Daeron wrote:
 > flatfish+++ wrote:
 >
 >> What is the purpose? Does anyone care where a particular message
 >> actually originates from?
 >
 >
 > obviously not you gary .. :]
 >
 > http://snipurl.com/4v1j
 > msg: <pan.2001.11.04.18.40.04.948.1091@mindspring.com>

Pwahaha, now this is the good stuff, nothing like a good troll slapping.

Thanks for the url Daeron

On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 20:00:10 GMT, Philip Callan wrote:

> Daeron wrote:
>  > flatfish+++ wrote:
>  >
>  >> What is the purpose? Does anyone care where a particular message
>  >> actually originates from?
>  >
>  >
>  > obviously not you gary .. :]
>  >
>  > http://snipurl.com/4v1j
>  > msg: <pan.2001.11.04.18.40.04.948.1091@mindspring.com>
> 
> Pwahaha, now this is the good stuff, nothing like a good troll slapping.
> 
> Thanks for the url Daeron

.... And lo, Philip again starts in with ad hominem attacks instead of
actually advocating Linux.

I have to ask you again: are you so bored with your Linux distribution not
working that you're spending all of its downtime attacking people on here?

Particularly those people who do more actual Linux advocacy than you do on
this group, such as flatfish.
-- 
Painful memories holding you back?
Regret from past experiences getting you down?
Lacuna Inc. can help you forget.
http://www.lacunainc.com

On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 20:00:10 GMT, Philip Callan <callanca@shaw.ca>
wrote:

>Daeron wrote:
> > flatfish+++ wrote:
> >
> >> What is the purpose? Does anyone care where a particular message
> >> actually originates from?
> >
> >
> > obviously not you gary .. :]
> >
> > http://snipurl.com/4v1j
> > msg: <pan.2001.11.04.18.40.04.948.1091@mindspring.com>
>
>Pwahaha, now this is the good stuff, nothing like a good troll slapping.
>
>Thanks for the url Daeron

Idiot.

If you read the entire thread you will realize that:

1. That was a fairytale full of holes written by a nutter.
2. No proof was ever offered other than the lies the OP made up and most
of the reasonable people figured that out for themselves.
3. The OP left COLA shortly afterwards because it was obvious he was
going off the deep end. Seriously going off the deep end.
4. Daeron, AKA Doug Mentohl is yet another USENET kook. This boy is a
few cards short of a full deck.
5. There were actually Linux nutcases calling Gary Stewarts in NY to try
and locate me.
Pretty funny I suppose, but not for the poor blokes they pestered.
6. I have Mentohl and his alter-ego killfiled so I don't have to waste
time looking at his tripe.


Do some research before you make an ass of yourself, or associate with a
known stalker and nutcase.

flatfish+++

Milo T. wrote:

> On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 20:00:10 GMT, Philip Callan wrote:
> 
>> Daeron wrote:
>>  > flatfish+++ wrote:
>>  >
>>  >> What is the purpose? Does anyone care where a particular message
>>  >> actually originates from?
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > obviously not you gary .. :]
>>  >
>>  > http://snipurl.com/4v1j
>>  > msg: <pan.2001.11.04.18.40.04.948.1091@mindspring.com>
>> 
>> Pwahaha, now this is the good stuff, nothing like a good troll slapping.
>> 
>> Thanks for the url Daeron
> 
> ... And lo, Philip again starts in with ad hominem attacks instead of
> actually advocating Linux.
> 
> I have to ask you again: are you so bored with your Linux distribution not
> working that you're spending all of its downtime attacking people on here?
> 
> Particularly those people who do more actual Linux advocacy than you do on
> this group, such as flatfish.

Flatfish does no linux advocacy. He pretends to do so, just to turn around
and spew the FUD and crosspost to aow-xp
-- 
Modern man is the missing link between apes and human beings.

flatfish+++ <flatfish@linuxmail.org> wrote:

>Do some research before you make an ass of yourself, or associate with a
>known stalker and nutcase.

You are a proven nymshifter, flathead.  Any denial from you, that you
have nym-shifted to conceal your identity in here, is a lie.

On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 16:06:54 -0600, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid>
wrote:

>flatfish+++ <flatfish@linuxmail.org> wrote:
>
>>Do some research before you make an ass of yourself, or associate with a
>>known stalker and nutcase.
>
>You are a proven nymshifter, flathead.  Any denial from you, that you
>have nym-shifted to conceal your identity in here, is a lie.

Prove it..........

flatfish+++

The troll, thief and liar flatfish+++ wrote:

> On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 16:06:54 -0600, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid>
> wrote:
> 
>>flatfish+++ <flatfish@linuxmail.org> wrote:
>>
>>>Do some research before you make an ass of yourself, or associate with a
>>>known stalker and nutcase.
>>
>>You are a proven nymshifter, flathead.  Any denial from you, that you
>>have nym-shifted to conceal your identity in here, is a lie.
> 
> Prove it..........
> 
> flatfish+++

No need. We all know it, sewer_clown
-- 
"Last I checked, it wasn't the power cord for the Clue Generator that
was sticking up your ass."        - John Novak, rasfwrj

Peter K�hlmann wrote:
> The troll, thief and liar flatfish+++ wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 16:06:54 -0600, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>>flatfish+++ <flatfish@linuxmail.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Do some research before you make an ass of yourself, or associate with a
>>>>known stalker and nutcase.
>>>
>>>You are a proven nymshifter, flathead.  Any denial from you, that you
>>>have nym-shifted to conceal your identity in here, is a lie.
>> 
>> Prove it..........
>> 
>> flatfish+++
> 
> No need. We all know it, sewer_clown

Malcontent.

Milo T. wrote:
>> > http://snipurl.com/4v1j

> ... And lo, Philip again starts in with ad hominem attacks instead of
> actually advocating Linux.
> 

ad hominem? Flatfish *IS* a troll, and I dont care what his name is, I 
just find him squirming in the attention a little funny, especially the 
'101 identities' crap, where you use another name, but are stupid enough 
to keep the same IP.

> I have to ask you again: are you so bored with your Linux distribution not
> working that you're spending all of its downtime attacking people on here?

I tell you now, so you dont have to ask again:

1. 99% of the off-site administration I do, is comprised of using SSH or 
https to webmin, so a good portion of my day, I'm able to get bored with 
all the boxes *working* that I come here for a laugh.

2. I'm so bored with Trolls and their FUD, and the whole MSFT/EV1/SCO 
thing smells of MS Puppetry 101, trying to delay for Wronghorn in 2008, 
so since the trolls have picked up the pace of FUD spreading, I've taken 
up the active art of troll slapping, you only have to go back to some of 
my replies to you Milo, which you've convieniently left alone to see that.

*slap*


> Particularly those people who do more actual Linux advocacy than you do on
> this group, such as flatfish.

flatfish doesnt advocate shit, and you know it, thats like saying Erik 
FUDkenbusch is 'honest'

hahahah

oh, damn, better make it 2 for good measure

*slap*

flatfish+++ wrote:


> Idiot.
> 
> If you read the entire thread you will realize that:

1. I did
2. I think you protest pretty loud again.
3. I [dont] and [never] cared to learn your real name, but how often you 
felt the need to reply, and how you brought in legions of other aliases, 
but the same IP, to support your claim, is a nice example of a cornered 
troll.

Now quick, nymshift, and make everyone look at the wookie!

wjbell wrote:

> Peter K�hlmann wrote:
>> The troll, thief and liar flatfish+++ wrote:
>> 
>>> On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 16:06:54 -0600, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>flatfish+++ <flatfish@linuxmail.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Do some research before you make an ass of yourself, or associate with
>>>>>a known stalker and nutcase.
>>>>
>>>>You are a proven nymshifter, flathead.  Any denial from you, that you
>>>>have nym-shifted to conceal your identity in here, is a lie.
>>> 
>>> Prove it..........
>>> 
>>> flatfish+++
>> 
>> No need. We all know it, sewer_clown
> 
> Malcontent.

Now isn't that nice? A troll, liar and thief coming to the aid of a troll,
liar and thief
-- 
If you had any brains, you'd be dangerous.

On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 22:40:14 GMT, Philip Callan wrote:
> 2. I'm so bored with Trolls and their FUD, and the whole MSFT/EV1/SCO 
> thing smells of MS Puppetry 101, trying to delay for Wronghorn in 2008, 
> so since the trolls have picked up the pace of FUD spreading, I've taken 
> up the active art of troll slapping, you only have to go back to some of 
> my replies to you Milo, which you've convieniently left alone to see that.
> 
> *slap*

Whatever, Philip. It just goes to show how pathetic you truly are.

But hey, go ahead, type "slap" again, and see how far it gets you - as in
"not very".

Why did I stop replying to your arguments? You're a longwinded buffoon who
can't accept when he gets things wrong, and so you just write more and more
text to cover up for the fact that you're clueless and ignorant.

It's pointless arguing with someone like you; it very quickly get very very
boring, because arguing in circles is pointless.
-- 
Painful memories holding you back?
Regret from past experiences getting you down?
Lacuna Inc. can help you forget.
http://www.lacunainc.com

On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 22:45:47 GMT, Philip Callan <callanca@shaw.ca>
wrote:

>flatfish+++ wrote:
>
>
>> Idiot.
>> 
>> If you read the entire thread you will realize that:
>
>1. I did
>2. I think you protest pretty loud again.
>3. I [dont] and [never] cared to learn your real name, but how often you 
>felt the need to reply, and how you brought in legions of other aliases, 
>but the same IP, to support your claim, is a nice example of a cornered 
>troll.

Really?

And if I said nothing, just like the last time, I would be accused of
ignoring the topic.

I don't ignore untruths being propogated by idiots like you.

Legions of other aliases, all with the same IP?

I'm sure you can prove that one.

Right?

To coin a popular phrase, idiot....

flatfish+++


>Now quick, nymshift, and make everyone look at the wookie!

On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 22:40:14 GMT, Philip Callan <callanca@shaw.ca>
wrote:


>1. 99% of the off-site administration I do, is comprised of using SSH or 
>https to webmin, so a good portion of my day, I'm able to get bored with 
>all the boxes *working* that I come here for a laugh.

Based on Google, I don't believe you....
Doesn't matter though because I will respond no more.
Doing so will only give Doug Mentohl his jollies.

flatfish+++

On 2004-03-03, Peter K�hlmann <Peter.Koehlmann@t-online.de> blubbered:
> The troll, thief and liar flatfish+++ wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 16:06:54 -0600, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>>flatfish+++ <flatfish@linuxmail.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Do some research before you make an ass of yourself, or associate with a
>>>>known stalker and nutcase.
>>>
>>>You are a proven nymshifter, flathead.  Any denial from you, that you
>>>have nym-shifted to conceal your identity in here, is a lie.
>> 
>> Prove it..........
>> 
>> flatfish+++
>
> No need. We all know it, sewer_clown

Yeah, snootie_cutie(sp), quimby, sewer rat, mike_hunt, Heather,
WinRulez.......

-- 
Windows isn't unstable. It's spontaneous!

flatfish+++ wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 22:45:47 GMT, Philip Callan <callanca@shaw.ca>
> wrote:

> Really?
> 
> And if I said nothing, just like the last time, I would be accused of
> ignoring the topic.

Yeah, probably, but like was brought up before, if you had of been like:
[
Old news, ya gotta dredge up 2 year old crap that isnt true?
Hahhaha suckers.
]

*I* would have at least thought [along with a fair chunk of people I assume]

'haha, guess having his nymshifting exposed only pushes his buttons so far'

Once again, I never claimed your name was [whatever], or that the thread 
was *true*, just that your troll-like habit of 'nymshifting' had been 
spotlighted, and you squirmed a fair bit when pressed on that point.

> 
> I don't ignore untruths being propogated by idiots like you.

The fact that your nymshifting was highlighted, and that the subject of 
it seemed to draw you *repeatedly* out, *nymshifting throught the 
thread*, was you 'flopping miserably' since I thought it was a nice 
subject-line for a thread about a fish?

You should click that URL, and then tell me that you didnt nymshift.

I *dont* however, see any point in this message where I claimed to 
*care* or even *believe* if you *were* person [whatever]

> Legions of other aliases, all with the same IP?
> 
> I'm sure you can prove that one.

It was proved back then, headers and all, by a few people, I suppose the 
usage of the word 'legion' was a bit of dramatic flair I suppose, sorry.

'Four or five other aliases, all with the same IP?'
[and a list of others the person alleges you use]

Are you just pissed your secret stash of trollnyms got exposed, and now 
you need to take a week off to think up new ones?

I just advertised a thread in which you seemed to squirm a lot in, and I 
found it a very funny example of the lengths that trolls in general go 
to in order to have to 'win' some sort of Troll points, by making sure 
'everyone knows that *I* am the cool one here, since I made so-and-so 
lose their temper'

Nevermind you had to act like a complete ass, which in any society, 
civilized or primitive, would have gotten you ostracized at the least, 
but more likely knocked over the head with a rock and fed to a 
sabre-tooth tiger.

So why I wonder?

A) You *only* act like this in the digital realm, and it somehow makes 
you feel better about yourself, or gets you off.

B) You score TrollPoints(tm) to spend on TrollBay on things like 
anonymous remailers, open proxies, and list of nyms so as not to burn 
valuable trolling time when you go out fishing.

C) You act like this in real life, in which case you probably dont have 
many [close] friends, so in order to feel like not such a recluse, you 
play the role of the typically 'crazy old guy in the woods' and laugh 
your ass off at the reactions people have.

D) You are Sybil's twin brother, and it just happens a good chunk of 
your personalities like trolling.

E) You are doing a really long thesis about psychology, and UseNet is 
your sampling pool.

flatfish+++ <flatfish@linuxmail.org> wrote:

>On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 16:06:54 -0600, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid>
>wrote:
>
>>flatfish+++ <flatfish@linuxmail.org> wrote:
>>
>>>Do some research before you make an ass of yourself, or associate with a
>>>known stalker and nutcase.
>>
>>You are a proven nymshifter, flathead.  Any denial from you, that you
>>have nym-shifted to conceal your identity in here, is a lie.
>
>Prove it..........

That's not a denial, Flatfish.  Are you getting tired of the lies?

