To anyone who says poor Windows security doesn't matter, I was investigating
today why a mailbox at work has been getting *ten thousand* more emails a
day than it should be getting.

They are bounce messages for spams, relayed through a vast number of poorly
secured Windows machinces, that are using one of our domains in the forged
"From" header line, so we get the bounces.

That's about 13 megabytes per day.  Note that if the spammers had happened
to pick someone's vanity domain, rather than a corporation that has high
mail volumes and so is set up to handle things like this, they very likely
would be overflowing that person's mailbox, causing that person to lose all
their legitimate mail.

-- 
--Tim Smith

Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
> To anyone who says poor Windows security doesn't matter, I was investigating
> today why a mailbox at work has been getting *ten thousand* more emails a
> day than it should be getting.

> They are bounce messages for spams, relayed through a vast number of poorly
> secured Windows machinces, that are using one of our domains in the forged
> "From" header line, so we get the bounces.

> That's about 13 megabytes per day.  Note that if the spammers had happened
> to pick someone's vanity domain, rather than a corporation that has high
> mail volumes and so is set up to handle things like this, they very likely
> would be overflowing that person's mailbox, causing that person to lose all
> their legitimate mail.

Sounds familiar, oh yes, it happened to me.
Rendered my e-mail address totally useless when that virus hit last year.
Still useless now, getting over 200 mails a day, over half of them 100ish k
in size. Fortunately, my "REAL" mailbox is relatively untouched, but my
freenet.co.uk address (was "real" once, before I moved ISP) is flooded every
day.

Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message news:<eeONb.13090$zj7.1937@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> To anyone who says poor Windows security doesn't matter, I was investigating
> today why a mailbox at work has been getting *ten thousand* more emails a
> day than it should be getting.
> 
> They are bounce messages for spams, relayed through a vast number of poorly
> secured Windows machinces, that are using one of our domains in the forged
> "From" header line, so we get the bounces.
> 
> That's about 13 megabytes per day.  Note that if the spammers had happened
> to pick someone's vanity domain, rather than a corporation that has high
> mail volumes and so is set up to handle things like this, they very likely
> would be overflowing that person's mailbox, causing that person to lose all
> their legitimate mail.

That isn't a reason. The example you have given makes it your /
someone elses problem, rather than a problem for the person with the
poor Microsoft (tm) Windows system. Trust me - they don't care. :)

Also, even if it were to affect a mailbox in the way you mention, then
that is a *good* thing. As a Microsot (tm) Windows user you are
expected to have bought at least $3000 of add-ons to make the system
near useable. One of these add-ons would be a Microsoft (tm) Exchange
backup / repair util. This only helps to line the pockets of Microsoft
(tm) even more. And they like that.

Bring on the spam!

Mattias Honrendgard wrote:
> Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message news:<eeONb.13090$zj7.1937@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> 
>>To anyone who says poor Windows security doesn't matter, I was investigating
>>today why a mailbox at work has been getting *ten thousand* more emails a
>>day than it should be getting.
>>
>>They are bounce messages for spams, relayed through a vast number of poorly
>>secured Windows machinces, that are using one of our domains in the forged
>>"From" header line, so we get the bounces.
>>
>>That's about 13 megabytes per day.  Note that if the spammers had happened
>>to pick someone's vanity domain, rather than a corporation that has high
>>mail volumes and so is set up to handle things like this, they very likely
>>would be overflowing that person's mailbox, causing that person to lose all
>>their legitimate mail.
> 
> 
> That isn't a reason. The example you have given makes it your /
> someone elses problem, rather than a problem for the person with the
> poor Microsoft (tm) Windows system. Trust me - they don't care. :)
> 
> Also, even if it were to affect a mailbox in the way you mention, then
> that is a *good* thing. As a Microsot (tm) Windows user you are
> expected to have bought at least $3000 of add-ons to make the system
> near useable.


Really? can you enumerate what I need to get my system working? I have a 
600 $ system that works flawlessly along with many Macs that also work 
flawlessly and I never needed to spend that much money.

Relax George.

Nicolas

  One of these add-ons would be a Microsoft (tm) Exchange
> backup / repair util. This only helps to line the pockets of Microsoft
> (tm) even more. And they like that.
> 
> Bring on the spam!

On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 09:34:02 GMT, Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com>
wrote:

>To anyone who says poor Windows security doesn't matter, I was investigating
>today why a mailbox at work has been getting *ten thousand* more emails a
>day than it should be getting.
>
>They are bounce messages for spams, relayed through a vast number of poorly
>secured Windows machinces, that are using one of our domains in the forged
>"From" header line, so we get the bounces.
>
>That's about 13 megabytes per day.  Note that if the spammers had happened
>to pick someone's vanity domain, rather than a corporation that has high
>mail volumes and so is set up to handle things like this, they very likely
>would be overflowing that person's mailbox, causing that person to lose all
>their legitimate mail.

A similar thing happened to a consultant friend of mine.
This was a large IBM box running AIX and it had become the worlds largest porn
server.
The system admin for the hospital was incompetent and had the operators running
everything as root.
The only way they found out was they eventually ran low on disk space and wanted
to purchase more disk drives.

A strong operating system isn't going to prevent an idiot from giving the
hackers the keys to the store.
Windows however makes it far too easy to be compromised compared to any of the
nix's I am aware of and that's the problem.

