Why is nextgens trying to kill 0.5?  If he doesn't want to use
it then why doesn't he just not use it and filter out stuff he
doesn't want to read on 0.7?

Don't believe me? Here is proof of the dastard's intent:

> [20:12:25] <nextgens> Zothar_Work> I need to talk about bringing 0.5 d
own with toad
> [20:12:38] <nextgens> Zothar_Work> I've got some ideas on how to do it
> [20:12:52] <nextgens> that would definitly shut up 0.5 trolls, wouldn'
t it ?
> [20:14:08] <Zothar_Work> nextgens: yeah, that would probably do it
> [20:14:13] <FuriousRage> censoring at hand?
> [20:14:24] <nextgens> it's not about censoring
> [20:14:30] <Zothar_Work> I find it interesting that Frost on 0.5 doesn
't seem to be having the board spoofing problem 0.7 does
> [20:14:36] <nextgens> it's about prooving that 0.5 has to be replaced 

> [20:14:43] <Zothar_Work> FuriousRage: vulnerability demonstration
> [20:15:19] <Zothar_Work> that would be indirect "settling"


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

It would be useful if you'd explain what you are talking about.

Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote:
> Why is nextgens trying to kill 0.5?  If he doesn't want to use
> it then why doesn't he just not use it and filter out stuff he
> doesn't want to read on 0.7?
>
> Don't believe me? Here is proof of the dastard's intent:

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

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

nospam <nospamatall@iol.ie> wrote in news:f0bd2k$q8u$2@aioe.org:

> It would be useful if you'd explain what you are talking about.

I think they're referrring to freenetproject.org and the people using
the new pre-alpha version 0.7 trying to kill off the existing, stable
0.5 network.

I also believe that there's also no reason to be concerned about it.
Too many users of 0.5 (including myself) are going along with a new
project that's forking from freenet called fogweb.

[vbcol=seagreen]
> Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote: 



- --
http://blog.peculiarplace.com
http://offthecuff.lurasbookcase.com
http://peculiarplace.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32) - GPGshell v3.52

iQEVAwUBRipAxHV+YnyE1GYEAQhPSgf/YXkL1tbfUZr3OD3u8JlHt8rDOs9/agfR
 LC5lrEzWUzS+wCFTrWd34uTmfXENUnNaEP7oZicr
uorj2az1DAeU3RsEfWGbLYZW
 TkCwGuEZ7maSU9COFbnzQBsZ3GtgFgv+qU2GK3aU
WRBz8/h/kPnMR2c6/fIaR12b
 +U6IYIoVbPbctNyRhEkOSwDW5E2inrIAs+pZU3mh
40r7yi6xx/p/CkC8h7y57gy7
 FOOOVy+V+rwmGkoklFf+6JVWHKMpbcH+rgyVFfS0
EazsnD5mwq6AUd7nJi/2no2z
 fDN1RnlYj8uGbbEnX7UdagWXJEFXBnbG7D216TcW
yqPBbjAtYG1nuQ==
=vGPl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Ed wrote:
> nospam <nospamatall@iol.ie> wrote in news:f0bd2k$q8u$2@aioe.org:
> 
>
> I think they're referrring to freenetproject.org and the people using
> the new pre-alpha version 0.7 trying to kill off the existing, stable
> 0.5 network.
>
> I also believe that there's also no reason to be concerned about it.
> Too many users of 0.5 (including myself) are going along with a new
> project that's forking from freenet called fogweb.

Thanks.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]