Okay.  Here is the proof, AGAIN.  You, apologizing for something,
using the "Flatfish" name, thus nailing yourself as the person using
the "Fawn Lebowitz" name.  Of course, when I pointed this out to you,
you fell silent.

http://www.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=psn0ut4pef00bsfgndfltu6tr4971a7b9s%404ax.com&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fhl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DISO-8859-1%26q%3Dflatfish%2Bapology%2Bgroup%253Acomp.os.linux.advocacy%2Bauthor%253Achrisv%26btnG%3DGoogle%2BSearch

Let's see a denial, Flathead.  Let's see you say "I never posted using
the name Fawn Lebowitz."

chrisv wrote:

> flatfish+++ <flatfish@linuxmail.org> wrote:
> 
>>On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 16:06:54 -0600, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>flatfish+++ <flatfish@linuxmail.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Do some research before you make an ass of yourself, or associate with a
>>>>known stalker and nutcase.
>>>
>>>You are a proven nymshifter, flathead.  Any denial from you, that you
>>>have nym-shifted to conceal your identity in here, is a lie.
>>
>>Prove it..........
> 
> That's not a denial, Flatfish.  Are you getting tired of the lies?
> 
> Okay.  Here is the proof, AGAIN.  You, apologizing for something,
> using the "Flatfish" name, thus nailing yourself as the person using
> the "Fawn Lebowitz" name.  Of course, when I pointed this out to you,
> you fell silent.
> 
>
http://www.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=psn0ut4pef00bsfgndfltu6tr4971a7b9s%404ax.com&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fhl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DISO-8859-1%26q%3Dflatfish%2Bapology%2Bgroup%253Acomp.os.linux.advocacy%2Bauthor%253Achrisv%26btnG%3DGoogle%2BSearch
> 
> Let's see a denial, Flathead.  Let's see you say "I never posted using
> the name Fawn Lebowitz."

Flatfish made the same blunder several times already, with different
handles. After all, it can be quite confusing posting as all those idiots
-- 
Law of Probable Dispersal:
Whatever it is that hits the fan will not be evenly distributed.

"Milo T." <fantastical@malaprop.net> wrote in message news:<1asds73xekiy1$.buucbflzfbva@fanatastical.malaprop.net>...
> On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 20:00:10 GMT, Philip Callan wrote:

> ... And lo, Philip again starts in with ad hominem attacks instead of
> actually advocating Linux.

For someone who keeps using that word you don't seen to know what it
means.
Look up *irony* while you're about it.
-

ad hom�i�nem (P)Pronunciation Key (hm-nm, -nm)
adj.

Appealing to personal considerations rather than to logic or reason:
Debaters should avoid ad hominem arguments that question their
opponents' motives.
-

"What's the matter, Phillip? So sick of Linux that you've decided to
spend
some time lying about people?" Simon Cooke Feb 29 2004

"Idiot. That's plainly obvious. But when were those options granted,
dumbass?" Simon Cooke Mar 03 2004

"That's an odd question. Perhaps you should read up on how the NT
kernel
works - I get the feeling that if I try to explain it, you won't
understand
it." Simon Cooke Feb 18 2004

"And please, don't quote Peter K. He's the worst troll of the lot
here." Simon Cooke June 02 2002
- unquote -
 
[..]

> Particularly those people who do more actual Linux advocacy than you do on
> this group, such as flatfish.

"Terry Porter is not smart enough to figure that point out. You have
to understand that you are dealing with a person who braggs in a
public fora about how he uses telnet to administer his clients
machines." flatfish Sep 12 2003

"You should have just sent her a copy of Linux. Once she tried to use
it she would have killed herself."  flatfish Sep 13 2003

"COLA is a wasteland of misfits that are so out of touch with reality
and the real world that it is hysterical and that is exactly what
makes COLA, or /. so very funny."  flatfish Sep 12 2003

"Why is that? Ask Simon about the rabid, anti-social, misfit,
dangerous rabid linux
zealot."  flatfish Sep 11 2003

"You are all one small step from the Uni-bomber and in fact most of
you probably have a Uni-brow so that makes you a 1/2 step."  flatfish
Sep 11 2003


"According to you, and your other idiot Linux lusers I am every troll
under the sun and you are way off base."

"BTW I think Porter is a compete idiot and his picture speaks for
itself. D_O_R_K...."

"His wife needs to learn how to dress him and suggest that he please
change those 1970's sunglasses."

"However, the faggots (not the stick kind) in the Hampton's would be
all over him. They seem to gravitate toward oddballs."  flatfish Sep
11 2003

http://www.angelfire.com/blog/trollarchive/

Daeron wrote:

> http://www.angelfire.com/blog/trollarchive/

Oh sweet, someone is already doing it :)

X-No-Archive = X-Archive-it-all :)

doug_mentohl@yahoo.co.uk (Daeron) writes:

> "Milo T." <fantastical@malaprop.net> wrote in message news:<1asds73xekiy1$.buucbflzfbva@fanatastical.malaprop.net>...
>> On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 20:00:10 GMT, Philip Callan wrote:
>
>> ... And lo, Philip again starts in with ad hominem attacks instead of
>> actually advocating Linux.
>
> For someone who keeps using that word you don't seen to know what it
> means.
> Look up *irony* while you're about it.
> -
>
> ad hom=B7i=B7nem (P)Pronunciation Key (hm-nm, -nm)
> adj.
>
> Appealing to personal considerations rather than to logic or reason:
> Debaters should avoid ad hominem arguments that question their
> opponents' motives.
> -

These are not ad hominems per se.  An ad hominem attempts to refute a
position by casting doubt on the reliability of a proponent of that
position.  Your examples do not do so.  They are insults, but they are
not examples of the ad hominem fallacy as it is usually intended.

> "What's the matter, Phillip? So sick of Linux that you've decided to
> spend
> some time lying about people?" Simon Cooke Feb 29 2004
>
> "Idiot. That's plainly obvious. But when were those options granted,
> dumbass?" Simon Cooke Mar 03 2004
>
> "That's an odd question. Perhaps you should read up on how the NT
> kernel
> works - I get the feeling that if I try to explain it, you won't
> understand
> it." Simon Cooke Feb 18 2004
>

With one exception: The following is arguably an ad hominem fallacy.
Do not quote Peter, because he is a troll.  In this case, Simon
explicitly states that, because Peter is a troll, anything Peter says
should be disregarded.

> "And please, don't quote Peter K. He's the worst troll of the lot
> here." Simon Cooke June 02 2002
> - unquote -
>=20=20
> [..]
>
>> Particularly those people who do more actual Linux advocacy than you do on
>> this group, such as flatfish.
>
> "Terry Porter is not smart enough to figure that point out. You have
> to understand that you are dealing with a person who braggs in a
> public fora about how he uses telnet to administer his clients
> machines." flatfish Sep 12 2003
>
> "You should have just sent her a copy of Linux. Once she tried to use
> it she would have killed herself."  flatfish Sep 13 2003
>
> "COLA is a wasteland of misfits that are so out of touch with reality
> and the real world that it is hysterical and that is exactly what
> makes COLA, or /. so very funny."  flatfish Sep 12 2003
>
> "Why is that? Ask Simon about the rabid, anti-social, misfit,
> dangerous rabid linux
> zealot."  flatfish Sep 11 2003
>
> "You are all one small step from the Uni-bomber and in fact most of
> you probably have a Uni-brow so that makes you a 1/2 step."  flatfish
> Sep 11 2003
>
>
> "According to you, and your other idiot Linux lusers I am every troll
> under the sun and you are way off base."
>
> "BTW I think Porter is a compete idiot and his picture speaks for
> itself. D_O_R_K...."
>
> "His wife needs to learn how to dress him and suggest that he please
> change those 1970's sunglasses."
>
> "However, the faggots (not the stick kind) in the Hampton's would be
> all over him. They seem to gravitate toward oddballs."  flatfish Sep
> 11 2003
>
> http://www.angelfire.com/blog/trollarchive/

Some of the above *might* be examples of ad hominem in a larger
context, but given only what you've quoted, they are no ad hominems.

Not every insult is an ad hominem in the (informal) logical sense.

--=20
Jesse F. Hughes

              "I'm better than you, and you know it."
                                        -- James Harris

Philip Callan <callanca@shaw.ca> writes:

> Daeron wrote:
>
>> http://www.angelfire.com/blog/trollarchive/
>
> Oh sweet, someone is already doing it :)
>
> X-No-Archive = X-Archive-it-all :)

This is not a good thing.

The X-No-Archive header ought to be respected.  I won't go so far as
to claim that its users have the right to demand their posts not be
archived.  I don't know if they do or if they don't.  But decency
suggests that, without very strong reasons (stronger than that they're
simply assholes), their requests ought to be respected.

-- 
"I've ... contacted [some of the...] highest I.Q.'s in the country...
I've even helped the FBI out a few times...  I've met at least one
governor..., a senator... and I've had some really good seats at
sports games.  My experiences are not your experiences." --JSH != you

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
> This is not a good thing.
> 
> The X-No-Archive header ought to be respected.  I won't go so far as
> to claim that its users have the right to demand their posts not be
> archived.  I don't know if they do or if they don't.  But decency
> suggests that, without very strong reasons (stronger than that they're
> simply assholes), their requests ought to be respected.
> 

Oh by all means, in support groups, and places where being anonymous is 
the *norm* I could understand.

Doing this in c.o.l.a is one thing, I agree there are many groups/places 
where it SHOULD by all means be respected.

Do you count the argument 'I dont want proof of my words biting me later 
in the ass in public debate' as stronger, or less strong, than being an 
asshole?

If a person enters a public forum, and is involved in the debate or 
conversation, they should accept the fact that one or more people *may* 
be recording it (logging, saving posts, writing it down on a pad???) 
similar to when you engage in a ytalk, or IM/email with a person, BBS 
chat rooms, or engage in public conversation on the bus.

When I go to the McDonalds and start yelling *BURGER KING RULES, YOUR 
BURGERS GOT MAGGOTS IN 'EM* and they have me arrested, I cant very well 
go into the court and say 'Hey! Thats not fair, I told all those people 
not to remember anything'

Ooops, forgot your neuralyzer (sp? MiB) *zzzt*

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:

> Philip Callan <callanca@shaw.ca> writes:
> 
>> Daeron wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.angelfire.com/blog/trollarchive/
>>
>> Oh sweet, someone is already doing it :)
>>
>> X-No-Archive = X-Archive-it-all :)
> 
> This is not a good thing.
> 
> The X-No-Archive header ought to be respected.  

No

> I won't go so far as 
> to claim that its users have the right to demand their posts not be
> archived.  I don't know if they do or if they don't.  But decency
> suggests that, without very strong reasons (stronger than that they're
> simply assholes), their requests ought to be respected.
> 

They post in an open forum. They post that everyone can see it.
Why should they demand that it is not archived? Because they post crap?
Insult people? Forge posters? These are reasons not to archive?

I would go much farther: With the exception of certain groups *all* groups
should mandate to put in IP headers. *No* spoofing allowed. *No* anonymous
posts allowed

After all, what good is your word when you hide behind an anonymizer,
prevent archiving and try to be as untraceable as possible? It is worth
nothing
-- 
Hardware, n.:
        The parts of a computer system that can be kicked.

Peter K=F6hlmann <Peter.Koehlmann@t-online.de> writes:

> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>
>> Philip Callan <callanca@shaw.ca> writes:
>>=20
>>> Daeron wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://www.angelfire.com/blog/trollarchive/
>>>
>>> Oh sweet, someone is already doing it :)
>>>
>>> X-No-Archive =3D X-Archive-it-all :)
>>=20
>> This is not a good thing.
>>=20
>> The X-No-Archive header ought to be respected.=20=20
>
> No
>
>> I won't go so far as=20
>> to claim that its users have the right to demand their posts not be
>> archived.  I don't know if they do or if they don't.  But decency
>> suggests that, without very strong reasons (stronger than that they're
>> simply assholes), their requests ought to be respected.
>>=20
>
> They post in an open forum. They post that everyone can see it.
> Why should they demand that it is not archived? Because they post crap?
> Insult people? Forge posters? These are reasons not to archive?

Forged posts are a different matter, of course.  Forgery is a serious
offense and a forger's wishes need not be respected.

Who cares why they demand (request) that the post not be archived,
forgers aside?  In general, requests of this sort (which impose no
particular burden on the beseeched) ought to be honored unless there
is good reason not to.

> I would go much farther: With the exception of certain groups *all* groups
> should mandate to put in IP headers. *No* spoofing allowed. *No* anonymous
> posts allowed

If that mandate is in place, then that's another matter.  But
anonymity and a no-archive request are distinct issues, strictly
speaking.  They are related in some ways, but they are distinct.

> After all, what good is your word when you hide behind an anonymizer,
> prevent archiving and try to be as untraceable as possible? It is worth
> nothing

--=20
What you want with a hen?             What you want with a woman=20
Won't cackle when she lays            when she won't do nothin' I say?=20=20
What you want with a hen?              -- Charlie Patton,
Won't cackle when she lays               "Banty Rooster Blues"
=20

Philip Callan <callanca@shaw.ca> writes:

> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>> This is not a good thing.
>> 
>> The X-No-Archive header ought to be respected.  I won't go so far as
>> to claim that its users have the right to demand their posts not be
>> archived.  I don't know if they do or if they don't.  But decency
>> suggests that, without very strong reasons (stronger than that they're
>> simply assholes), their requests ought to be respected.
>> 
>
> Oh by all means, in support groups, and places where being anonymous is 
> the *norm* I could understand.
>
> Doing this in c.o.l.a is one thing, I agree there are many groups/places 
> where it SHOULD by all means be respected.
>
> Do you count the argument 'I dont want proof of my words biting me later 
> in the ass in public debate' as stronger, or less strong, than being an 
> asshole?

You don't know the motivation.  You presume it, perhaps on good
evidence, but you don't know it.


> If a person enters a public forum, and is involved in the debate or 
> conversation, they should accept the fact that one or more people *may* 
> be recording it (logging, saving posts, writing it down on a pad???) 
> similar to when you engage in a ytalk, or IM/email with a person, BBS 
> chat rooms, or engage in public conversation on the bus.

I don't object to participants saving certain postings for later
reference.  This isn't an activity that the no-archive header is meant
to prevent.  It is intended to prevent that the postings are archived
in a form that the general public can later access.  Saving postings
of others for later personal use and reference is different than the
trollarchive site.

> When I go to the McDonalds and start yelling *BURGER KING RULES, YOUR 
> BURGERS GOT MAGGOTS IN 'EM* and they have me arrested, I cant very well 
> go into the court and say 'Hey! Thats not fair, I told all those people 
> not to remember anything'
>
> Ooops, forgot your neuralyzer (sp? MiB) *zzzt*

These last two paragraphs have absolutely nothing to do with the
intended interpretation of X-No-Archive.