In article <C1VNb.65486$IF6.1506471@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
 Nicolas <ndk@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:

> Mattias Honrendgard wrote:
> > Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message 
> > news:<eeONb.13090$zj7.1937@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> > 
> >>To anyone who says poor Windows security doesn't matter, I was 
> >>investigating
> >>today why a mailbox at work has been getting *ten thousand* more emails a
> >>day than it should be getting.
> >>
> >>They are bounce messages for spams, relayed through a vast number of poorly
> >>secured Windows machinces, that are using one of our domains in the forged
> >>"From" header line, so we get the bounces.
> >>
> >>That's about 13 megabytes per day.  Note that if the spammers had happened
> >>to pick someone's vanity domain, rather than a corporation that has high
> >>mail volumes and so is set up to handle things like this, they very likely
> >>would be overflowing that person's mailbox, causing that person to lose all
> >>their legitimate mail.
> > 
> > 
> > That isn't a reason. The example you have given makes it your /
> > someone elses problem, rather than a problem for the person with the
> > poor Microsoft (tm) Windows system. Trust me - they don't care. :)
> > 
> > Also, even if it were to affect a mailbox in the way you mention, then
> > that is a *good* thing. As a Microsot (tm) Windows user you are
> > expected to have bought at least $3000 of add-ons to make the system
> > near useable.
> 
> 
> Really? can you enumerate what I need to get my system working? I have a 
> 600 $ system that works flawlessly along with many Macs that also work 
> flawlessly and I never needed to spend that much money.
> 
> Relax George.
> 
> Nicolas

So tell us then, why are your considering Macs over PC's?

Steve

Woooooooooohooooooooooooooo MSFT knows how to make money!!! Capitalism at
its finest.

"Mattias Honrendgard" <comeand@kissmyfatarse.com> wrote in message
news:dd394218.0401160736.1702aa0a@posting.google.com...
> Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message
news:<eeONb.13090$zj7.1937@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> > To anyone who says poor Windows security doesn't matter, I was
investigating
> > today why a mailbox at work has been getting *ten thousand* more emails
a
> > day than it should be getting.
> >
> > They are bounce messages for spams, relayed through a vast number of
poorly
> > secured Windows machinces, that are using one of our domains in the
forged
> > "From" header line, so we get the bounces.
> >
> > That's about 13 megabytes per day.  Note that if the spammers had
happened
> > to pick someone's vanity domain, rather than a corporation that has high
> > mail volumes and so is set up to handle things like this, they very
likely
> > would be overflowing that person's mailbox, causing that person to lose
all
> > their legitimate mail.
>
> That isn't a reason. The example you have given makes it your /
> someone elses problem, rather than a problem for the person with the
> poor Microsoft (tm) Windows system. Trust me - they don't care. :)
>
> Also, even if it were to affect a mailbox in the way you mention, then
> that is a *good* thing. As a Microsot (tm) Windows user you are
> expected to have bought at least $3000 of add-ons to make the system
> near useable. One of these add-ons would be a Microsoft (tm) Exchange
> backup / repair util. This only helps to line the pockets of Microsoft
> (tm) even more. And they like that.
>
> Bring on the spam!

Steve Carroll wrote:

> In article <C1VNb.65486$IF6.1506471@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
>  Nicolas <ndk@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
> 
> 
>>Mattias Honrendgard wrote:
>>
>>>Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message 
>>>news:<eeONb.13090$zj7.1937@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
>>>
>>>
>>>>To anyone who says poor Windows security doesn't matter, I was 
>>>>investigating
>>>>today why a mailbox at work has been getting *ten thousand* more emails a
>>>>day than it should be getting.
>>>>
>>>>They are bounce messages for spams, relayed through a vast number of poorly
>>>>secured Windows machinces, that are using one of our domains in the forged
>>>>"From" header line, so we get the bounces.
>>>>
>>>>That's about 13 megabytes per day.  Note that if the spammers had happened
>>>>to pick someone's vanity domain, rather than a corporation that has high
>>>>mail volumes and so is set up to handle things like this, they very likely
>>>>would be overflowing that person's mailbox, causing that person to lose all
>>>>their legitimate mail.
>>>
>>>
>>>That isn't a reason. The example you have given makes it your /
>>>someone elses problem, rather than a problem for the person with the
>>>poor Microsoft (tm) Windows system. Trust me - they don't care. :)
>>>
>>>Also, even if it were to affect a mailbox in the way you mention, then
>>>that is a *good* thing. As a Microsot (tm) Windows user you are
>>>expected to have bought at least $3000 of add-ons to make the system
>>>near useable.
>>
>>
>>Really? can you enumerate what I need to get my system working? I have a 
>>600 $ system that works flawlessly along with many Macs that also work 
>>flawlessly and I never needed to spend that much money.
>>
>>Relax George.
>>
>>Nicolas
> 
> 
> So tell us then, why are your considering Macs over PC's?
> 
> Steve

Why, so that you can find another reason to pick nits or spin what I say 
and eventually call me a Wintroll/Bag?
No thanks, it's getting pretty tired.

Nicolas

In article <eeONb.13090$zj7.1937@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
 Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote:

> To anyone who says poor Windows security doesn't matter, I was investigating
> today why a mailbox at work has been getting *ten thousand* more emails a
> day than it should be getting.
> 
> They are bounce messages for spams, relayed through a vast number of poorly
> secured Windows machinces, that are using one of our domains in the forged
> "From" header line, so we get the bounces.
> 
> That's about 13 megabytes per day.  Note that if the spammers had happened
> to pick someone's vanity domain, rather than a corporation that has high
> mail volumes and so is set up to handle things like this, they very likely
> would be overflowing that person's mailbox, causing that person to lose all
> their legitimate mail.

