trying to be
> smart. I'd guess 17 or 18 perhaps, and that's being
> generous.
> If you're older - you'd better not reply and just and shut
> the XXXX up, because you've got a problem, and the more you
> post the stupider you look.
| |
| Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer 2007-06-27, 7:13 pm |
| nobody wrote:
> "Usenet is just a giant day care center
> full of unruly children with sociopathic egos."
>
> around?
>
> Nicely proved - again. LOL.
>
>
> This is Usenet. Nobody needs an invitation from a twat.
>
>
>
> What are you talking about? Apparently you're trying to be
> smart. I'd guess 17 or 18 perhaps, and that's being
> generous.
> If you're older - you'd better not reply and just and shut
Do I smell desperation?
You betcha.
"PLEASE stop pointing out what a pathetic hypocrite I am. PLEASE!"
Quit begging you sniveling little cunt. We'll only plow you deeper and
harder.
> the XXXX up, because you've got a problem, and the more you
> post the stupider you look.
| |
| George Orwell 2007-06-27, 7:13 pm |
| George Orwell wrote:
> Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote:
>
>
> ROTFL!
>
> How big of a moron does someone actually have to be to stick around just to
> keep telling everyone how bad they don't want to be here?
Pretty damned big since this isn't the first time the moron has gone off
on this pathetic rant.
Don't like it? Get the XXXX out. Simple as that.
[vbcol=seagreen]
>
| |
| George Orwell 2007-06-27, 7:13 pm |
| Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote:
> Gogarty wrote:
>
>
> You're voluntarily standing in a room you weren't even invited into to
> begin with, incessantly whining about what a zoo it is, and you honestly
> don't believe you look like supporting talent in the afternoon monkey show
> matinee?
>
> I wouldn't exactly call that Mensa material there kiddo...
Wanna know just how much of a pathetic moron this poor bastard is? So
pathetic he'll post just to tell people he's not going to post something
because it's so much nicer somewhere else:
<cut>
Subject: More TOR
From: Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu>
Message-ID: <HMCdnfNhWLRC0F7YnZ2dnUVZ_tHinZ2d@bway.net>
I have some reasonable questions about how to get the most out of TOR.
But I am not going to post them here, even though the answers might be
useful to others. Too many people suffering from Tourette's Syndrome.
There is another group with people as knowledgeable, or more so, as
people here. But unlike here, those people believe in civil discourse.
</cut>
But yet the pathetic bastard is STILL here whining about what a bad place
it is. It's just not natural. What manner of bizarre compulsions makes
someone go on and on about the people around him and not bother to heed
the glowing neon EXIT sign over the huge open door?
Sounds like someone whose obsessed to me. Sounds like Eelbash. <shrug>
| |
| Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer 2007-06-27, 7:13 pm |
| Anonymous wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 21:45:07 +0200, Anonymous wrote:
>
>
> There is an old saying, that when you lie down with lice, you get lousy.
> And you are obviously one of the lice.
So what's that make something like you? I mean, here you are endlessly
wallowing in the lice pit trying to pretend you're something better.
At least some of us aren't obsessing over trying to be the thing we're
bitching about. ;)
| |
| Gogarty 2007-06-27, 7:13 pm |
| In article <e06cffc4bf3bea45c64a293fc8b8805f@pseudo.borked.net>,
nobody@pseudo.borked.net says...
>
>
>nobody wrote:
>
>
>Uh, dumbXXXX, that's the point. You don't need an invitation to come OR go.
>The only reason someone who whines like you do could possibly have to stick
>around is some sadistic need to have your dumbXXXX ego pummeled by the
>"twats" you're whining about.
>
>You're about three steps further down on the evolutionary scale than the
>people you're ragging about sonny, because you're the same breed of cat
>but you don't even like it here. Sorry your pathetic "you're all the same"
>rant turned around and took a chunk out of your dumbXXXX XXX, but that's
>just the way it is. You're at least twice as pathetic as someone who is
>here just to be a dick.
>
Sounds like the rant of a gawky geeky seventeen-year old whose parents won't
trust him beyond the front door.
| |
| Gogarty 2007-06-27, 7:13 pm |
| In article < 7211c718b8ab39815c58cc1df781af43@mixmast
er.it>,
nobody@mixmaster.it says...
>
>
>Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer wrote:
>
>
>Wanna know just how much of a pathetic moron this poor bastard is? So
>pathetic he'll post just to tell people he's not going to post something
>because it's so much nicer somewhere else:
>
><cut>
>Subject: More TOR
>From: Gogarty <Gogarty@Clongowes.edu>
>Message-ID: <HMCdnfNhWLRC0F7YnZ2dnUVZ_tHinZ2d@bway.net>
>
>I have some reasonable questions about how to get the most out of TOR.
>But I am not going to post them here, even though the answers might be
>useful to others. Too many people suffering from Tourette's Syndrome.
>There is another group with people as knowledgeable, or more so, as
>people here. But unlike here, those people believe in civil discourse.
></cut>
>
>But yet the pathetic bastard is STILL here whining about what a bad place
>it is. It's just not natural. What manner of bizarre compulsions makes
>someone go on and on about the people around him and not bother to heed
>the glowing neon EXIT sign over the huge open door?