-- 
Jesse F. Hughes
"[I]t's the damndest thing.  There's something wrong with every last
one of you, and I *never* thought that was a possibility.  But now I
feel it's the only reasonable conclusion." --JSH sees some sorta light

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:

> Peter K�hlmann <Peter.Koehlmann@t-online.de> writes:
> 
>> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>>
>>> Philip Callan <callanca@shaw.ca> writes:
>>> 
>>>> Daeron wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> http://www.angelfire.com/blog/trollarchive/
>>>>
>>>> Oh sweet, someone is already doing it :)
>>>>
>>>> X-No-Archive = X-Archive-it-all :)
>>> 
>>> This is not a good thing.
>>> 
>>> The X-No-Archive header ought to be respected.
>>
>> No
>>
>>> I won't go so far as
>>> to claim that its users have the right to demand their posts not be
>>> archived.  I don't know if they do or if they don't.  But decency
>>> suggests that, without very strong reasons (stronger than that they're
>>> simply assholes), their requests ought to be respected.
>>> 
>>
>> They post in an open forum. They post that everyone can see it.
>> Why should they demand that it is not archived? Because they post crap?
>> Insult people? Forge posters? These are reasons not to archive?
> 
> Forged posts are a different matter, of course.  Forgery is a serious
> offense and a forger's wishes need not be respected.
> 
> Who cares why they demand (request) that the post not be archived,
> forgers aside?  In general, requests of this sort (which impose no
> particular burden on the beseeched) ought to be honored unless there
> is good reason not to.
> 
>> I would go much farther: With the exception of certain groups *all*
>> groups should mandate to put in IP headers. *No* spoofing allowed. *No*
>> anonymous posts allowed
> 
> If that mandate is in place, then that's another matter.  But
> anonymity and a no-archive request are distinct issues, strictly
> speaking.  They are related in some ways, but they are distinct.
> 

Did you *ever* encounter someone here with X-No-Archive who was *not* a
troll, liar and generally a stupid dumbass?
That does not mean that those without the flag are not of this category, but
as a rule you can count anyone using that flag into it
-- 
Warning: 10 days have passed since your last Windows reinstall.

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:

> These last two paragraphs have absolutely nothing to do with the
> intended interpretation of X-No-Archive.
> 

The *intended interpretation*

Sorry, trolls do not get to hide behind yet another layer of deception.
The last 2 paragraphs have everything to do with FLATFISH's intended 
interpretation of the X-No-Archive header.

On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 23:34:29 +0000, Milo T. brought forth for the ages:

> On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 22:40:14 GMT, Philip Callan wrote:
>> 2. I'm so bored with Trolls and their FUD, and the whole MSFT/EV1/SCO 
>> thing smells of MS Puppetry 101, trying to delay for Wronghorn in 2008, 
>> so since the trolls have picked up the pace of FUD spreading, I've taken 
>> up the active art of troll slapping, you only have to go back to some of 
>> my replies to you Milo, which you've convieniently left alone to see that.
>> 
>> *slap*
> 
> Whatever, Philip. It just goes to show how pathetic you truly are.
> 
> But hey, go ahead, type "slap" again, and see how far it gets you - as in
> "not very".
> 
> Why did I stop replying to your arguments? You're a longwinded buffoon who
> can't accept when he gets things wrong, and so you just write more and more
> text to cover up for the fact that you're clueless and ignorant.
> 
> It's pointless arguing with someone like you; it very quickly get very very
> boring, because arguing in circles is pointless.

Hey, we do it for *your* sake. Arguing in circles is the only mode you're
good at.

We like to make you feel at home.

-- 
"To use Emacs is to practice Zen.
   Every command is a koan.
     Profound to the user, unintelligible to the uninitiated. 
       You discover truth everytime you use it."    --reddy@lion.austin.ibm.com

Philip Callan <callanca@shaw.ca> writes:

> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>
>> These last two paragraphs have absolutely nothing to do with the
>> intended interpretation of X-No-Archive.
>> 
>
> The *intended interpretation*
>
> Sorry, trolls do not get to hide behind yet another layer of deception.
> The last 2 paragraphs have everything to do with FLATFISH's intended 
> interpretation of the X-No-Archive header.
>
No, they don't.  The X-No-Archive header is not intended to ensure
that participants forget one's contributions nor to prevent readers
from saving articles for personal use.  

-- 
Jesse F. Hughes
"Ultimately, I can bring the entire mathematical establishment to its
knees...  Live in a fantasy world if you wish, but to me that's just
an expression of your intellectual inferiority." --James Harris

Peter K=F6hlmann <Peter.Koehlmann@t-online.de> writes:

> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>
>> Peter K=F6hlmann <Peter.Koehlmann@t-online.de> writes:
>>=20
>>> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>>>
>>>> Philip Callan <callanca@shaw.ca> writes:
>>>>=20
>>>>> Daeron wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.angelfire.com/blog/trollarchive/
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh sweet, someone is already doing it :)
>>>>>
>>>>> X-No-Archive =3D X-Archive-it-all :)
>>>>=20
>>>> This is not a good thing.
>>>>=20
>>>> The X-No-Archive header ought to be respected.
>>>
>>> No
>>>
>>>> I won't go so far as
>>>> to claim that its users have the right to demand their posts not be
>>>> archived.  I don't know if they do or if they don't.  But decency
>>>> suggests that, without very strong reasons (stronger than that they're
>>>> simply assholes), their requests ought to be respected.
>>>>=20
>>>
>>> They post in an open forum. They post that everyone can see it.
>>> Why should they demand that it is not archived? Because they post crap?
>>> Insult people? Forge posters? These are reasons not to archive?
>>=20
>> Forged posts are a different matter, of course.  Forgery is a serious
>> offense and a forger's wishes need not be respected.
>>=20
>> Who cares why they demand (request) that the post not be archived,
>> forgers aside?  In general, requests of this sort (which impose no
>> particular burden on the beseeched) ought to be honored unless there
>> is good reason not to.
>>=20
>>> I would go much farther: With the exception of certain groups *all*
>>> groups should mandate to put in IP headers. *No* spoofing allowed. *No*
>>> anonymous posts allowed
>>=20
>> If that mandate is in place, then that's another matter.  But
>> anonymity and a no-archive request are distinct issues, strictly
>> speaking.  They are related in some ways, but they are distinct.
>>=20
>
> Did you *ever* encounter someone here with X-No-Archive who was *not* a
> troll, liar and generally a stupid dumbass?

It depends on your opinion of me.  I used the header several years
ago.  I'm almost positive I'm not a troll.  Whether I'm a liar or not
depends on how many lies make one a liar.  I'll abstain from comment
on whether I'm a "stupid dumbass".

> That does not mean that those without the flag are not of this category, but
> as a rule you can count anyone using that flag into it

None of that has any bearing on whether the flag ought to be
respected.

--=20
Jesse Hughes=20
"How come there's still apes running around loose and there are
humans?  Why did some of them decide to evolve and some did not?  Did
they choose to stay as a monkey or what?" -Kans. Board of Ed member

jesse@phiwumbda.org (Jesse F. Hughes) wrote in message news:<87u113n8px.fsf@phiwumbda.org>...

>>>>>> Oh sweet, someone is already doing it :)

>>>>>> X-No-Archive = X-Archive-it-all :)
 
>>>>> This is not a good thing.

>>>>> The X-No-Archive header ought to be respected.

Do you consider the flatfish deserving of respect ?

If someone feels strongly enough about something to post it then they
shouldn't mind it being archived. If someone persistentlys
X-No-Archives  his posts then he must find his own utterances
shamefull.

"You don't know the motivation. You presume it, perhaps on good
evidence, but you don't know it."

What do you think the flatfishes motive is in posting here ?

doug_mentohl@yahoo.co.uk (Daeron) writes:

> jesse@phiwumbda.org (Jesse F. Hughes) wrote in message news:<87u113n8px.fsf@phiwumbda.org>...
>
>>>>>>> Oh sweet, someone is already doing it :)
>
>>>>>>> X-No-Archive = X-Archive-it-all :)
>  
>>>>>> This is not a good thing.
>
>>>>>> The X-No-Archive header ought to be respected.
>
> Do you consider the flatfish deserving of respect ?

That's not really the point.  There is a difference between respecting
a request that places no undue burden on the beseeched and respecting
the beseecher.  You're equivocating on two distinct uses of the word
"respect".

> If someone feels strongly enough about something to post it then they
> shouldn't mind it being archived. If someone persistentlys
> X-No-Archives  his posts then he must find his own utterances
> shamefull.
>
> "You don't know the motivation. You presume it, perhaps on good
> evidence, but you don't know it."
>
> What do you think the flatfishes motive is in posting here ?

That's not the point either.

Do you choose to ignore the robots.txt file of certain sites on the
grounds that they haven't given a good reason to honor it?

The X-No-Archive header is a request comparable to the robots.txt
file.  There is no accompanying X-No-Archive-Here's-My-Excuse header.
There is no traditional need to justify a header like the X-No-Archive
header.  It is a convention which is upheld by, as far as I know,
every single Usenet indexing site save one: the trollarchive site.

This fact is more shameful for the people running that site than for
the people using the header, as far as I'm concerned.

-- 
"There are people [...] who think it's socially acceptable to level
accusations of mental illness in insulting exchanges to make
points[...]  [They] are rather sick [them]selves, and in reality, are
sociopathic."  --- James Harris, evidently a self-described sociopath

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:

> doug_mentohl@yahoo.co.uk (Daeron) writes:
> 
>> jesse@phiwumbda.org (Jesse F. Hughes) wrote in message
>> news:<87u113n8px.fsf@phiwumbda.org>...
>>
>>>>>>>> Oh sweet, someone is already doing it :)
>>
>>>>>>>> X-No-Archive = X-Archive-it-all :)
>>  
>>>>>>> This is not a good thing.
>>
>>>>>>> The X-No-Archive header ought to be respected.
>>
>> Do you consider the flatfish deserving of respect ?
> 
> That's not really the point.  There is a difference between respecting
> a request that places no undue burden on the beseeched and respecting
> the beseecher.  You're equivocating on two distinct uses of the word
> "respect".
> 

Flatfish uses his X-No-Archive posting as a tool to yell "prove it"
Knowing fully well that the google threads are incomplete and therefor it is 
difficult to prove that he wrote something

< snip more excuses >
-- 
"Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend: and inside a dog,
it's too dark to read."                -- Groucho Marx

Peter K=F6hlmann <Peter.Koehlmann@t-online.de> writes:

> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>
>> doug_mentohl@yahoo.co.uk (Daeron) writes:
>>=20
>>> jesse@phiwumbda.org (Jesse F. Hughes) wrote in message
>>> news:<87u113n8px.fsf@phiwumbda.org>...
>>>
>>>>>>>>> Oh sweet, someone is already doing it :)
>>>
>>>>>>>>> X-No-Archive =3D X-Archive-it-all :)
>>>=20=20
>>>>>>>> This is not a good thing.
>>>
>>>>>>>> The X-No-Archive header ought to be respected.
>>>
>>> Do you consider the flatfish deserving of respect ?
>>=20
>> That's not really the point.  There is a difference between respecting
>> a request that places no undue burden on the beseeched and respecting
>> the beseecher.  You're equivocating on two distinct uses of the word
>> "respect".
>>=20
>
> Flatfish uses his X-No-Archive posting as a tool to yell "prove it"
> Knowing fully well that the google threads are incomplete and
> therefor it is=20 difficult to prove that he wrote something

Even with an X-No-Archive header, it's not hard to find previous
statements of flatfish.  They appear in almost every response to a
post he has made.  The header does not prevent archiving the followups
of others, and these followups almost always quote some or all of
flatfish's writing.  Googling for "flatfish" and some keywords bring
these quotations almost as effectively as googling for
"author:Kohlmann" and keywords bring up your statements.

> < snip more excuses >

I offered no "excuses" at all, but *reasons* for my assertion.  There
is a difference between the two (one does not *excuse* an assertion,
unless that assertion has been proved wrong -- even in that case, one
isn't excusing the assertion but the previous act of asserting).

--=20
Jesse Hughes
"She testified they had sex near the Oval Office, not in the famous
room itself, because that `wouldn't be appropriate, you know.'"
                                         -AP article

Peter K�hlmann wrote:

> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>> doug_mentohl@yahoo.co.uk (Daeron) writes:

>>> Do you consider the flatfish deserving of respect ?

>> That's not really the point ..

It is very much the point. The question is directed to you. That you
choose to ignore it is also relevant. The relevant point being
flatfishes statement:

"Does anyone care where a particular message actually originates from?"

I pointed out that he obviously didn't. As use of X-No-Archive flag and
multiple cross-gender aliases prove. Do you have anything to say on
this. Or do you also get to decide that this - the root comment of this
thread - is off topic.

>> a request that places no undue burden on the beseeched and 
>> respecting ..............  You're equivocating on two distinct uses
>>  of the word "respect".

On the contrary it is you who is the equivocator. You choose to
misinterpret what I said and then go on to *not* address it. A shuffle
worthy of Fuddie Frankentroll.

>>> "You don't know the motivation. You presume it, perhaps on good 
>>> evidence, but you don't know it."

>>> What do you think the flatfishes motive is in posting here ?

>> That's not the point either.

That *is* the point. The abuses of the X-No-Archive flag by flatfish.
What is your opinion of what motivates flatfish. Do you consider his
uses of the flag legitimate - Yes or NO ?

>> Do you choose to ignore the robots.txt file of certain sites on the
>>  grounds that they haven't given a good reason to honor it?

shuffle .. shuffle. We have no need of an analogy here. The discussion
is flatfish and his uses and abuses of the  X-No-Archive flag.

<snip>

>> This fact is more shameful for the people running that site than 
>> for the people using the header, as far as I'm concerned.

So you do deem it relevant to comment on my motives but not flatfish. I
wonder what your motivation is in posting here ?
		 			
> Flatfish uses his X-No-Archive posting as a tool to yell "prove it" 
> Knowing fully well that the google threads are incomplete and 
> therefor it is difficult to prove that he wrote something

See Peter K. has no difficulty figuring out the flatfish.
Jesse F.: Nice company you keep.

> < snip more excuses >

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:

> Peter K�hlmann <Peter.Koehlmann@t-online.de> writes:
> 
>> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>>
>>> doug_mentohl@yahoo.co.uk (Daeron) writes:
>>> 
>>>> jesse@phiwumbda.org (Jesse F. Hughes) wrote in message
>>>> news:<87u113n8px.fsf@phiwumbda.org>...
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Oh sweet, someone is already doing it :)
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> X-No-Archive = X-Archive-it-all :)
>>>>  
>>>>>>>>> This is not a good thing.
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The X-No-Archive header ought to be respected.
>>>>
>>>> Do you consider the flatfish deserving of respect ?
>>> 
>>> That's not really the point.  There is a difference between respecting
>>> a request that places no undue burden on the beseeched and respecting
>>> the beseecher.  You're equivocating on two distinct uses of the word
>>> "respect".
>>> 
>>
>> Flatfish uses his X-No-Archive posting as a tool to yell "prove it"
>> Knowing fully well that the google threads are incomplete and
>> therefor it is  difficult to prove that he wrote something
> 
> Even with an X-No-Archive header, it's not hard to find previous
> statements of flatfish.  They appear in almost every response to a
> post he has made.  The header does not prevent archiving the followups
> of others, and these followups almost always quote some or all of
> flatfish's writing.  