None of which has anything to do with "Windows security".   If the 
messages are bouncing, then the "To" addresses are invalid, and they 
will automatically bounce from the receiving SMTP server.    Or, perhaps 
they are being rejected as a result of anti-spam measures taken by the 
recipients.   Bouncing is also an option is this case, depending on the 
settings.   

That the "From" address is forged is just standard procedure for 
spammers - they don't want the 13 megs per day of returned messages 
either!   That they happened to pick *your* domain is just *your* bad 
luck.   

Nothing to do with "Windows security" at all.   

Nothing to see here folks, move along.

Dan

On 16 Jan 2004 15:48:08 -0600, Dan <me@here.net> wrote:


>Nothing to do with "Windows security" at all.   
>
>Nothing to see here folks, move along.
>

It has EVERYTHING to do with Windows security when large numbers of
mom and pop Windows machines connected to cable or DSL are being used
as 'zombies' for virus, spam or DoS attacks.  Not to put too fine a
point on it, these machines are being sold with software that is not
fit for retail sale.  Because of abusive monopoly powers, the vendors
are effectively not allowed to sell machines with superior and fit
operating systems.

In article <BGXNb.65565$IF6.1511664@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
 Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:

> Steve Carroll wrote:
> 
> > In article <C1VNb.65486$IF6.1506471@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
> >  Nicolas <ndk@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >>Mattias Honrendgard wrote:
> >>
> >>>Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message 
> >>>news:<eeONb.13090$zj7.1937@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>To anyone who says poor Windows security doesn't matter, I was 
> >>>>investigating
> >>>>today why a mailbox at work has been getting *ten thousand* more emails a
> >>>>day than it should be getting.
> >>>>
> >>>>They are bounce messages for spams, relayed through a vast number of 
> >>>>poorly
> >>>>secured Windows machinces, that are using one of our domains in the 
> >>>>forged
> >>>>"From" header line, so we get the bounces.
> >>>>
> >>>>That's about 13 megabytes per day.  Note that if the spammers had 
> >>>>happened
> >>>>to pick someone's vanity domain, rather than a corporation that has high
> >>>>mail volumes and so is set up to handle things like this, they very 
> >>>>likely
> >>>>would be overflowing that person's mailbox, causing that person to lose 
> >>>>all
> >>>>their legitimate mail.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>That isn't a reason. The example you have given makes it your /
> >>>someone elses problem, rather than a problem for the person with the
> >>>poor Microsoft (tm) Windows system. Trust me - they don't care. :)
> >>>
> >>>Also, even if it were to affect a mailbox in the way you mention, then
> >>>that is a *good* thing. As a Microsot (tm) Windows user you are
> >>>expected to have bought at least $3000 of add-ons to make the system
> >>>near useable.
> >>
> >>
> >>Really? can you enumerate what I need to get my system working? I have a 
> >>600 $ system that works flawlessly along with many Macs that also work 
> >>flawlessly and I never needed to spend that much money.
> >>
> >>Relax George.
> >>
> >>Nicolas
> > 
> > 
> > So tell us then, why are your considering Macs over PC's?
> > 
> > Steve
> 
> Why, so that you can find another reason to pick nits or spin what I say 
> and eventually call me a Wintroll/Bag?
> No thanks, it's getting pretty tired.
> 
> Nicolas

I think it's pretty obvious that others have seen your ruse, too. You 
aren't fooling anyone here, Licoass.

Steve

Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message news:<eeONb.13090$zj7.1937@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> To anyone who says poor Windows security doesn't matter, I was investigating
> today why a mailbox at work has been getting *ten thousand* more emails a
> day than it should be getting.
> 
> They are bounce messages for spams, relayed through a vast number of poorly
> secured Windows machinces, that are using one of our domains in the forged
> "From" header line, so we get the bounces.

I understand the problem of suing MS when your own Windows box goes crazy,
what with the EULA and all ... but what about suing MS for negligence for flooding
the world with attractive nuisances.  In the USA, you cannot build a backyard
pool without a fence to keep neighbor kids out.

> 
> That's about 13 megabytes per day.  Note that if the spammers had happened
> to pick someone's vanity domain, rather than a corporation that has high
> mail volumes and so is set up to handle things like this, they very likely
> would be overflowing that person's mailbox, causing that person to lose all
> their legitimate mail.

Steve Carroll wrote:

> In article <BGXNb.65565$IF6.1511664@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
>  Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
> 
> 
>>Steve Carroll wrote:
>>
>>
>>>In article <C1VNb.65486$IF6.1506471@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
>>> Nicolas <ndk@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Mattias Honrendgard wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message 
>>>>>news:<eeONb.13090$zj7.1937@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>To anyone who says poor Windows security doesn't matter, I was 
>>>>>>investigating
>>>>>>today why a mailbox at work has been getting *ten thousand* more emails a
>>>>>>day than it should be getting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>They are bounce messages for spams, relayed through a vast number of 
>>>>>>poorly
>>>>>>secured Windows machinces, that are using one of our domains in the 
>>>>>>forged
>>>>>>"From" header line, so we get the bounces.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>That's about 13 megabytes per day.  Note that if the spammers had 
>>>>>>happened
>>>>>>to pick someone's vanity domain, rather than a corporation that has high
>>>>>>mail volumes and so is set up to handle things like this, they very 
>>>>>>likely
>>>>>>would be overflowing that person's mailbox, causing that person to lose 
>>>>>>all
>>>>>>their legitimate mail.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>That isn't a reason. The example you have given makes it your /
>>>>>someone elses problem, rather than a problem for the person with the
>>>>>poor Microsoft (tm) Windows system. Trust me - they don't care. :)
>>>>>
>>>>>Also, even if it were to affect a mailbox in the way you mention, then
>>>>>that is a *good* thing. As a Microsot (tm) Windows user you are
>>>>>expected to have bought at least $3000 of add-ons to make the system
>>>>>near useable.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Really? can you enumerate what I need to get my system working? I have a 
>>>>600 $ system that works flawlessly along with many Macs that also work 
>>>>flawlessly and I never needed to spend that much money.
>>>>
>>>>Relax George.
>>>>
>>>>Nicolas
>>>
>>>
>>>So tell us then, why are your considering Macs over PC's?
>>>
>>>Steve
>>
>>Why, so that you can find another reason to pick nits or spin what I say 
>>and eventually call me a Wintroll/Bag?
>>No thanks, it's getting pretty tired.
>>
>>Nicolas
> 
> 
> I think it's pretty obvious that others have seen your ruse, too.