>
>Sounds like someone whose obsessed to me. Sounds like Eelbash. <shrug>
>
Keep lengthy logs for a long time, do you? Is that proper conduct in a news
group about privacy?
| |
| Anonymous 2007-06-28, 1:14 am |
| Gogarty wrote:
> In article <e06cffc4bf3bea45c64a293fc8b8805f@pseudo.borked.net>,
> nobody@pseudo.borked.net says...
> Sounds like the rant of a gawky geeky seventeen-year old whose parents won't
> trust him beyond the front door.
That "gawky geeky" mamma's boy just kicked your pathetic XXX.
You obviously can't stand the fact that someone pegged you so easily. I
you believed half of the shit you spew about Usenet you'd be gone a long
time ago, but here you are still trying to "fit in".
That's sad.
| |
| Anonymous 2007-06-28, 1:14 am |
| Gogarty wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Keep lengthy logs for a long time, do you? Is that proper conduct in a news
> group about privacy?
What "logs"???
That's a quote from a post you made about four months ago. It's probably
still available on every NNTP server on the planet, and I doubt there's a
news reader in the same general vicinity that doesn't have a "download all
headers" button.
What, you really thought anybody but Google respected your silly
X-No-Archive header?
*chuckle*
You poor, dumb, bunny. Consider this a valuable lesson you learned in a
privacy group you keep putting down. ;)
| |
| Anonymous Sender 2007-06-28, 1:14 am |
| Gogarty wrote:
> Keep lengthy logs for a long time, do you? Is that proper conduct in a news
> group about privacy?
Logs?! What "logs" do you think that came from, whiner?
And yeah, it's perfect behavior for a group like this. Using the public
posts of an XNA coward which can still be found on any news server that's
NOT Google to document what an adolescent hypocrite they are, keeps the
noobs from screwing themselves by listening to the incompetent "advice"
idiots like you hand out on those rare occasions you're doing something
besides blubbering like a prison XXXXX.
And for what it's worth prag, I happen to run my own news server so I have
an even bigger cache of your stupidity than most ISP servers. Care to
put it to a test?
How about we dredge out the dozen or so posts where you "advised" people
to use a file naming utility to hide files from snoops, until finally
someone took pity on your dumb XXX and clued you in to the fact that the
junk software you were recommending logged every file it renamed?
Or what about your tirade about Tor being no better than a chain of three
open proxies because node operators could see where encrypted traffic was
coming from and going to, and your bald faced lies about not having said it
shortly after it finally disappeared from Google?
Message-ID: <-JadnS7Fo-e3fyvYnZ2dnUVZ_v3inZ2d@bway.net>
"If that is possible then TOR is useless."
Message-ID: <OYWdnRW416OmDJzbnZ2dnUVZ_ujinZ2d@bway.net>
"I have never, ever even imputed that TOR was useless as an anonymity
tool."
Or how about your idiotic claim that you had some secret way to killfile a
single remailer user?
Message-ID: <Le-dnT-LQflAi5HbnZ2dnUVZ_obinZ2d@bway.net>
"I have my ways"
Message-ID: <UM6dncB3GrA3bZHbnZ2dnUVZ_szinZ2d@bway.net>
"Nope. Forty new messages. Ten killed. They don't even appear, as if they
never existed."
I have ALL that shit right here at my fingertips, coward, and it's high
time you and all the rest of your yellow bellied clansmen realized Google
isn't the only news archive in the world, and that SOME of us know how to
search a server for a specific thread or message ID without having to have
our little hands held by a dumbed down web interface. Your stupid XNA
isn't anything but a joke you're playing on yourself, dumbass.
| |
| Gogarty 2007-06-28, 1:14 pm |
| In article < 1a92612eb57f1b11e4584d049c13efbc@remaile
r.metacolo.com>,
anonymous@remailer.metacolo.com says...
>
>
>Gogarty wrote:
>
>
>Logs?! What "logs" do you think that came from, whiner?
>
>And yeah, it's perfect behavior for a group like this. Using the public
>posts of an XNA coward which can still be found on any news server that's
>NOT Google to document what an adolescent hypocrite they are, keeps the
>noobs from screwing themselves by listening to the incompetent "advice"
>idiots like you hand out on those rare occasions you're doing something
>besides blubbering like a prison XXXXX.
>
>And for what it's worth prag, I happen to run my own news server so I have
>an even bigger cache of your stupidity than most ISP servers. Care to
>put it to a test?
>
>How about we dredge out the dozen or so posts where you "advised" people
>to use a file naming utility to hide files from snoops, until finally
>someone took pity on your dumb XXX and clued you in to the fact that the
>junk software you were recommending logged every file it renamed?
>
>Or what about your tirade about Tor being no better than a chain of three
>open proxies because node operators could see where encrypted traffic was
>coming from and going to, and your bald faced lies about not having said it
>shortly after it finally disappeared from Google?
>
>Message-ID: <-JadnS7Fo-e3fyvYnZ2dnUVZ_v3inZ2d@bway.net>
>
> "If that is possible then TOR is useless."