And do not contain the header, often valuable or needed when dealing with
scum like flatfish

> Googling for "flatfish" and some keywords bring 
> these quotations almost as effectively as googling for
> "author:Kohlmann" and keywords bring up your statements.
> 
>> < snip more excuses >
> 
> I offered no "excuses" at all, but *reasons* for my assertion.  There
> is a difference between the two (one does not *excuse* an assertion,
> unless that assertion has been proved wrong -- even in that case, one
> isn't excusing the assertion but the previous act of asserting).
> 

So the only thing we can agree on in this matter is to disagree. Completely
-- 
Modern man is the missing link between apes and human beings.

Peter K�hlmann <Peter.Koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote in message news:<c28bqh$c01$06$1@news.t-online.com>...
> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
> 
> > Peter K�hlmann <Peter.Koehlmann@t-online.de> writes:
> > 
> >> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
> >>
> >>> Philip Callan <callanca@shaw.ca> writes:
> >>> 
> >>>> Daeron wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> http://www.angelfire.com/blog/trollarchive/
> >>>>
> >>>> Oh sweet, someone is already doing it :)
> >>>>
> >>>> X-No-Archive = X-Archive-it-all :)
> >>> 
> >>> This is not a good thing.
> >>> 
> >>> The X-No-Archive header ought to be respected.
> >>
> >> No
> >>
> >>> I won't go so far as
> >>> to claim that its users have the right to demand their posts not be
> >>> archived.  I don't know if they do or if they don't.  But decency
> >>> suggests that, without very strong reasons (stronger than that they're
> >>> simply assholes), their requests ought to be respected.
> >>> 
> >>
> >> They post in an open forum. They post that everyone can see it.
> >> Why should they demand that it is not archived? Because they post crap?
> >> Insult people? Forge posters? These are reasons not to archive?
> > 
> > Forged posts are a different matter, of course.  Forgery is a serious
> > offense and a forger's wishes need not be respected.
> > 
> > Who cares why they demand (request) that the post not be archived,
> > forgers aside?  In general, requests of this sort (which impose no
> > particular burden on the beseeched) ought to be honored unless there
> > is good reason not to.
> > 
> >> I would go much farther: With the exception of certain groups *all*
> >> groups should mandate to put in IP headers. *No* spoofing allowed. *No*
> >> anonymous posts allowed
> > 
> > If that mandate is in place, then that's another matter.  But
> > anonymity and a no-archive request are distinct issues, strictly
> > speaking.  They are related in some ways, but they are distinct.
> > 
> 
> Did you *ever* encounter someone here with X-No-Archive who was *not* a
> troll, liar and generally a stupid dumbass?
> That does not mean that those without the flag are not of this category, but
> as a rule you can count anyone using that flag into it

Peter K�hlmann, you are an asshole.

Daeron <daeron@demon.net> writes:

> Peter K=F6hlmann wrote:
>
>> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>>> doug_mentohl@yahoo.co.uk (Daeron) writes:
>
>>>> Do you consider the flatfish deserving of respect ?
>
>>> That's not really the point ..
>
> It is very much the point. The question is directed to you. That you
> choose to ignore it is also relevant. The relevant point being
> flatfishes statement:
>
> "Does anyone care where a particular message actually originates from?"
>
> I pointed out that he obviously didn't. As use of X-No-Archive flag and
> multiple cross-gender aliases prove. Do you have anything to say on
> this. Or do you also get to decide that this - the root comment of this
> thread - is off topic.

It has no bearing on my participation in the thread.  My participation
was motivated not by anything flatfish said, but by something Philip
said, namely=20

,----
| Oh sweet, someone is already doing it :)
|=20
| X-No-Archive =3D X-Archive-it-all :)
`----

My claim is that one ought, in general, respect the no-archive header.

>>> a request that places no undue burden on the beseeched and=20
>>> respecting ..............  You're equivocating on two distinct uses
>>>  of the word "respect".
>
> On the contrary it is you who is the equivocator. You choose to
> misinterpret what I said and then go on to *not* address it. A shuffle
> worthy of Fuddie Frankentroll.

No, I did not equivocate.  I said one ought to respect requests such
that blah blah blah, and you asked me whether I respected flatfish.
That is an irrelevant point that only appears relevant due to
equivocation on the term "respect".


>>>> "You don't know the motivation. You presume it, perhaps on good=20
>>>> evidence, but you don't know it."
>
>>>> What do you think the flatfishes motive is in posting here ?
>
>>> That's not the point either.
>
> That *is* the point. The abuses of the X-No-Archive flag by flatfish.
> What is your opinion of what motivates flatfish. Do you consider his
> uses of the flag legitimate - Yes or NO ?

I consider it a legitimate use of the header.  This does not mean that
I support his rhetorical tactics but only that he is using the header
as it was intended: to indicate that he does not wish his posts to be
publicly archived.

There *may* be extenuating circumstances that would nullify the basic
moral principles that I invoke when I say his request ought to be
honored, but the fact that flatfish uses a deceptive and reprehensible
rhetorical strategy isn't sufficient, in my opinion.

>>> Do you choose to ignore the robots.txt file of certain sites on the
>>>  grounds that they haven't given a good reason to honor it?
>
> shuffle .. shuffle. We have no need of an analogy here. The discussion
> is flatfish and his uses and abuses of the  X-No-Archive flag.

I did not "shuffle".  I asked a question to reason by analogy, an
analogy that seems perfectly apt.  Would you advocate ignoring, say,
SCO's robots.txt file on the grounds that SCO is a bad company?  Or (a
bit more controversial) would you advocate ignoring the White House's
robots.txt file on the grounds that the administration attempted to
hide information that ought to be public?

In both cases, one has made a request that another may or may not
choose to fulfill.  In both cases, the request places no undue burden
on the requestee.  Seems a perfectly apt comparison.=20=20

A "shuffle" indicates that I'm trying to change the subject to avoid a
weak point in my argument.  This is pointedly not the case.

>>> This fact is more shameful for the people running that site than=20
>>> for the people using the header, as far as I'm concerned.
>
> So you do deem it relevant to comment on my motives but not flatfish. I
> wonder what your motivation is in posting here ?

I didn't comment on your motives.  I commented on what I think the
moral high ground requires.

I don't comment on flatfish's motives because I don't know them.  I
didn't criticize flatfish's ethics because the unethical things he has
done are plain to see (especially, but not limited to, his previous
forgeries in order to pretend that there was a groundswell of
disinterested users of Linux, each of whom curiously chose to express
their disinterest on a fringe newsgroup like COLA).

I don't promise to criticize equally.  I reacted to Philip's post
because I think that the position he took is regrettable and because,
right or wrong, it reflects on the Linux advocates in the newsgroup.
I thought that one should say it's a bad opinion if one thinks it is.

When Flatfish and other MS advocates say something with which I
disagree, I don't feel similar motivation to say so on the group.

>> Flatfish uses his X-No-Archive posting as a tool to yell "prove it"=20
>> Knowing fully well that the google threads are incomplete and=20
>> therefor it is difficult to prove that he wrote something
>
> See Peter K. has no difficulty figuring out the flatfish.
> Jesse F.: Nice company you keep.

Now *that* is an example of ad hominem.  Congratulations.  Don't trust
Jesse because he's pals with Flatfish.  (Alternatively, it could be
read as a different fallacy: Jesse's take on ethics cannot be correct,
because it benefits Flatfish.  I don't have a name for that fallacy,
but it could be called "argument from undesirable consequences").

I think Peter was right.  This conversation is going nowhere.  We
should probably let it drop, but feel free to respond to anything
above, of course.  I will reply only if there's something that
strongly tempts me.


--=20
"Not all features that are found on the Security tab are designed to
help make your documents and files more secure." --Microsoft on Office
security features (after it was pointed out by a third party that a
certain password setting is easily bypassed.)
=20

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

chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> espoused:
> flatfish+++ <flatfish@linuxmail.org> wrote:
> 
>>On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 16:06:54 -0600, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>flatfish+++ <flatfish@linuxmail.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Do some research before you make an ass of yourself, or associate with a
>>>>known stalker and nutcase.
>>>
>>>You are a proven nymshifter, flathead.  Any denial from you, that you
>>>have nym-shifted to conceal your identity in here, is a lie.
>>
>>Prove it..........
> 
> That's not a denial, Flatfish.  Are you getting tired of the lies?
> 
> Okay.  Here is the proof, AGAIN.  You, apologizing for something,
> using the "Flatfish" name, thus nailing yourself as the person using
> the "Fawn Lebowitz" name.  Of course, when I pointed this out to you,
> you fell silent.
> 
> http://www.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=psn0ut4pef00bsfgndfltu6tr4971a7b9s%404ax.com&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fhl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DISO-8859-1%26q%3Dflatfish%2Bapology%2Bgroup%253Acomp.os.linux.advocacy%2Bauthor%253Achrisv%26btnG%3DGoogle%2BSearch
> 
> Let's see a denial, Flathead.  Let's see you say "I never posted using
> the name Fawn Lebowitz."
> 

Wow - flatty's names - well, there are so many, aren't there?  hepcat (the cat)
springs to mind as one... try this:

	quimby, Wilbur J. Quimby, fawnlebowitz, junk_trapper, Fawn
	Lebowitz, the_flatfish, juke_joint, Whizzer, whppier, t,
	WinRulez, linux_sux, Jeff Szarka, Collie Entragion, Deadpenguin,
	, ., Amy, BklynBoy, Claire Lynn, [Ff]latfish+++, [fF]latfish,
	[Ff]latfish++++, Grendel, Heather, Heather69, Ishmeal Hafizi,
	Jerry Butler, McSwain, Mike Hunt, Mike, Pickle Pete, Proculous, S,
	Sarek, Saul Goldblatt, Saul, Sewer Rat, Simon, Simon777, Sponge,
	Steve, Susan Wong, Susie Wong, Swango, Syphon, Tiberious, Tim
	Palmer, Willy Wong, Wobbles, bison, hepcat, keymaster, keys88,
	leg log, noone, piddy, screwbilk, scummer, steveno, teknite,
	trailerpark, unknown, wazzoo, whparker, nobody@nowhere.org,
	bill.gates.loves.me, %^$&&&&&&&&&&&&@!!!!!!!!!!!!!.com,

just to mention a few...

His real name is Gary Stewart, afairc.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkBI6t0ACgkQ3fSltXWnWJDIJwCfaphXtkksChEtDAh0pglpp5d7
uSgAoMSu2xUzemMb5A0Pot+eCZM0K6X6
=toQ3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
| Mark Kent   --   mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk  |
We ARE as gods and might as well get good at it.
		-- Whole Earth Catalog

Mark Kent <mark.kent@demon.co.uk> writes:

> His real name is Gary Stewart, afairc.

How was this discovered?  On what evidence?

-- 
"[N]ow for once I might actually have an audience that realizes that
[my proof of Fermat's Last Theorem is correct], because you see,
they'll finally know what's in it for them--cold, hard cash."
 --James Harris embarks on a new mathematical strategy.

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:

> Mark Kent <mark.kent@demon.co.uk> writes:

>> His real name is Gary Stewart, afairc.

> How was this discovered?  On what evidence?

Lets give he man the benefit of the doubt ...<snort>

You do keep strange company ....

Daeron <daeron@demon.net> writes:

> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>
>> Mark Kent <mark.kent@demon.co.uk> writes:
>
>>> His real name is Gary Stewart, afairc.
>
>> How was this discovered?  On what evidence?
>
> Lets give he man the benefit of the doubt ...<snort>

Which man what benefit?

> You do keep strange company ....

What strange company?  I ask only on what grounds someone says that
Flatfish's real name is Gary Stewart?

I admit curiosity about Flatfish.  I'd like to know what sort of
person ends up pursuing a posting history like that.  Why on earth
would he behave so?  Knowing a name isn't much, but it's something.

But I'd like to know what evidence one has that Gary Stewart *is* his
name.  Not to mention, of course, that I'm curious how one would
possibly gain this knowledge.

You know, Daeron, you really are a pea-brain.  My questions are
perfectly reasonable and natural motivations are available on a
moment's reflections.  But go ahead and cast innuendo about, hint at
grand conspiracies, whatever.  

Dumbass.

-- 
Jesse F. Hughes
"Well, I don't claim to be an expert, in fact I am a fry cook with a
national burger chain, but I have solved many differential and partial
differential equations numerically."  --C. Bond

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

Jesse F. Hughes <jesse@phiwumbda.org> espoused:
> Mark Kent <mark.kent@demon.co.uk> writes:
> 
>> His real name is Gary Stewart, afairc.
> 
> How was this discovered?  On what evidence?
> 

I wouldn't normally do this, but here is mjcr's analysis, 
pulled from google:

- --------- start quote ---------------
   From: [7]mjcr ([8]mjcr@mindspring.com)
   Subject: Come and meet Gary "flatfish" Stewart

   Newsgroups:
   [11]comp.os.linux.advocacy, [12]alt.linux.sux
   Date: 2001-11-04 19:46:44 PST

That is right Gary M. Stewart is the real identity of the long term
winvocate and wintroll who has haunted COLA and perhaps a.l.s as well who
has gone by the false identities of:

quimby, Wilbur J. Quimby, fawnlebowitz, junk_trapper, Fawn Lebowitz,
the_flatfish, juke_joint, Whizzer, whppier, t, WinRulez, linux_sux, Jeff
Szarka, Collie Entragion, Deadpenguin, , ., Amy, BklynBoy, Claire Lynn,
[Ff]latfish+++, [fF]latfish, [Ff]latfish++++, Grendel, Heather, Heather69,
Ishmeal Hafizi, Jerry Butler, McSwain, Mike Hunt, Mike, Pickle Pete,
Proculous, S, Sarek, Saul Goldblatt, Saul, Sewer Rat, Simon, Simon777,
Sponge, Steve, Susan Wong, Susie Wong, Swango, Syphon, Tiberious, Tim
Palmer, Willy Wong, Wobbles, bison, hepcat, keymaster, keys88, leg log,
noone, piddy, screwbilk, scummer, steveno, teknite, trailerpark, unknown,
wazzoo, whparker, nobody@nowhere.org, bill.gates.loves.me,
%^$&&&&&&&&&&&&@!!!!!!!!!!!!!.com,

I will now provide my train of reasoning in determining that he/she/it is
Gary.