Wow, Carroll. You *really* put me in my place, now.
Denial is a terrible thing.

  You
> aren't fooling anyone here, Licoass.

Licoass? Grow the fsck up, man...really.
See why what you say is like water on a ducks back, AFAIC?

Nicolas

> Steve

Nashton wrote:

> Steve Carroll wrote:
> 
>> In article <BGXNb.65565$IF6.1511664@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
>>  Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Steve Carroll wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> In article <C1VNb.65486$IF6.1506471@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
>>>> Nicolas <ndk@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Mattias Honrendgard wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message 
>>>>>> news:<eeONb.13090$zj7.1937@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To anyone who says poor Windows security doesn't matter, I was 
>>>>>>> investigating
>>>>>>> today why a mailbox at work has been getting *ten thousand* more 
>>>>>>> emails a
>>>>>>> day than it should be getting.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They are bounce messages for spams, relayed through a vast number 
>>>>>>> of poorly
>>>>>>> secured Windows machinces, that are using one of our domains in 
>>>>>>> the forged
>>>>>>> "From" header line, so we get the bounces.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's about 13 megabytes per day.  Note that if the spammers had 
>>>>>>> happened
>>>>>>> to pick someone's vanity domain, rather than a corporation that 
>>>>>>> has high
>>>>>>> mail volumes and so is set up to handle things like this, they 
>>>>>>> very likely
>>>>>>> would be overflowing that person's mailbox, causing that person 
>>>>>>> to lose all
>>>>>>> their legitimate mail.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That isn't a reason. The example you have given makes it your /
>>>>>> someone elses problem, rather than a problem for the person with the
>>>>>> poor Microsoft (tm) Windows system. Trust me - they don't care. :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, even if it were to affect a mailbox in the way you mention, 
>>>>>> then
>>>>>> that is a *good* thing. As a Microsot (tm) Windows user you are
>>>>>> expected to have bought at least $3000 of add-ons to make the system
>>>>>> near useable.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Really? can you enumerate what I need to get my system working? I 
>>>>> have a 600 $ system that works flawlessly along with many Macs that 
>>>>> also work flawlessly and I never needed to spend that much money.
>>>>>
>>>>> Relax George.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nicolas
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So tell us then, why are your considering Macs over PC's?
>>>>
>>>> Steve
>>>
>>>
>>> Why, so that you can find another reason to pick nits or spin what I 
>>> say and eventually call me a Wintroll/Bag?
>>> No thanks, it's getting pretty tired.
>>>
>>> Nicolas
>>
>>
>>
>> I think it's pretty obvious that others have seen your ruse, too.
> 
> 
> Wow, Carroll. You *really* put me in my place, now.
> Denial is a terrible thing.
> 
>  You
> 
>> aren't fooling anyone here, Licoass.
> 
> 
> Licoass? Grow the fsck up, man...really.
> See why what you say is like water on a ducks back, AFAIC?


liconasty. deal w/it.

Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in 
news:Kl8Ob.66246$IF6.1533041@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca:

>   You
>> aren't fooling anyone here, Licoass.
> 
> Licoass? Grow the fsck up, man...really.
> See why what you say is like water on a ducks back, AFAIC?

You, like your pathetic attempt at acronym 101, is FUBAR. OTOH, Licoass is 
almost as fitting a title as Nicol-ass [but not quite].

Cheeze, wot a wus.

-- 
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, 
signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, 
those who are cold and are not clothed."

President Dwight D. Eisenhower, April 16, 1953

Mike Dee wrote:

> Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in 
> news:Kl8Ob.66246$IF6.1533041@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca:
> 
> 
>>  You
>>
>>>aren't fooling anyone here, Licoass.
>>
>>Licoass? Grow the fsck up, man...really.
>>See why what you say is like water on a ducks back, AFAIC?
> 
> 
> You, like your pathetic attempt at acronym 101, is FUBAR. OTOH, Licoass is 
> almost as fitting a title as Nicol-ass [but not quite].

Did your sandbox freeze with the recent cold snap?
Try Megabots, I'm sure you'll find them "fun".

> 
> Cheeze, wot a wus.