>
>Message-ID: <OYWdnRW416OmDJzbnZ2dnUVZ_ujinZ2d@bway.net>
>
> "I have never, ever even imputed that TOR was useless as an anonymity
> tool."
>
>Or how about your idiotic claim that you had some secret way to killfile a
>single remailer user?
>
>Message-ID: <Le-dnT-LQflAi5HbnZ2dnUVZ_obinZ2d@bway.net>
>
> "I have my ways"
>
>Message-ID: <UM6dncB3GrA3bZHbnZ2dnUVZ_szinZ2d@bway.net>
>
> "Nope. Forty new messages. Ten killed. They don't even appear, as if they
> never existed."
>
>I have ALL that shit right here at my fingertips, coward, and it's high
>time you and all the rest of your yellow bellied clansmen realized Google
>isn't the only news archive in the world, and that SOME of us know how to
>search a server for a specific thread or message ID without having to have
>our little hands held by a dumbed down web interface. Your stupid XNA
>isn't anything but a joke you're playing on yourself, dumbass.
>
Well, bully for you. And you never do fail to rise to the bait, do you?
Pathetic dweeb.
| |
| Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer 2007-06-28, 1:14 pm |
| Gogarty wrote:
> Well, bully for you. And you never do fail to rise to the bait, do you?
This is another one of your more notable traits. When someone pins you to
the mat like they just did by dissecting your XNA nonsense, you pretend
you "baited" them into it. Your malodorous "I meant to do that" defense
response.
We all know normal people don't "bait" others into exposing their own
ignorance. Of course normal people don't pretend looking messages up on
news servers is "logging" just to try and drag others down to their own
level, either. Now do they? ;)
You didn't answer the question by the way. Were you operating under the
assumption that someone besides Google paid any attention to XNA headers?
I'll bet you were, but you'll deny it now that you've tried to sidestep
the question without success.
You're really not hard to figure out you know. I'm sure your simple mind
has convinced you that you're crafty and complex, but nothing is farther
from the truth. Of all the people who post here you're probably the most
predictably prepubescent and laughably pathetic, alternately trying to
convince people you teased the wolves just to see what it felt like to
have an arm chewed off above the elbow, and whining about how sharp their
teeth are.
| |
|
| > Uh, dumbXXXX, that's the point. You don't need an invitation to come OR go.
> The only reason someone who whines like you do could possibly have to stick
> around is some sadistic need to have your dumbXXXX ego pummeled by the
> "twats" you're whining about.
But there was no pummeling twatie, only your incoherent
barking. And your off topic responses are fun to read.
> You're about three steps further down on the evolutionary scale than the
> people you're ragging about sonny, because you're the same breed of cat
> but you don't even like it here. Sorry your pathetic "you're all the same"
> rant turned around and took a chunk out of your dumbXXXX XXX, but that's
> just the way it is. You're at least twice as pathetic as someone who is
> here just to be a dick.
This response took you some time, especially the 'creative'
evolution stuff. The obvious conclusion is that your
McDonald's manager gave you the day off.
| |
| Borked Pseudo Mailed 2007-06-28, 7:13 pm |
| nobody wrote:
>
> But there was no pummeling twatie, only your incoherent
> barking. And your off topic responses are fun to read.
>
>
> This response took you some time, especially the 'creative'
> evolution stuff. The obvious conclusion is that your
> McDonald's manager gave you the day off.
Point proved.
| |
| Cyberiade.it Anonymous Remailer 2007-06-28, 7:13 pm |
| nobody wrote:
>
> But there was no pummeling twatie, only your incoherent
> barking. And your off topic responses are fun to read.
You enjoy being pummeled?
>
>
> This response took you some time, especially the 'creative'
> evolution stuff. The obvious conclusion is that your
> McDonald's manager gave you the day off.
That you'd think someone holding an honest job is an insult speaks volumes
about you, kid.
| |
| Borked Pseudo Mailed 2007-06-28, 7:13 pm |
| nobody wrote:
>
> But there was no pummeling twatie, only your incoherent
> barking. And your off topic responses are fun to read.
>
>
> This response took you some time, especially the 'creative'
> evolution stuff. The obvious conclusion is that your
> McDonald's manager gave you the day off.
Um, I know you really WANTED to fire back with a scathing reply that would
send your opponent running for cover, but all you really accomplished was
acting exactly as the poster said you would, and confirming the fact that
you're a bit sore from the pummeling.
| |
| Anonymous Sender 2007-06-28, 7:13 pm |
| nobody wrote:
>
> But there was no pummeling twatie, only your incoherent
> barking. And your off topic responses are fun to read.
ROTFL!
"Never happened", and "I meant to do that".
The last ditch efforts of every defeated child.
Out any Tor nodes lately?
LOL!!!
| |
| Anonymous 2007-06-28, 7:13 pm |
| Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote:
> nobody wrote:
>
>
> Point proved.
Indeed. I've always wondered why some people think acting like a twat to
try and prove what a twat someone else is gets them anywhere.
Or why they think the McDonald's canard is anything but lame... ;-)
|
|
|
|