Soon after I started reading COLA, I had my first run in with this person.
At the time he was using the names of Simon777, Susie Wong, and Willy
Wong.  I really took notice of him as more than just a passing troll, when
he spent nearly 12 hours trying to get past my firewall. That lead to a
series of exchanges that showd that Gary had comitted identity theft by
using the the email address of real persons to hide behind.  Gary
professed his innocent transgression and established the account of
deadpenguin@earthlink.net.  He then claimed that would be his only
identity from then on, this account was a real one.  But it didn't last
soon Claire Lynn had come along.  Just like with the attacks of 9/11 Gary
had professed the profound effect it had on his values, and that "The OS
Wars" were over for him; we now see how empty a statement that really was.

At first I noted a feeling of Deja Vue while reading Gary's prattlings.
Then with his use of Keymaster an identity and his statements of
having been a sysop of a BBS, I started suspecting that I knew who he is.
For a while I intended to watch and wait and compare details.  As time
carried on, I became more an more certain of his identity because he kept
using identies that I have seen before and has kept using language and
phrasings that I have seen before.  What is more both the phrasing and the
identites came from the same person from the days of computer Bulletin
Board Systems.

Now let's take a look at Gary M. Stewart from his days as a BBS sysop.
Gary was known for using multiple identities.  He was quite militant
against certain brands of software.

The BBS was a Telegard BBS named "The Great AbysS".  The official handle
of the sysop of the board was Keymaster; however, he would normally post
in the echoes as Gary M. Stewart (sometimes without the middle initial).
The Great AbysS was the centeral hub for GaSpNet a Fido Technology based
Network owned by Gary.  The Great AbysS was also a node on a number of
other BBS networks: Fidonet, UGNGASP (was GaSpNet before the name change),
NIRVANAnet, Paul Revere Net, PODnet.  Gary was running a FUD campain
againt Renegade BBS and OS/2, and by extension IBM PS/2's.  Gary was also
a beta tester of Telegard BBS.

One day his BBS stopped running taking with it GaSpNet.  He started
leaving messages on other BBS's of the then late GaSpNet begging for
donations to repair his BBS.  After collecting a sizeable sum, (so it was
claimed), rather than repairing his BBS and going back on-line and
bringing his network back to life, he moved back east with the money.  He
was the thirdsysop in the area to pull a stunt like that.  Gary's stunt
marked the beginning of the end of BBS's in this area.  Callers and
fellow sysops were nologer too willing to pay for BBS access or to help a
sysop in financial trouble keep his BBS running.

Here are some quotes of statments by Gary or reguarding Gary in his
network's echoes that are quite similar to the pratling of Gary here in
COLA.


In reply to a request by a caller for the evidence of his claims that
Telegard 2.5g source code was pirated:

- -----included text---------
Papers!  Papers!  Papers!  Ve must see your papers!

You're almost 50 years too late.

Burned any good Jews?
- -----end included text---------


Reply to a question asking what is wrong with Renegade BBS:

- -----included text---------
Renegade is a fuckin abortion.

Telegard RULEZ!!!!!
- -----end included text---------


In response to an inquiry about the value of gaining OS/2 experience.

- -----included text---------
OS/2 sucks
DOS rules

PM SUCKS
Windows RULZ.

Now get to fuck off my board.
- -----end included text---------


>From a sysop of another BBS that was a node on GaSpNet:

- -----included text---------
Hey!  Keymaster, Gary, Steve, Mike, Simon or whoever the fuck you are
calling youself today!
[...]
- -----end included text---------


After locking out a "caller" to The Great AbysS and announcing it via
an echo of GaSpNet:

>From one sysop:

- -----included text---------
Awwww come on!  Let Tim back on...or we will never hear from you again,
keymaster.  We know that Tim = keymaster = Alice = Gary = you.
NOW CUT THE ACT!
- -----end included text---------

>From another sysop:

- -----included text---------
OK,  Gary, Simon, winrulez, drkool, keymaster, Mike, W.J. Quimby, Tim
you got tired of your "Tim" name but you don't got to make this show
of lockin it out.
- -----end included text---------

I guess Gary is one old dog that can not give up his old tricks and it is
those tricks that lead to his identity.  Just like how Quimby was cought
today by Terry Porter was the same method I used to identify Gary as the
person who tried to crack into my systems.

I find the odds that these two persons, Gary and he/she/it are not one
and the same to be quite slim.  That said, even with Gary's name exposed,
he is still anonymous enough.  There are at least 19 Gary Stewart's in
the state of New York and 4 more in the state of New Jersey.


- ------------------ end quote --------------------


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkBJCS0ACgkQ3fSltXWnWJA0kQCfZ5+EIi7JaRtuy2HEPKf36JRL
lgYAnju+DD/CaMRb8r61kw+aGY7eVxoY
=ZLB9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
| Mark Kent   --   mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk  |
We ARE as gods and might as well get good at it.
		-- Whole Earth Catalog

Mark Kent <mark.kent@demon.co.uk> writes:

> Jesse F. Hughes <jesse@phiwumbda.org> espoused:
>> Mark Kent <mark.kent@demon.co.uk> writes:
>> 
>>> His real name is Gary Stewart, afairc.
>> 
>> How was this discovered?  On what evidence?
>> 
>
> I wouldn't normally do this, but here is mjcr's analysis, 
> pulled from google:

Thanks.

There are still plenty of unanswered questions (how did he know it was
Flatfish trying to get past his firewall?) and there's much
uncertainty in the identity (it's hard to be sure that two authors are
the same, but it's easy to get a gut feeling).  Mjcr's analysis seems
to make the identification plausible, if not beyond doubt.

Anyway, I appreciate the reference.

-- 
"At the Microsoft-sponsored cocktail reception in the Galaxy Ballroom
that evening, Robert Dees urges us 'to network on behalf of the people
of Iraq,'" 
   -- Naomi Klein reports on Microsoft's efforts to further democracy.
 

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:

<snip>

>>>> This fact is more shameful for the people running that site 
>>>> than for the people using the header, as far as I'm concerned.

>> So you do deem it relevant to comment on my motives but not 
>> flatfish. I wonder what your motivation is in posting here ?

> I didn't comment on your motives.  I commented on what I think the 
> moral high ground requires.

- quote -
"It is a convention which is upheld by, as far as I know,
every single Usenet indexing site save one: the trollarchive site."

"This fact is more shameful for the people running that site than for
the people using the header, as far as I'm concerned." Jesse F. Hughes
Mar 05 2004
- unquote -

Hokey, dokey .. You commented on the 'moral high ground'. You are
implying that the keeper of the trollarchive is less 'moral' than
flatfish. Since you've brought up 'shame' 'morals' and 'respect' in
relation to my posts. It is relevent to ask the same of your and
flatfishes posts. It is *most* relevent to ask what is *your* motivation
  in defending fishie.

As for the rest. You've had your say and I have had mine. There is no
furthur benefit in continuing the 'discussion'.

<snip>

Daeron wrote:
> "It is a convention which is upheld by, as far as I know,
> every single Usenet indexing site save one: the trollarchive site."

He did say AFAIK, but of course, we know thats about as far as Blake 
Stowell'd FUD gets off his lips before its disproven.

I think you should qualify yourself Jesse, 'every single *PUBLIC* Usenet 
indexing site'

You honestly think MS's newsgroup droid gives a fuck about your 
X-No-Archive? they may not show it when accessing the site externally, 
but a backup thats run EACH day, is not 'archiving' that message for 
threads, its 'backing it up to maintain integrity in case of crashes'

Those 'backups' how often do they erase them I wonder?

Many *PAID* companies scour, and archive the web, print media, the trade 
press, and yes, newsgroups.

X-No-Archive is used for *valid* reasons by many, but only trolls use it 
in such a manner as to prevent others finding proof, your argument of 
'seeing their words in replies to it' is not valid.

Proof to many is a message including headers available via google or 
other archive not just 'quoted' text, which as Erik F is so keen on 
proving, can be twisted, its all about context) and its the 'Proof' most 
trolls scream for when accused of saying something 'I didnt say that, 
show me where I said that' and guess what, all thats there is 'quoted' 
text, and 'subject to interpretation' 'taken out of context' etc etc

Your persistance in defending flatfish, and not the *VALID* use of an 
X-No-Archive header, leads me to believe your probably just trolling 
yourself, or perhaps a flatty nym yourself, he has been quiet lately 
compared to before...

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:

> You know, Daeron, you really are a pea-brain ..

"In your typical pea-brained way .."

- Erik Funkenbusch Mar 05 2004 20:17
- unquote -

A lot of people would have forgotten the hyphen eg: propellor-head :)

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:

> Philip Callan <callanca@shaw.ca> writes:
> 
> 
>>Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>>
>>
>>>These last two paragraphs have absolutely nothing to do with the
>>>intended interpretation of X-No-Archive.
>>>
>>
>>The *intended interpretation*
>>
>>Sorry, trolls do not get to hide behind yet another layer of deception.
>>The last 2 paragraphs have everything to do with FLATFISH's intended 
>>interpretation of the X-No-Archive header.
>>
> 
> No, they don't.  The X-No-Archive header is not intended to ensure
> that participants forget one's contributions nor to prevent readers
> from saving articles for personal use.  
> 

 > No, they don't.

1. YES THEY DO
2. How do you know FLATFISH's intended interpretation? Do you ask him, 
or are you him?

Thanks for noticing:

 > The X-No-Archive header is [not] intended to ensure
 > that participants forget one's contributions nor to prevent readers
 > from saving articles for personal use

Never said anything about its *intended intepretation* being used in 
such regard.

I said those two paragraphs about the *flatfish / troll* interpretation 
of the header which to quote myself is:

[
Do you count the argument 'I dont want proof of my words biting me later 
in the ass in public debate' as stronger, or less strong, than being an 
asshole?
]

I re-iterate my definition of proof from another of my posts:

[
Proof to many is a message including headers available via google or 
other archive not just 'quoted' text, which as Erik F is so keen on 
proving, can be twisted, its all about context) and its the 'Proof' most 
trolls scream for when accused of saying something 'I didnt say that, 
show me where I said that' and guess what, all thats there is 'quoted' 
text, and 'subject to interpretation' 'taken out of context' etc etc
]

Once again, because it is an ACCURATE representation of FLATFISH's usage 
of the X-No-Archive header, I repeat the two paragraphs, so those 
joining in the thread may go through your arguments and see your intent, 
additional comments within ()
[
If a person enters a public forum, and is involved in the debate or 
conversation, they should accept the fact that one or more people *may* 
be recording it (logging, saving posts, writing it down on a pad???) 
similar to when you engage in a ytalk, or IM/email with a person, BBS 
chat rooms, or engage in public conversation on the bus.

(Flatfish uses the header in order to prevent 'proof' as defined above)

When I go to the McDonalds and start yelling *BURGER KING RULES, YOUR 
BURGERS GOT MAGGOTS IN 'EM* and they have me arrested, I cant very well 
go into the court and say 'Hey! Thats not fair, I told all those people 
not to remember anything'

(Flatfish comes into a public forum, and behaves in a disruptive manner, 
and attacks people/things without cause)
thats behavior
(Oooh, a newly classified troll, 'Jesse' begins the 'thats not fair, 
X-no-archive is telling people to forget' IGNORING FLATFISH's USAGE, and 
being rather disengenious, replying in ways so as to draw attention AWAY 
from flatfish flopping)
]

Nymshift, alliance with other trolls as part of the Troll Accords?, or 
just another bored troll, looking for reaction?

Daeron wrote:

> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
> 
>> You know, Daeron, you really are a pea-brain ..
> 
> 
> "In your typical pea-brained way .."
> 
> - Erik Funkenbusch Mar 05 2004 20:17
> - unquote -
> 
> A lot of people would have forgotten the hyphen eg: propellor-head :)

I'm beginning to suspect one of the regulars Erik/Milo/Mike Cox/Flatfish 
has been smarting a bit from all the troll slaps lately, and nymshifted.

So anyway, it was like, 17:00 CET Mar 06 2004, you know? Oh, and, yeah,
Philip Callan was all like, "Dude,

> [everyone who thinks x-no-archive should be honoured is a troll!]

Let me just add myself to the general troll community here. I think
that the actions of some lowlife should not invalidate the legitimate
use of a privacy flag for others.

Archival services with the express intent of disragarding the wishes
of posters are, in my opinion, doing a disservice to the world as a
whole. I'm sorry, but who-fucking-cares about what the trolls said or
did not say?

People posting in a public, political forum using a flag that prevents
the normal archives from retaining their posts don't have any
credibility in the first place, so what difference does it make if
you can't drag up their words later on? For dramatic effect, they've
been quoted enough times by morons[1] who can't stop themselves from
responding.

Now, please, stop labelling honest people with derogatory remarks and
get over it. Thanks.

[1] Yes, I'm indeed one of those morons once in a while, even if
    I do credit myself with some more restraint than that of
    others.

-- 
Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana.      Perth ---> *
 17:16:47 up 13 days, 23:53,  6 users,  load average: 1.01, 1.03, 1.01
$ cat /dev/bollocks "echo y | format c:" Registered Linux user #261729
repurpose e-business solutions

Philip Callan wrote:

>> A lot of people would have forgotten the hyphen eg: propellor-head
>> :)

> I'm beginning to suspect one of the regulars Erik/Milo/Mike
> Cox/Flatfish has been smarting a bit from all the troll slaps lately,
> and nymshifted.

I've said this before. But I suspect that while there may be different
individuals doing the typing. They get their material 'scripted' for them.

They then get to personalise it with different personas. The pretend
Linux advocate being one. The raving looney Linux advocate is another.

Daeron wrote:

> They then get to personalise it with different personas. The pretend
> Linux advocate being one. The raving looney Linux advocate is another.

Thats Bailo, except he just is looney, I dont think he's effective 
enough to be paid for it.

Daeron <daeron@demon.net> writes:

> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>>>>> This fact is more shameful for the people running that site 
>>>>> than for the people using the header, as far as I'm concerned.
>
>>> So you do deem it relevant to comment on my motives but not 
>>> flatfish. I wonder what your motivation is in posting here ?
>
>> I didn't comment on your motives.  I commented on what I think the 
>> moral high ground requires.
>
> - quote -
> "It is a convention which is upheld by, as far as I know,
> every single Usenet indexing site save one: the trollarchive site."
>
> "This fact is more shameful for the people running that site than for
> the people using the header, as far as I'm concerned." Jesse F. Hughes
> Mar 05 2004
> - unquote -
>
> Hokey, dokey .. You commented on the 'moral high ground'. You are
> implying that the keeper of the trollarchive is less 'moral' than
> flatfish. 