Nicolas

Nicolas <ndk@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message news:<C1VNb.65486$IF6.1506471@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>...
> Mattias Honrendgard wrote:
> > Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message news:<eeONb.13090$zj7.1937@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> > 
> >>To anyone who says poor Windows security doesn't matter, I was investigating
> >>today why a mailbox at work has been getting *ten thousand* more emails a
> >>day than it should be getting.
> >>
> >>They are bounce messages for spams, relayed through a vast number of poorly
> >>secured Windows machinces, that are using one of our domains in the forged
> >>"From" header line, so we get the bounces.
> >>
> >>That's about 13 megabytes per day.  Note that if the spammers had happened
> >>to pick someone's vanity domain, rather than a corporation that has high
> >>mail volumes and so is set up to handle things like this, they very likely
> >>would be overflowing that person's mailbox, causing that person to lose all
> >>their legitimate mail.
> > 
> > 
> > That isn't a reason. The example you have given makes it your /
> > someone elses problem, rather than a problem for the person with the
> > poor Microsoft (tm) Windows system. Trust me - they don't care. :)
> > 
> > Also, even if it were to affect a mailbox in the way you mention, then
> > that is a *good* thing. As a Microsot (tm) Windows user you are
> > expected to have bought at least $3000 of add-ons to make the system
> > near useable.
> 
> 
> Really? can you enumerate what I need to get my system working? I have a 
> 600 $ system that works flawlessly along with many Macs that also work 
> flawlessly and I never needed to spend that much money.
> 
> Relax George.

Um. Microsoft Exchange Server alone will set you back waaay over
$6000. Thats on top of the $300-$700 for a single OS, $500 for
Microsoft Office, $100 for anti-virus, $500 for backup (which is going
to require another machine, so we'll ignore the hardware costs of that
and just double the software), $200 crash recovery tools, $1000 for
support, er.. the list goes on... Mommy, where has my pocket money
gone?

I guess your little $600 on software is $300 for the OS and the rest
for games, huh?

> 
> Nicolas
> 
>   One of these add-ons would be a Microsoft (tm) Exchange
> > backup / repair util. This only helps to line the pockets of Microsoft
> > (tm) even more. And they like that.
> > 
> > Bring on the spam!

Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in
news:WuaOb.66279$IF6.1536122@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca: 

>>>  You
>>>
>>>>aren't fooling anyone here, Licoass.
>>>
>>>Licoass? Grow the fsck up, man...really.
>>>See why what you say is like water on a ducks back, AFAIC?
>> 
>> You, like your pathetic attempt at acronym 101, is FUBAR. OTOH,
>> Licoass is almost as fitting a title as Nicol-ass [but not quite].
> 
> Did your sandbox freeze with the recent cold snap?
> Try Megabots, I'm sure you'll find them "fun".

It isn't winter everywhere on the globe right now, Nicol-ass.

Mid-summer where I am - Mmm-mmm and it's nice and hot too :)

D.

-- 
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, 
signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, 
those who are cold and are not clothed."

President Dwight D. Eisenhower, April 16, 1953

Mike Dee wrote:
> Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in
> news:WuaOb.66279$IF6.1536122@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca: 
> 
> 
>>>> You
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>aren't fooling anyone here, Licoass.
>>>>
>>>>Licoass? Grow the fsck up, man...really.
>>>>See why what you say is like water on a ducks back, AFAIC?
>>>
>>>You, like your pathetic attempt at acronym 101, is FUBAR. OTOH,
>>>Licoass is almost as fitting a title as Nicol-ass [but not quite].
>>
>>Did your sandbox freeze with the recent cold snap?
>>Try Megabots, I'm sure you'll find them "fun".
> 
> 
> It isn't winter everywhere on the globe right now, Nicol-ass.

So you've been paying attention in class. Good for you, boy!
> 
> Mid-summer where I am - Mmm-mmm and it's nice and hot too :)

Yawn. So Dee, why exactly aren't you out there getting some fresh air, 
producing some much needed Vitamin D for your bones, instead of posting 
stupidity upon distilled stupidity on csma? Hmmmm?

Nicolas

> D.
> 

Mattias Honrendgard wrote:

> Nicolas <ndk@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message news:<C1VNb.65486$IF6.1506471@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>...
> 
>>Mattias Honrendgard wrote:
>>
>>>Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message news:<eeONb.13090$zj7.1937@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
>>>
>>>
>>>>To anyone who says poor Windows security doesn't matter, I was investigating
>>>>today why a mailbox at work has been getting *ten thousand* more emails a
>>>>day than it should be getting.
>>>>
>>>>They are bounce messages for spams, relayed through a vast number of poorly
>>>>secured Windows machinces, that are using one of our domains in the forged
>>>>"From" header line, so we get the bounces.
>>>>
>>>>That's about 13 megabytes per day.  Note that if the spammers had happened
>>>>to pick someone's vanity domain, rather than a corporation that has high
>>>>mail volumes and so is set up to handle things like this, they very likely
>>>>would be overflowing that person's mailbox, causing that person to lose all
>>>>their legitimate mail.
>>>
>>>
>>>That isn't a reason. The example you have given makes it your /
>>>someone elses problem, rather than a problem for the person with the
>>>poor Microsoft (tm) Windows system. Trust me - they don't care. :)
>>>
>>>Also, even if it were to affect a mailbox in the way you mention, then
>>>that is a *good* thing. As a Microsot (tm) Windows user you are
>>>expected to have bought at least $3000 of add-ons to make the system
>>>near useable.
>>
>>
>>Really? can you enumerate what I need to get my system working? I have a 
>>600 $ system that works flawlessly along with many Macs that also work 
>>flawlessly and I never needed to spend that much money.
>>
>>Relax George.
> 
> 
> Um. Microsoft Exchange Server alone will set you back waaay over
> $6000. Thats on top of the $300-$700 for a single OS, $500 for
> Microsoft Office, $100 for anti-virus, $500 for backup (which is going
> to require another machine, so we'll ignore the hardware costs of that
> and just double the software), $200 crash recovery tools, $1000 for
> support, er.. the list goes on... Mommy, where has my pocket money
> gone?
> 
> I guess your little $600 on software is $300 for the OS and the rest
> for games, huh?
> 
> 
>>Nicolas
>>
>>  One of these add-ons would be a Microsoft (tm) Exchange
>>
>>>backup / repair util. This only helps to line the pockets of Microsoft
>>>(tm) even more. And they like that.
>>>
>>>Bring on the spam!