In retrospect, I may have overstated things there.  At least, I'm less
confident in that judgment than I expressed.

> Since you've brought up 'shame' 'morals' and 'respect' in relation
> to my posts. It is relevent to ask the same of your and flatfishes
> posts. It is *most* relevent to ask what is *your* motivation in
> defending fishie.

You're mistaken.  I've never mentioned morality with respect to your
posts, but only with respect to the actions of the keeper of the
trollarchive.  

I disagree that asking my motivation is particularly relevant, but
I'll give it anyway.  I've said this before.  When a putative Linux
advocate says or does something with which I disagree, I sometimes
feel compelled to say so.  I want to make clear that not all Linux
advocates agree with that opinion.  

From a practical standpoint, this motivation isn't particularly
reasonable.  Certainly, what is said here on COLA doesn't matter much
and influences worldwide opinions of Linux and its advocates almost
not at all.  Also, it's not at all clear that there *is* a presumption
that Linux advocates think as one, so it's not clear that one needs to
dispel this myth.  

Nonetheless, I feel a stronger urge, typically, to correct or dispute
questionable statements from a Linux advocate than from a Windows
advocate.  Let the trolls make fools of themselves.  Others will argue
with them.  I just prefer not to have wrong or inadvisable opinions
from Linux advocates go unchallenged.

I think you've asked me similar questions before and I've answered
roughly similarly.  For instance, I have previously written 

,----[ <87llujejc5.fsf@phiwumbda.localnet> ]
| Correcting false statements from those that are "on your side" is more
| important than correcting false statements from Windows advocates.
| Basic honesty and integrity requires as much.  You seem to think that
| such activities are defending the "enemy".
`----

I don't know why you keep asking the same questions about motive, keep
insinuating that my activity is undercover trolling and so on.  Maybe
you should save a copy of this post.  That way, next time you feel
puzzled about how a self-respecting Linux user could possibly find
fault with the statement of another Linux user, you could re-read this
explanation and save us the tedium of replaying this thread.

Alternatively, you could drop the innuendo and find the smoking gun
that proves that I'm a closet wintroll.  After all I use my real name
and always have.  Maybe you could try the wayback machine and search
old web pages.  Or concoct a theory of how I used aliases to promote
Windows for the past eight years all while publicly stating a deep
preference for Linux.  Do something like that.  Drop the chickenshit
innuendo and make a real allegation.

-- 
"Sale or rental of this disc is ILLEGAL.  If you have rented or
purchased this disc, please call the MPAA at 1-800-NO-COPYS."  
                 -- The MPAA begins a new anti-piracy program,
                    found on a DVD purchased in China

Johan Lindquist wrote:

> So anyway, it was like, 17:00 CET Mar 06 2004, you know? Oh, and, yeah,
> Philip Callan was all like, "Dude,
> 
> 
>>[everyone who thinks x-no-archive should be honoured is a troll!]
> 

Please tell me where I *SAID* that, or implied it.

If you are going to leave my name in it, at least use my words, dont put 
your interpretation under my fucking name.

Philip Callan <callanca@shaw.ca> writes:

> Daeron wrote:
>> "It is a convention which is upheld by, as far as I know,
>> every single Usenet indexing site save one: the trollarchive site."
>
> He did say AFAIK, but of course, we know thats about as far as Blake 
> Stowell'd FUD gets off his lips before its disproven.
>
> I think you should qualify yourself Jesse, 'every single *PUBLIC* Usenet 
> indexing site'

Certainly, I did mean "public".  Thanks.


[...]

> X-No-Archive is used for *valid* reasons by many, but only trolls use it 
> in such a manner as to prevent others finding proof, your argument of 
> 'seeing their words in replies to it' is not valid.
> 
> Proof to many is a message including headers available via google or 
> other archive not just 'quoted' text, which as Erik F is so keen on 
> proving, can be twisted, its all about context) and its the 'Proof' most 
> trolls scream for when accused of saying something 'I didnt say that, 
> show me where I said that' and guess what, all thats there is 'quoted' 
> text, and 'subject to interpretation' 'taken out of context' etc etc

Erik uses that rejoinder, but trolls like flatfish don't.  In any
case, that rejoinder simply cannot work if the troll himself is the
reason that we cannot see his words in a fuller context.  

I think you raise a reasonable point, but in practice it just doesn't
come up.  I've never seen any of the no-archiving posters claim that
their words (which are lost to the public) have been taken out of
context.  Erik says that, no doubt.  Erik says that when his words are
plain and the literal meaning the only reasonable meaning.  But Erik
doesn't use the dreaded no-archive header.

> Your persistance in defending flatfish, and not the *VALID* use of an 
> X-No-Archive header, leads me to believe your probably just trolling 
> yourself, or perhaps a flatty nym yourself, he has been quiet lately 
> compared to before...

Yes, that's probably it.  You found me out.

Hey, I know.  Try Google.  See what you can find that supports your
suggestion.


-- 
Jesse F. Hughes
"Penguins are so sensitive to my needs."  --Lyle Lovett

Daeron <daeron@demon.net> writes:

> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>
>> You know, Daeron, you really are a pea-brain ..
>
> "In your typical pea-brained way .."
>
> - Erik Funkenbusch Mar 05 2004 20:17
> - unquote -
>
> A lot of people would have forgotten the hyphen eg: propellor-head :)
>

What's your point?  Guilt by spelling association?

-- 
Jesse Hughes
"Such behaviour is exclusively confined to functions invented by
mathematicians for the sake of causing trouble."
 -Albert Eagle's _A Practical Treatise on Fourier's Theorem_

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:

> Yes, that's probably it.  You found me out.

I can agree with your self-stated purpose of 'correcting' the linux 
advocates, but how is *repeated* mis-interpretation, and stubborn 
refusal to believe a linux advocate when they say 'That wasnt my intent, 
and if you look in context, I think you'll see that' not trolling?

You need something spelled out to you with each word defined by the 
dictionary? You nit-pick on INTERPRETATIONS, not INTENT.

The fact that you twist words, like you did on your other x-no-archive 
thread, is proof that your posting something, not as truth, or as a 
corrective statement, but your interpretation, and doing it to provoke a 
response.

Thats a good definition of a troll, if you ask me, regardless of the OS 
you use, or name.

Philip Callan <callanca@shaw.ca> writes:

> Daeron wrote:
>
>> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>> 
>>> You know, Daeron, you really are a pea-brain ..
>> 
>> 
>> "In your typical pea-brained way .."
>> 
>> - Erik Funkenbusch Mar 05 2004 20:17
>> - unquote -
>> 
>> A lot of people would have forgotten the hyphen eg: propellor-head :)
>
> I'm beginning to suspect one of the regulars Erik/Milo/Mike Cox/Flatfish 
> has been smarting a bit from all the troll slaps lately, and nymshifted.
>

Then you're simply a complete and utter moron.  

There's a way for you to check your suspicions, you know.  A new
device called Google Groups.  Somehow seems relevant to this thread
and all.  Why don't you try it out?  Come back.  Report what you find.

Do a search on author:jesse author:hughes.  Anything that comes from
phiwumbda.org, cmu.edu or cs.kun.nl is certainly mine.  Heck, try the
wayback machine.  See my old webpage from CMU.  Tell us all about my
remarkably bad sense of aesthetics.

Take your time and gather some evidence and come back and make your
case.  I'll bet it's so overwhelming that I'll break down on the
witness stand and confess.  Should be quite dramatic.

Moron.
-- 
Jesse F. Hughes
"[blah blah blah] which you are trying to dispute, but I've found that
you've used ***definitions*** rather than mathematical logic, often in
your posts." -- James Harris on the insufficiency of math. definitions.

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>>
>>I'm beginning to suspect one of the regulars Erik/Milo/Mike Cox/Flatfish 
>>has been smarting a bit from all the troll slaps lately, and nymshifted.
>>
> 
> 
> Then you're simply a complete and utter moron.  

Thanks for an attack on my intelligence, but how does my SUSPECTING make 
me stupid?

Its an opinion based on my interpretation of your behavior, and as ralph 
has shown, BELIEVING something has nothing to do with the TRUTH of 
something.

Some of your behavior is trolling in nature, some isnt, suspecting you 
may post under another name is not SAYING you are any of those people, 
it is voicing my suspicion, based on the evidence I've seen thus far, 
unlike Erik, I'm willing to change my opinion if facts or rebuttals 
warrant it.

Re; Google searching, uhmm, great, the fact that the persona (or person, 
as the case may be) of 'Jesse Hughes' posts material of Type A, does NOT 
preclude you from posting under a different name material of Type B.

Check google for me, I've got posts from 1994, and huge blank spots, is 
it because I got off the net? No, its because my email, or 'posting 
name' was a nickname, or alias, and not everything is under my real name.

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:

> Daeron <daeron@demon.net> writes:
> 
> 
>>Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>>
>>
>>>You know, Daeron, you really are a pea-brain ..
>>
>>"In your typical pea-brained way .."
>>
>>- Erik Funkenbusch Mar 05 2004 20:17
>>- unquote -
>>
>>A lot of people would have forgotten the hyphen eg: propellor-head :)
>>
> 
> 
> What's your point?  Guilt by spelling association?
> 

I took it as more:

'Can't you even be original?'

Philip Callan <callanca@shaw.ca> writes:

> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>
>> Yes, that's probably it.  You found me out.
>
> I can agree with your self-stated purpose of 'correcting' the linux 
> advocates, but how is *repeated* mis-interpretation, and stubborn 
> refusal to believe a linux advocate when they say 'That wasnt my intent, 
> and if you look in context, I think you'll see that' not trolling?
>
> You need something spelled out to you with each word defined by the 
> dictionary? You nit-pick on INTERPRETATIONS, not INTENT.

I've no idea what you mean.  Who said, "That wasn't my intent?"
*What* wasn't his intent?  When did I ignore a statement like that?

If you have an explicit example in mind, give some details (including
citations) so I know what the hell you're talking about.

> The fact that you twist words, like you did on your other x-no-archive 
> thread, is proof that your posting something, not as truth, or as a 
> corrective statement, but your interpretation, and doing it to provoke a 
> response.

You'll have to give me an example.

> Thats a good definition of a troll, if you ask me, regardless of the OS 
> you use, or name.

Whatever.  I have been explicit on my meaning, I think, and I have not
wavered on any significant point as far as I recall.  I can't imagine
what words you think I've twisted.

But now, with your no doubt ever-so-reasonable new allegation (I've
been downgraded from sock-puppet to garden variety troll), evidence
is that much simpler.  You don't need to Google years back.  You can
just give an example from this very thread (or the other thread you
mention) to show what you mean.  Give some evidence that I've been
disingenuous here.  
-- 
Jesse F. Hughes

"I post for many reasons [...] and there's no reason to think that
I'll stop." -- James S. Harris

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:

> Philip Callan <callanca@shaw.ca> writes:

>>You need something spelled out to you with each word defined by the 
>>dictionary? You nit-pick on INTERPRETATIONS, not INTENT.

> If you have an explicit example in mind, give some details (including
> citations) so I know what the hell you're talking about.

> You'll have to give me an example.
> 
> 
>>Thats a good definition of a troll, if you ask me, regardless of the OS 
>>you use, or name.

> Give some evidence that I've been
> disingenuous here.  
Jesse F. Hughes wrote:

 > Philip Callan <callanca@shaw.ca> writes:
 >
 >
 >> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
 >>
 >>
 >>> These last two paragraphs have absolutely nothing to do with the
 >>> intended interpretation of X-No-Archive.
 >>>
 >>
 >> The *intended interpretation*
 >>
 >> Sorry, trolls do not get to hide behind yet another layer of deception.
 >> The last 2 paragraphs have everything to do with FLATFISH's intended 
interpretation of the X-No-Archive header.
 >>
 >
 > No, they don't.  The X-No-Archive header is not intended to ensure
 > that participants forget one's contributions nor to prevent readers
 > from saving articles for personal use.


 > No, they don't.

1. YES THEY DO
2. How do you know FLATFISH's intended interpretation? Do you ask him, 
or are you him?

Thanks for noticing:

 > The X-No-Archive header is [not] intended to ensure
 > that participants forget one's contributions nor to prevent readers
 > from saving articles for personal use

Never said anything about its *intended intepretation* being used in 
such regard.

I said those two paragraphs about the *flatfish / troll* interpretation 
of the header which to quote myself is:

[
Do you count the argument 'I dont want proof of my words biting me later 
in the ass in public debate' as stronger, or less strong, than being an 
asshole?
]

I re-iterate my definition of proof from another of my posts:

[
Proof to many is a message including headers available via google or 
other archive not just 'quoted' text, which as Erik F is so keen on 
proving, can be twisted, its all about context) and its the 'Proof' most 
trolls scream for when accused of saying something 'I didnt say that, 
show me where I said that' and guess what, all thats there is 'quoted' 
text, and 'subject to interpretation' 'taken out of context' etc etc
]

Once again, because it is an ACCURATE representation of FLATFISH's usage 
of the X-No-Archive header, I repeat the two paragraphs, so those 
joining in the thread may go through your arguments and see your intent, 
additional comments within ()
[
If a person enters a public forum, and is involved in the debate or 
conversation, they should accept the fact that one or more people *may* 
be recording it (logging, saving posts, writing it down on a pad???) 
similar to when you engage in a ytalk, or IM/email with a person, BBS 
chat rooms, or engage in public conversation on the bus.

(Flatfish uses the header in order to prevent 'proof' as defined above)

When I go to the McDonalds and start yelling *BURGER KING RULES, YOUR 
BURGERS GOT MAGGOTS IN 'EM* and they have me arrested, I cant very well 
go into the court and say 'Hey! Thats not fair, I told all those people 
not to remember anything'

(Flatfish comes into a public forum, and behaves in a disruptive manner, 
and attacks people/things without cause)
thats behavior
(Oooh, a newly classified troll, 'Jesse' begins the 'thats not fair, 
X-no-archive is telling people to forget' IGNORING FLATFISH's USAGE, and 
being rather disengenious, replying in ways so as to draw attention AWAY 
from flatfish flopping)
]

Nymshift, alliance with other trolls as part of the Troll Accor

Philip Callan <callanca@shaw.ca> writes:

> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>>>
>>>I'm beginning to suspect one of the regulars Erik/Milo/Mike Cox/Flatfish 
>>>has been smarting a bit from all the troll slaps lately, and nymshifted.
>>>
>> 
>> 
>> Then you're simply a complete and utter moron.  
>
> Thanks for an attack on my intelligence, but how does my SUSPECTING make 
> me stupid?

Going public with your suspicion without checking readily available
evidence to the contrary is a pretty good sign of stupidity, I'd say.

> Its an opinion based on my interpretation of your behavior, and as ralph 
> has shown, BELIEVING something has nothing to do with the TRUTH of 
> something.
>
> Some of your behavior is trolling in nature, some isnt, suspecting you 
> may post under another name is not SAYING you are any of those people, 
> it is voicing my suspicion, based on the evidence I've seen thus far, 
> unlike Erik, I'm willing to change my opinion if facts or rebuttals 
> warrant it.
>
> Re; Google searching, uhmm, great, the fact that the persona (or person, 
> as the case may be) of 'Jesse Hughes' posts material of Type A, does NOT 
> preclude you from posting under a different name material of Type B.

No, it doesn't.  But it would be a remarkable event if someone
consistently pretended to be a user and advocate of Linux for years
while clandestinely trolling for Windows.  And now, I suppose, the jig
would be up, would it?

It's a cute theory.  This particular "persona" earned a degree or two
and has been in a couple of jobs, which is easily verifiable through
Google.  Makes me wonder what my other personas have been up to.  I
hope they've had full and rewarding lives.

But, of course, you didn't bother a cursory search of even Google
groups before publicly suggesting that I was a sock puppet of the evil
MS conspiracy.  See, *that's* why I called you stupid.  Not because
you considered the possibility, but because you're simply too ignorant
to do *anything* to confirm or deny the theory before publicly
discussing it. 

I don't personally need to Google to check your posting history.  The
behavior in this one post is sufficient for my conclusion: you're a
moron.


-- 
"[R]eality has a fascinating ability to check us when we get a little too
big for our britches... Make no mistake.  There isn't a mathematician alive
today that I can't now touch, and not a mathematical career on the planet
that I can't now affect."  --James Harris, render of worlds

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:

> Philip Callan <callanca@shaw.ca> writes:
>> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:

>>>> I'm beginning to suspect one of the regulars Erik/Milo/Mike
>>>> Cox/Flatfish has been smarting a bit from all the troll slaps
>>>> lately, and nymshifted.

Jesse F is of the reasonable kind. He give the wintrolls the benefit of
the doubt. While requiring the rigorous of posting standards from the
pro Linux people.

Philip Callan <callanca@shaw.ca> writes:

> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>
>> Daeron <daeron@demon.net> writes:
>> 
>> 
>>>Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>You know, Daeron, you really are a pea-brain ..
>>>
>>>"In your typical pea-brained way .."
>>>
>>>- Erik Funkenbusch Mar 05 2004 20:17
>>>- unquote -
>>>
>>>A lot of people would have forgotten the hyphen eg: propellor-head :)
>>>
>> 
>> 
>> What's your point?  Guilt by spelling association?
>> 
>
> I took it as more:
>
> 'Can't you even be original?'
>

It is possible that I chose the word "pea-brain" because I had seen
Erik use it earlier that day.  I think I read that post, so it might
have influenced my word choice.

In defense of my originality, a Google search confirms that I've used
"pea-brain" at least once before.  By coincidence (?), I called Daeron
a pea-brain on that occasion too.  Erik was calling Daeron a
pea-brain, too.

This suggests the following interpretation.  When composing followups
to Daeron, the word "pea-brain" just naturally suggests itself.  I
wonder why that might be.
-- 
Jesse F. Hughes
"Penguins are so sensitive to my needs."  --Lyle Lovett

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:

> Daeron <daeron@demon.net> writes:

>>> You know, Daeron, you really are a pea-brain ..

>> "In your typical pea-brained way .."

>> A lot of people would have forgotten the hyphen eg: propellor-head 
>> :)

> What's your point?  Guilt by spelling association?

A lot of people would have forgotten the hyphen eg: propellor head

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:

> See, *that's* why I called you stupid.  Not because
> you considered the possibility, but because you're simply too ignorant
> to do *anything* to confirm or deny the theory before publicly
> discussing it. 
> 

For my view on this, see the debate re: ESR  in the 'follow the money' 
thread between me and Mark Kent, its a matter of interpretation of intent.

You come on here an publically state *your* interpretation of my posts, 
without checking my past, and then have the balls to say this:

> I don't personally need to Google to check your posting history.  The
> behavior in this one post is sufficient for my conclusion: you're a
> moron.

I dont personally need to Google to check *your* posting history. The 
behavior in a fair number of recent posts is sufficient for my 
SUSPICION: your a troll, and I believe you to be one of the regulars, 
and when trolling under that pseudonym is slapped too severely, you 
resort to your personal name.

Philip Callan <callanca@shaw.ca> writes:

[...]

I haven't yet responded to the post which you quoted here, but I will.

-- 
"Run mathematicians, RUN!!!  I'm coming for you.  It may take a few
months, but I'll get [computer verification of my proof] and then your
lives will be ended as you previously knew it." -- JSH meets PVS

Daeron wrote:

> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
> 
>> Philip Callan <callanca@shaw.ca> writes:
>>
>>> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
> 
> 
>>>>> I'm beginning to suspect one of the regulars Erik/Milo/Mike
>>>>> Cox/Flatfish has been smarting a bit from all the troll slaps
>>>>> lately, and nymshifted.
> 
> 
> Jesse F is of the reasonable kind. He give the wintrolls the benefit of
> the doubt. While requiring the rigorous of posting standards from the
> pro Linux people.

Ahh, double standard then, not wintrolling in specific, agreed.

So anyway, it was like, 17:36 CET Mar 06 2004, you know? Oh, and, yeah,
Philip Callan was all like, "Dude,
> Johan Lindquist wrote:
>> So anyway, it was like, 17:00 CET Mar 06 2004, you know? Oh, and, yeah,
>> Philip Callan was all like, "Dude,

>>> [everyone who thinks x-no-archive should be honoured is a troll!]
>
> Please tell me where I *SAID* that,

Those words, nowhere. That's what the [] is for, I'm paraphrasing.

> or implied it.

This entire thread seems to consist of one guy saying "I think people
should honour posters using the x-no-archive flag" and you and another
guy going "so you're one of flatfish' fellow trolls then, huh" in
response to this.

That's my interpretation of it, and your general paranoia only serves
to enforce it.

-- 
Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana.      Perth ---> *
 19:17:29 up 14 days,  1:54,  6 users,  load average: 1.00, 1.01, 1.00
$ cat /dev/bollocks "echo y | format c:" Registered Linux user #261729
drive compelling channels

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:

> You're mistaken.  I've never mentioned morality with respect to your
>  posts, but only with respect to the actions of the keeper of the 
> trollarchive.

It is common knowlege that I made the trollarchive site. Just google on
trollarchive

"they go here: http://members.lycos.co.uk/trollarchive/"
- Daeron Mar 12 2003

"http://www.angelfire.com/blog/trollarchive updated here ..."
- Daeron Mar 21 2003

Philip Callan <callanca@shaw.ca> writes:

> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>
>> Philip Callan <callanca@shaw.ca> writes:
>> 
>> 
>>>Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>These last two paragraphs have absolutely nothing to do with the
>>>>intended interpretation of X-No-Archive.
>>>>
>>>
>>>The *intended interpretation*
>>>
>>>Sorry, trolls do not get to hide behind yet another layer of deception.
>>>The last 2 paragraphs have everything to do with FLATFISH's intended 
>>>interpretation of the X-No-Archive header.
>>>
>> 
>> No, they don't.  The X-No-Archive header is not intended to ensure
>> that participants forget one's contributions nor to prevent readers
>> from saving articles for personal use.  
>> 
>
>  > No, they don't.
>
> 1. YES THEY DO
> 2. How do you know FLATFISH's intended interpretation? Do you ask him, 
> or are you him?

There seems to be some misunderstanding here.  I didn't mean to give
Flatfish's "intended interpretation", but the intention of the
originators of the X-No-Archive header.  I don't think that one should
decide whether or not to honor a header based on his own guess about
the intentions of the poster.  That seems a bad move.


>
> Thanks for noticing:
>
>  > The X-No-Archive header is [not] intended to ensure
>  > that participants forget one's contributions nor to prevent readers
>  > from saving articles for personal use
>
> Never said anything about its *intended intepretation* being used in 
> such regard.
>
> I said those two paragraphs about the *flatfish / troll* interpretation 
> of the header which to quote myself is:

Again, the confusion here is that, when I write of the "intended
interpretation" of the header, I meant "intended by the originators of
the convention", not Flatfish's intent.  I *think* the policy of the
trollarchive site is to archive *every* post using the no-archive
header.  This is regrettable, but it would be just as regrettable if
they only archived the posts of certain participants, on the grounds
that those participants are up to no good.

Any participant may certainly record any posts he wishes.  The issue
of providing a publicly accessible archive of those posts is what I
find regrettable.

> [
> Do you count the argument 'I dont want proof of my words biting me later 
> in the ass in public debate' as stronger, or less strong, than being an 
> asshole?
> ]
>
> I re-iterate my definition of proof from another of my posts:
>
> [
> Proof to many is a message including headers available via google or 
> other archive not just 'quoted' text, which as Erik F is so keen on 
> proving, can be twisted, its all about context) and its the 'Proof' most 
> trolls scream for when accused of saying something 'I didnt say that, 
> show me where I said that' and guess what, all thats there is 'quoted' 
> text, and 'subject to interpretation' 'taken out of context' etc etc
> ]
>
> Once again, because it is an ACCURATE representation of FLATFISH's usage 
> of the X-No-Archive header, I repeat the two paragraphs, so those 
> joining in the thread may go through your arguments and see your intent, 
> additional comments within ()

Do you have an example where Flatfish complained that an earlier
poster was misrepresenting him when quoting part of a post which had
not been archived?  Is this a real problem or an imagined problem?
Why not simply say, in such cases, that we cannot glean any more
context than has been preserved by Google, and so Flatfish cannot
legitimately complain about lack of context when the context is
lacking by his own choice?

> Nymshift, alliance with other trolls as part of the Troll Accords?, or 
> just another bored troll, looking for reaction?

All of the above.  Duh.
-- 
Meaningless movies                                
on the screen behind the band that's blowing       Waterboys,
throwing shapes                                    "My Love is My Rock
Half of the music is on tape                         in the Weary Land"

Daeron <daeron@demon.net> writes:

> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>
>> Philip Callan <callanca@shaw.ca> writes:
>>> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>
>>>>> I'm beginning to suspect one of the regulars Erik/Milo/Mike
>>>>> Cox/Flatfish has been smarting a bit from all the troll slaps
>>>>> lately, and nymshifted.
>
> Jesse F is of the reasonable kind. He give the wintrolls the benefit of
> the doubt. While requiring the rigorous of posting standards from the
> pro Linux people.
>

I wouldn't say I give wintrolls any benefit of the doubt.  I simply
don't as often feel compelled to respond to their idiocy as I do to
the misstatements of Linux advocates.

The two are very often in a very different class.  Take the wintroll
account of a botched company-wide move to Linux now active.  Why
should I bother to respond to such a ridiculous story, when plenty of
others will be sure to respond and when such stories and when silly
claims like he makes do not even indirectly reflect on Linux users?

Wintroll claims are often much more ludicrous, but I don't usually
respond to them.  This shouldn't be interpreted as giving wintrolls
the "benefit of the doubt".

-- 
"At the Microsoft-sponsored cocktail reception in the Galaxy Ballroom
that evening, Robert Dees urges us 'to network on behalf of the people
of Iraq,'" 
   -- Naomi Klein reports on Microsoft's efforts to further democracy.
 

Johan Lindquist wrote:

> So anyway, it was like, 17:36 CET Mar 06 2004, you know? Oh, and, yeah,
> Philip Callan was all like, "Dude,
> 
>>Johan Lindquist wrote:
>>
>>>So anyway, it was like, 17:00 CET Mar 06 2004, you know? Oh, and, yeah,
>>>Philip Callan was all like, "Dude,
> 
> 
>>>>[everyone who thinks x-no-archive should be honoured is a troll!]
>>
>>Please tell me where I *SAID* that,
> 
> 
> Those words, nowhere. That's what the [] is for, I'm paraphrasing.
> 

Then please refrain from using my name as a quoted party unless you wish 
to use the ACTUAL text I used. This is what leads to mis-interpretations 
later in the thread.

And for the record:

> So anyway, it was like, 17:00 CET Mar 06 2004, you know? Oh, and, yeah,
> Philip Callan was all like, "Dude,
> 
> 
>>> [everyone who thinks x-no-archive should be honoured is a troll!]

I implying I said it, and being that I use the [] a fair bit in text, 
can be taken to assume that those WERE my actual words, when they are 
not, they are your 'paraphrasing' as you put it, perhaps you should put 
a disclaimer in your posts that your only paraphrasing others, and not 
actually quoting THEM.

> 
>>or implied it.
> 
> 
> This entire thread seems to consist of one guy saying "I think people
> should honour posters using the x-no-archive flag" and you and another
> guy going "so you're one of flatfish' fellow trolls then, huh" in
> response to this.
> 

Actually, this thread splits a lot, and this branch of it is one guy 
saying 'You all suck for not honoring the X-no-archive' implying that 
its not honored where its used for its *intended* purpose.

And me arguing that Flatfish is not using it for its intended purpose, 
that I have no problems with it being used as intended, and that I was 
only ragging on FLATFISH's usage of it.

> That's my interpretation of it, and your general paranoia only serves
> to enforce it.
> 

How is my indignation at being 'paraphrased' and shit being written 
under my name, contrary to the context and content 'paranoia'

But hey, at least you put a disclaimer:
 > That's my interpretation of it

Well, guess what, you interpreted it wrong.

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:

>> A lot of people would have forgotten the hyphen eg: propellor head

> *That's* your point?  Surely not?  Why on earth would you make such a
>  comment?

I'm taking the mickey ... <Duh>

Daeron <daeron@demon.net> writes:

> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>
>> Daeron <daeron@demon.net> writes:
>
>>>> You know, Daeron, you really are a pea-brain ..
>
>>> "In your typical pea-brained way .."
>
>>> A lot of people would have forgotten the hyphen eg: propellor-head 
>>> :)
>
>> What's your point?  Guilt by spelling association?
>
> A lot of people would have forgotten the hyphen eg: propellor head
>

*That's* your point?  Surely not?  Why on earth would you make such a
comment?

Anyway, there are 155 posts on comp.os.linux.advocacy with "pea-brain"
or "pea-brained", including an old one of mine.  Not so uncommon as to
be worthy of comment.  You *do* agree, I guess, that proper spelling
is a virtue?

(I make no claims to being a good speller, of course.)

-- 
Jesse F. Hughes
"Well, I don't claim to be an expert, in fact I am a fry cook with a
national burger chain, but I have solved many differential and partial
differential equations numerically."  --C. Bond

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:

>>2. How do you know FLATFISH's intended interpretation? Do you ask him, 
>>or are you him?
> 
> 
> There seems to be some misunderstanding here.  I didn't mean to give
> Flatfish's "intended interpretation", but the intention of the
> originators of the X-No-Archive header.  I don't think that one should
> decide whether or not to honor a header based on his own guess about
> the intentions of the poster.  That seems a bad move.
> 

That in itself, I agree, would be a bad move, but what about a person 
deciding not to honor a header based on MULTIPLE behaviors, and a clear 
intent to troll?

Flatfish's motivations are crystal clear, he *is* a troll, with a habit 
of nymshifting, he is *not* using it for valid purposes, therefore 
should not receive any protection under the INTENDED usage of the header.

> 
> Any participant may certainly record any posts he wishes.  The issue
> of providing a publicly accessible archive of those posts is what I
> find regrettable.

Ahh, here's the nub then,

Is it the PUBLIC availability of postings made to a PUBLIC group, using 
the X-No-Archive header for OTHER than its intended usage? Obviously 
not, the public has access to that message in numerous forms long before 
it is expired or removed, and the X-No-Archive becomes relevant.

Its the public availability of proof of 'Using the X-No-Archive' header 
in a manner *not* in keeping with its purpose.

And other than anonimity, I remember a lot of people using the 
X-No-Archive when posting large messages, just so as to keep the spool down.


> Do you have an example where Flatfish complained that an earlier
> poster was misrepresenting him when quoting part of a post which had
> not been archived?  Is this a real problem or an imagined problem?
> Why not simply say, in such cases, that we cannot glean any more
> context than has been preserved by Google, and so Flatfish cannot
> legitimately complain about lack of context when the context is
> lacking by his own choice?

Becuase the 'we cannot glean any more context than has been preserved by 
Google' is still giving the troll an out, and trolls deserve no escape, 
genocide is the only reasonable alternative.

Regardless of flatfish using that argument or not, many 'trolls' do, and 
by *highlighting* the prolific usage of the header by TROLLS primarily 
so their disruptive posts and influences are not *readily* available via 
google.

I think the Troll archive is less a 'this is us disrespecting 
X-No-Archive' and more 'This is what trolls do, this is WHY they do it, 
this is proof that they ABUSE the header, and not for its intended purpose.
>>just another bored troll, looking for reaction?
> 
> 
> All of the above.  Duh.

Looking at it now, I disregard the first two, and settle on the third, 
you are neither a 'linvocate/troll' or a 'winvocate/troll' your simply a 
troll, in that you post primarily to obtain a reaction, and less out of 
desire for debate or enlightenment.

Philip Callan <callanca@shaw.ca> writes:

> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>
>> See, *that's* why I called you stupid.  Not because
>> you considered the possibility, but because you're simply too ignorant
>> to do *anything* to confirm or deny the theory before publicly
>> discussing it. 
>> 
>
> For my view on this, see the debate re: ESR  in the 'follow the money' 
> thread between me and Mark Kent, its a matter of interpretation of intent.
>
> You come on here an publically state *your* interpretation of my posts, 
> without checking my past, and then have the balls to say this:

For what it's worth, I've read quite a few of your posts.

>> I don't personally need to Google to check your posting history.  The
>> behavior in this one post is sufficient for my conclusion: you're a
>> moron.
>
> I dont personally need to Google to check *your* posting history. The 
> behavior in a fair number of recent posts is sufficient for my 
> SUSPICION: your a troll, and I believe you to be one of the regulars, 
> and when trolling under that pseudonym is slapped too severely, you 
> resort to your personal name.

Woohoo!  Now *that's* a theory!  You should teach Daeron how to come
right out and make an accusation.  He's too chickenshit to say what he
means, so he hides behind bizarre innuendo.  Oh, but you!  You're not
afraid to give your suspicion, no matter how, well, interesting.

Yes, you found me out.  I am Flatfish incarnate.  Or maybe I'm Erik.
I keep forgetting.  Anyway, I've been maintaining a false persona for
years now, just so I have an advocate's address to return to when I'm
tired of the abuse you big branes heap on us minions of Bill.  It's a
tiring double life[1], but it's all worth it to further the glory of
Microsoft.  

There.  Now I feel better.  Thanks for giving me the opportunity to
unload.  Well, I guess I'll see you later.  I'd like to slip into a
more comfortable persona.  Windows RULEZ!  Linux SUX.  Go Bill!  Rah!
Rah!

P.S. Please don't tell my wife.  Thanks.

Footnotes: 
[1]  In fact, I moved to the Netherlands because I realized that my
neighbors were onto me.  Here in Europe, I can continue with my life's
work without fear that word will reach my dear old Ma and Pa, a lovely
couple who have never shared in my dream of a Windows OS on every
chip.

-- 
"Yup, you guessed it.  If worse comes to worse, I *will* turn to the
Army to help me with mathematicians.  And then mathematicians don't
think the NSA or CIA can save your asses, as generals LIKE me."
  -- James Harris's latest foray into mathematical logic.

Daeron <daeron@demon.net> writes:

> Jesse F. Hughes wrote:
>
>> You're mistaken.  I've never mentioned morality with respect to your
>>  posts, but only with respect to the actions of the keeper of the 
>> trollarchive.
>
> It is common knowlege that I made the trollarchive site. Just google on
> trollarchive

Okay.  I didn't know that.

-- 
"Naomi Klein reports that Microsoft is helping develop e-government in
Iraq, 'which Dees admits is a little ahead of the curve, since there
is no g-government in Iraq--not to mention functioning phones lines.'"
   -- as reported in The Register, http://www.theregister.co.uk

So anyway, it was like, 19:48 CET Mar 06 2004, you know? Oh, and, yeah,
Philip Callan was all like, "Dude,
> Johan Lindquist wrote:

>> [everyone who thinks x-no-archive should be honoured is a troll!]
>
> I implying I said it, and being that I use the [] a fair bit in
> text, can be taken to assume that those WERE my actual words,
> when they are not, they are your 'paraphrasing' as you put it,
> perhaps you should put a disclaimer in your posts that your only
> paraphrasing others, and not actually quoting THEM.

It's, as far as I can tell, a very common technique used to indicate
that a quote is not an exact one. You'll just have to deal with that
if you have a personal habit of using those characters for some other
purpose. I'm certainly not the only person using braces in this
manner.

> And me arguing that Flatfish is not using it for its intended
> purpose, that I have no problems with it being used as intended, and
> that I was only ragging on FLATFISH's usage of it.

You were grouping another person with flatfish, apparently only
because this person thought that there was a fair use for the flag in
question.

>> That's my interpretation of it, and your general paranoia only
>> serves to enforce it.
>
> How is my indignation at being 'paraphrased' and shit being written
> under my name, contrary to the context and content 'paranoia'

I was referring to your going along with the general witch-hunt, not
what you wrote in response to me. I guess you just misinterpreted what
I wrote there. Don't worry tho, it happens to the best of us.

> Well, guess what, you interpreted it wrong.

That may very well be. If you stop acting like a paranoid nut,
seeing trolls where people are just giving their general opinion, my
interpretation will likely change.

-- 
Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana.      Perth ---> *
 19:58:14 up 14 days,  2:34,  6 users,  load average: 1.00, 1.03, 1.00
$ cat /dev/bollocks "echo y | format c:" Registered Linux user #261729
architect cross-platform deliverables

Philip Callan <callanca@shaw.ca> writes:

> I think the Troll archive is less a 'this is us disrespecting 
> X-No-Archive' and more 'This is what trolls do, this is WHY they do it, 
> this is proof that they ABUSE the header, and not for its intended purpose.

I don't think I have a complaint if the trollarchive was filled with
hand-picked posts illustrating the abuse, rather than archiving every
X-No-Archive post it encounters (perhaps from a list of participants).

Anyway, let's just drop it.  The conversation has grown too long and
tedious to expect any good to come out of it.  

Besides, I'm hankering to return to my wintroll costume and further my
life's work of supporting Microsoft however I can.

-- 
"We want a single platform.  We're trying to get there using the
carrot, or blackmail, or rewards, or whatever you call it."
   -- Madison, WI, superintendent Rainwater grasps subtlety in the
              operating system wars.

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:

> Anyway, let's just drop it.  The conversation has grown too long and
> tedious to expect any good to come out of it.  

> Besides, I'm hankering to return to my wintroll costume and further my
> life's work of supporting Microsoft however I can.

I concur ...

Johan Lindquist wrote:

> So anyway, it was like, 19:48 CET Mar 06 2004, you know? Oh, and, yeah,
> Philip Callan was all like, "Dude,
>
>>And me arguing that Flatfish is not using it for its intended
>>purpose, that I have no problems with it being used as intended, and
>>that I was only ragging on FLATFISH's usage of it.
> 
> 
> You were grouping another person with flatfish, apparently only
> because this person thought that there was a fair use for the flag in
> question.
>

No, I did not group that poster because he thought there was a fair use, 
I agreed with him in the first post, and said if used as *intended* 
which is 'fair use' in my books.

He REPEATEDLY found different ways to mis-interpret each post, when to 
most people, the point had been made with sufficient clarity before-hand.


Trolling, in the sense of posting something with the intent to get a 
reaction, which can then be spun, 'mis-interpreted' and *to DEFLECT 
ATTENTION* from the SUBJECT THREAD, which in case we all hadn't noticed,
is flatfish's example of 'flopping' when confronted, nymshifting and 
all, its beauty. Go back to the top of the thread and click on it, you 
know you want to.

All other debate spun from that, including the fact that trolls abuse a 
header for other than its intended purpose.

I categorize Jesse as a 'argument' troll, just likes the debate, 
regardless of the subject matter or person.

I categorize flatfish as a 'base' troll, will use any/all tactics, 
including open proxies, nymshifting, and profanity, in order to evoke a 
response.

Both 'are' trolls, just to varying degree's.

Myself, I'm technically a troll too, I'm a anti-troll, I will try as 
often as possible, to expose a troll for what he is, so that in any 
given day, for each 1 message of their FUD/stupidity/troll is at least 
one reply, with a minimum of profanity (but a liberal use of the word 
troll), and a fairly coherent argument for each point of the trolls 
argument I debate.

But I dont switch my name, or email, and any person can killfile me if 
they choose, if they disagree with my points, they are welcome to debate 
the matter if they want to present a intelligent argument, I'm always 
open to changing my view if someone can present a logical enough argument.

But in the face of trollkins, I just like to smack them with their own 
words and tactics, it makes it sting more.

Seeing 4 posts of 'Idiot' from PK may be an *indicator* of a troll, but 
its by no means litmus, I prefer to expose the troll for who/what they 
are, including the METHODS they use, so as to (hopefully) shut them up 
until they realize that 99% of the group knows they are a troll, and 
every person coming INTO the group knows they are a troll, since they've 
been exposed in at least one or two other threads.

I in no way equate Jesse's double standard of allowing 
winvocates/wintrolls to go by unchecked and yet holding 'linvocates' in 
his words to a higher standard.

Q: How was archiving some troll posts *ignoring a valid use* of the 
X-No-Archive?

A: It wasnt, but Jesse had to argue about something.

Why is it that when I responded, and said I had no problem with intended 
usage, I had problems with its abuse, and saw nothing wrong with 
archiving troll posts, as it effectively castrates a lot of the trolls 
from using the 'show me my words' argument, knowing that one of the most 
common tools, Google, wont keep it.

And each spin of the thread from there, is Jesse arguing for the sake of 
arguing.

I'm sure if you read it top-bottom, you'll see the pattern form.

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:

> Woohoo!  Now *that's* a theory!  You should teach Daeron how to come
> right out and make an accusation.  He's too chickenshit to say what he
> means, so he hides behind bizarre innuendo.  Oh, but you!  You're not
> afraid to give your suspicion, no matter how, well, interesting.

Even if I'm proven wrong later, I'm never afraid to speak what I think.

You cant learn your wrong unless someone corrects you.

> 
> Yes, you found me out.  I am Flatfish incarnate.  Or maybe I'm Erik.
> I keep forgetting.  Anyway, I've been maintaining a false persona for
> years now, just so I have an advocate's address to return to when I'm
> tired of the abuse you big branes heap on us minions of Bill.  It's a
> tiring double life[1], but it's all worth it to further the glory of
> Microsoft.  
> 


Hahah, that was cute, honestly I think your a whole class above common 
trolls, your just here for the entertainment and the occassional debate :)

But to address a few issues, once again, maintaining a steady email 
under your real name is no big feat, getting easier now with webmail and 
non-isp based.

That doesnt *exclude* you from occassionally stirring the pot, under a 
pseudonym from an open proxy, just like the wintrolls do occassionally 
would it?

Not neccessarily PRO-Linux, or Pro-anything, but just to give a dying 
thread a little impetus?

I guess when you came to fish's defense so quick, and pursued the 
matter, seemingly always finding a way to twist or misinterpret my 
words, it gave me the impression that you popped in to deflect 
attention, or debate the proper usage of the header, but when I tried to 
tell you I had no problems with its intended use, you pursued it...

I pretty much figure anyone who deflects the thread away from FF when 
I'm making him squirm is doing it for a purpose, so I assumed you had an 
interest.

It struck me as odd, perhaps your like a diamond cutter, and saw a nice 
point to strike to spin off a new stone :)

> I'd like to slip into a
> more comfortable persona.  Windows RULEZ!  Linux SUX.  Go Bill!  Rah!
> Rah!

More comfortable persona indeed, being a wintroll requires less 
braincells :)

> 
> P.S. Please don't tell my wife.  Thanks.

No problem, as long as you dont tell mine I'm addicted to groklaw. :)

Someday, you'll get the point.  I didn't twist your words, at least
not on purpose.  I objected to your congratulations regarding the
trollarchive thread not to deflect it, but because I thought it was
wrong.  I kept the thread going only because I didn't agree with you.

It has nothing to do with love of debate.  I get more than my share of
debate at my day job, thanks.  It has to do with the fact that I think
the practice begun by the trollarchive site is regrettable.  

Some things are just as they appear.  No need to invent odd
conspiracies and theories that I post under pseudonyms that reveal my
true loyalties.

-- 
Jesse Hughes
"Such behaviour is exclusively confined to functions invented by
mathematicians for the sake of causing trouble."
 -Albert Eagle's _A Practical Treatise on Fourier's Theorem_

Philip Callan wrote:


> I in no way equate Jesse's double standard of allowing 
> winvocates/wintrolls to go by unchecked and yet holding 'linvocates' in 
> his words to a higher standard.

This should be 'I in no way equate Jesse's...a higher standard, to be 
the same class of trolling as flatfish.

(must have cut and pasted and missed the tail end somewhere :)