Sorry, I don't use my comp as a server.
I don't use M$ office.
The AV came with the computer for free.
Backup is on an external LaCie FW 400 that I picked up for 60$ on eBay.
Don't need crash recovery tools.
Don't need support.
I certainly don't play games on my PC, unless you consider learning and 
using 3dstudiomax 6 a "game".
What are you smoking, again?  ;)

Nicolas

In article <Kl8Ob.66246$IF6.1533041@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
 Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:

> Steve Carroll wrote:
> 
> > In article <BGXNb.65565$IF6.1511664@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
> >  Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >>Steve Carroll wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>In article <C1VNb.65486$IF6.1506471@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
> >>> Nicolas <ndk@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Mattias Honrendgard wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message 
> >>>>>news:<eeONb.13090$zj7.1937@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>To anyone who says poor Windows security doesn't matter, I was 
> >>>>>>investigating
> >>>>>>today why a mailbox at work has been getting *ten thousand* more emails 
> >>>>>>a
> >>>>>>day than it should be getting.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>They are bounce messages for spams, relayed through a vast number of 
> >>>>>>poorly
> >>>>>>secured Windows machinces, that are using one of our domains in the 
> >>>>>>forged
> >>>>>>"From" header line, so we get the bounces.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>That's about 13 megabytes per day.  Note that if the spammers had 
> >>>>>>happened
> >>>>>>to pick someone's vanity domain, rather than a corporation that has 
> >>>>>>high
> >>>>>>mail volumes and so is set up to handle things like this, they very 
> >>>>>>likely
> >>>>>>would be overflowing that person's mailbox, causing that person to lose 
> >>>>>>all
> >>>>>>their legitimate mail.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>That isn't a reason. The example you have given makes it your /
> >>>>>someone elses problem, rather than a problem for the person with the
> >>>>>poor Microsoft (tm) Windows system. Trust me - they don't care. :)
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Also, even if it were to affect a mailbox in the way you mention, then
> >>>>>that is a *good* thing. As a Microsot (tm) Windows user you are
> >>>>>expected to have bought at least $3000 of add-ons to make the system
> >>>>>near useable.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Really? can you enumerate what I need to get my system working? I have a 
> >>>>600 $ system that works flawlessly along with many Macs that also work 
> >>>>flawlessly and I never needed to spend that much money.
> >>>>
> >>>>Relax George.
> >>>>
> >>>>Nicolas
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>So tell us then, why are your considering Macs over PC's?
> >>>
> >>>Steve
> >>
> >>Why, so that you can find another reason to pick nits or spin what I say 
> >>and eventually call me a Wintroll/Bag?
> >>No thanks, it's getting pretty tired.
> >>
> >>Nicolas
> > 
> > 
> > I think it's pretty obvious that others have seen your ruse, too.
> 
> Wow, Carroll. You *really* put me in my place, now.
> Denial is a terrible thing.

Just what is your place? It certainly isn't as a Mac advocate. Tell us 
again why you're considering Macs for your pending purchase. It's quite 
humorous that you think other people are fooled by your bullshit:) 
 
>   You
> > aren't fooling anyone here, Licoass.
> 
> Licoass? Grow the fsck up, man...really.

Can't handle it when the adults sink to your level, can you...

> See why what you say is like water on a ducks back, AFAIC?

Get a new crack pipe?

Steve

In article <hnbOb.66306$IF6.1537658@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
 Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:

> Mattias Honrendgard wrote:
> 
> > Nicolas <ndk@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote in message 
> > news:<C1VNb.65486$IF6.1506471@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>...
> > 
> >>Mattias Honrendgard wrote:
> >>
> >>>Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message 
> >>>news:<eeONb.13090$zj7.1937@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>To anyone who says poor Windows security doesn't matter, I was 
> >>>>investigating
> >>>>today why a mailbox at work has been getting *ten thousand* more emails a
> >>>>day than it should be getting.
> >>>>
> >>>>They are bounce messages for spams, relayed through a vast number of 
> >>>>poorly
> >>>>secured Windows machinces, that are using one of our domains in the 
> >>>>forged
> >>>>"From" header line, so we get the bounces.
> >>>>
> >>>>That's about 13 megabytes per day.  Note that if the spammers had 
> >>>>happened
> >>>>to pick someone's vanity domain, rather than a corporation that has high
> >>>>mail volumes and so is set up to handle things like this, they very 
> >>>>likely
> >>>>would be overflowing that person's mailbox, causing that person to lose 
> >>>>all
> >>>>their legitimate mail.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>That isn't a reason. The example you have given makes it your /
> >>>someone elses problem, rather than a problem for the person with the
> >>>poor Microsoft (tm) Windows system. Trust me - they don't care. :)
> >>>
> >>>Also, even if it were to affect a mailbox in the way you mention, then
> >>>that is a *good* thing. As a Microsot (tm) Windows user you are
> >>>expected to have bought at least $3000 of add-ons to make the system
> >>>near useable.
> >>
> >>
> >>Really? can you enumerate what I need to get my system working? I have a 
> >>600 $ system that works flawlessly along with many Macs that also work 
> >>flawlessly and I never needed to spend that much money.
> >>
> >>Relax George.
> > 
> > 
> > Um. Microsoft Exchange Server alone will set you back waaay over
> > $6000. Thats on top of the $300-$700 for a single OS, $500 for
> > Microsoft Office, $100 for anti-virus, $500 for backup (which is going
> > to require another machine, so we'll ignore the hardware costs of that
> > and just double the software), $200 crash recovery tools, $1000 for
> > support, er.. the list goes on... Mommy, where has my pocket money
> > gone?
> > 
> > I guess your little $600 on software is $300 for the OS and the rest
> > for games, huh?
> > 
> > 
> >>Nicolas
> >>
> >>  One of these add-ons would be a Microsoft (tm) Exchange
> >>
> >>>backup / repair util. This only helps to line the pockets of Microsoft
> >>>(tm) even more. And they like that.
> >>>
> >>>Bring on the spam!
> 
> Sorry, I don't use my comp as a server.
> I don't use M$ office.
> The AV came with the computer for free.
> Backup is on an external LaCie FW 400 that I picked up for 60$ on eBay.
> Don't need crash recovery tools.
> Don't need support.
> I certainly don't play games on my PC, unless you consider learning and 
> using 3dstudiomax 6 a "game".
> What are you smoking, again?  ;)
> 


It's called reality and I don't think your quite up to it :)

Steve

"Elizabot" <toolittletoolate@poo.com> wrote on 1/17/04 3:47 AM:

> Nashton wrote:
> 
>> Steve Carroll wrote:
>> 
>>> In article <BGXNb.65565$IF6.1511664@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
>>>  Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> Steve Carroll wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> In article <C1VNb.65486$IF6.1506471@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
>>>>> Nicolas <ndk@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Mattias Honrendgard wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:<eeONb.13090$zj7.1937@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> To anyone who says poor Windows security doesn't matter, I was
>>>>>>>> investigating
>>>>>>>> today why a mailbox at work has been getting *ten thousand* more
>>>>>>>> emails a
>>>>>>>> day than it should be getting.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> They are bounce messages for spams, relayed through a vast number
>>>>>>>> of poorly
>>>>>>>> secured Windows machinces, that are using one of our domains in
>>>>>>>> the forged
>>>>>>>> "From" header line, so we get the bounces.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> That's about 13 megabytes per day.  Note that if the spammers had
>>>>>>>> happened
>>>>>>>> to pick someone's vanity domain, rather than a corporation that
>>>>>>>> has high
>>>>>>>> mail volumes and so is set up to handle things like this, they
>>>>>>>> very likely
>>>>>>>> would be overflowing that person's mailbox, causing that person
>>>>>>>> to lose all
>>>>>>>> their legitimate mail.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> That isn't a reason. The example you have given makes it your /
>>>>>>> someone elses problem, rather than a problem for the person with the
>>>>>>> poor Microsoft (tm) Windows system. Trust me - they don't care. :)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Also, even if it were to affect a mailbox in the way you mention,
>>>>>>> then
>>>>>>> that is a *good* thing. As a Microsot (tm) Windows user you are
>>>>>>> expected to have bought at least $3000 of add-ons to make the system
>>>>>>> near useable.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Really? can you enumerate what I need to get my system working? I
>>>>>> have a 600 $ system that works flawlessly along with many Macs that
>>>>>> also work flawlessly and I never needed to spend that much money.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Relax George.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Nicolas
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> So tell us then, why are your considering Macs over PC's?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Steve
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Why, so that you can find another reason to pick nits or spin what I
>>>> say and eventually call me a Wintroll/Bag?
>>>> No thanks, it's getting pretty tired.
>>>> 
>>>> Nicolas
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I think it's pretty obvious that others have seen your ruse, too.
>> 
>> 
>> Wow, Carroll. You *really* put me in my place, now.
>> Denial is a terrible thing.
>> 
>>  You
>> 
>>> aren't fooling anyone here, Licoass.
>> 
>> 
>> Licoass? Grow the fsck up, man...really.
>> See why what you say is like water on a ducks back, AFAIC?
> 
> 
> liconasty. deal w/it.
> 
Isn't it cute how they come to each other's aid.  

In article <BC2EAB9E.3A813%snit@nospam-cableone.net>,
 Snit <snit@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:

> "Elizabot" <toolittletoolate@poo.com> wrote on 1/17/04 3:47 AM:
> 
> > Nashton wrote:
> > 
> >> Steve Carroll wrote:
> >> 
> >>> In article <BGXNb.65565$IF6.1511664@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
> >>>  Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>>> Steve Carroll wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>>> In article <C1VNb.65486$IF6.1506471@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
> >>>>> Nicolas <ndk@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>> Mattias Honrendgard wrote:
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message
> >>>>>>> news:<eeONb.13090$zj7.1937@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> To anyone who says poor Windows security doesn't matter, I was
> >>>>>>>> investigating
> >>>>>>>> today why a mailbox at work has been getting *ten thousand* more
> >>>>>>>> emails a
> >>>>>>>> day than it should be getting.
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> They are bounce messages for spams, relayed through a vast number
> >>>>>>>> of poorly
> >>>>>>>> secured Windows machinces, that are using one of our domains in
> >>>>>>>> the forged
> >>>>>>>> "From" header line, so we get the bounces.
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> That's about 13 megabytes per day.  Note that if the spammers had
> >>>>>>>> happened
> >>>>>>>> to pick someone's vanity domain, rather than a corporation that
> >>>>>>>> has high
> >>>>>>>> mail volumes and so is set up to handle things like this, they
> >>>>>>>> very likely
> >>>>>>>> would be overflowing that person's mailbox, causing that person
> >>>>>>>> to lose all
> >>>>>>>> their legitimate mail.
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> That isn't a reason. The example you have given makes it your /
> >>>>>>> someone elses problem, rather than a problem for the person with the
> >>>>>>> poor Microsoft (tm) Windows system. Trust me - they don't care. :)
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> Also, even if it were to affect a mailbox in the way you mention,
> >>>>>>> then
> >>>>>>> that is a *good* thing. As a Microsot (tm) Windows user you are
> >>>>>>> expected to have bought at least $3000 of add-ons to make the system
> >>>>>>> near useable.
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Really? can you enumerate what I need to get my system working? I
> >>>>>> have a 600 $ system that works flawlessly along with many Macs that
> >>>>>> also work flawlessly and I never needed to spend that much money.
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Relax George.
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Nicolas
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> So tell us then, why are your considering Macs over PC's?
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Steve
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> Why, so that you can find another reason to pick nits or spin what I
> >>>> say and eventually call me a Wintroll/Bag?
> >>>> No thanks, it's getting pretty tired.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Nicolas
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> I think it's pretty obvious that others have seen your ruse, too.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Wow, Carroll. You *really* put me in my place, now.
> >> Denial is a terrible thing.
> >> 
> >>  You
> >> 
> >>> aren't fooling anyone here, Licoass.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Licoass? Grow the fsck up, man...really.
> >> See why what you say is like water on a ducks back, AFAIC?
> > 
> > 
> > liconasty. deal w/it.
> > 
> Isn't it cute how they come to each other's aid.  
> 

You've got it all wrong, Snitty... idiot bashing is a group sport:)

Steve

"Steve Carroll" <fretwizz@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote on 1/17/04 10:02 AM:

> In article <BC2EAB9E.3A813%snit@nospam-cableone.net>,
> Snit <snit@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
> 
>> "Elizabot" <toolittletoolate@poo.com> wrote on 1/17/04 3:47 AM:
>> 
>>> Nashton wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Steve Carroll wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> In article <BGXNb.65565$IF6.1511664@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
>>>>>  Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Steve Carroll wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> In article <C1VNb.65486$IF6.1506471@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
>>>>>>> Nicolas <ndk@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Mattias Honrendgard wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:<eeONb.13090$zj7.1937@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> To anyone who says poor Windows security doesn't matter, I was
>>>>>>>>>> investigating
>>>>>>>>>> today why a mailbox at work has been getting *ten thousand* more
>>>>>>>>>> emails a
>>>>>>>>>> day than it should be getting.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> They are bounce messages for spams, relayed through a vast number
>>>>>>>>>> of poorly
>>>>>>>>>> secured Windows machinces, that are using one of our domains in
>>>>>>>>>> the forged
>>>>>>>>>> "From" header line, so we get the bounces.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> That's about 13 megabytes per day.  Note that if the spammers had
>>>>>>>>>> happened
>>>>>>>>>> to pick someone's vanity domain, rather than a corporation that
>>>>>>>>>> has high
>>>>>>>>>> mail volumes and so is set up to handle things like this, they
>>>>>>>>>> very likely
>>>>>>>>>> would be overflowing that person's mailbox, causing that person
>>>>>>>>>> to lose all
>>>>>>>>>> their legitimate mail.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> That isn't a reason. The example you have given makes it your /
>>>>>>>>> someone elses problem, rather than a problem for the person with the
>>>>>>>>> poor Microsoft (tm) Windows system. Trust me - they don't care. :)
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Also, even if it were to affect a mailbox in the way you mention,
>>>>>>>>> then
>>>>>>>>> that is a *good* thing. As a Microsot (tm) Windows user you are
>>>>>>>>> expected to have bought at least $3000 of add-ons to make the system
>>>>>>>>> near useable.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Really? can you enumerate what I need to get my system working? I
>>>>>>>> have a 600 $ system that works flawlessly along with many Macs that
>>>>>>>> also work flawlessly and I never needed to spend that much money.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Relax George.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Nicolas
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> So tell us then, why are your considering Macs over PC's?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Steve
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Why, so that you can find another reason to pick nits or spin what I
>>>>>> say and eventually call me a Wintroll/Bag?
>>>>>> No thanks, it's getting pretty tired.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Nicolas
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> I think it's pretty obvious that others have seen your ruse, too.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Wow, Carroll. You *really* put me in my place, now.
>>>> Denial is a terrible thing.
>>>> 
>>>>  You
>>>> 
>>>>> aren't fooling anyone here, Licoass.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Licoass? Grow the fsck up, man...really.
>>>> See why what you say is like water on a ducks back, AFAIC?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> liconasty. deal w/it.
>>> 
>> Isn't it cute how they come to each other's aid.
>> 
> 
> You've got it all wrong, Snitty... idiot bashing is a group sport:)

One of two ways of seeing this:

You see me as the idiot and feel you need support to show it -or-
You are feeling picked on, since you see yourself as the idiot.

Which did you mean?

In article <me-ADF321.16455216012004@28-70.newscene.com>, Dan wrote:
>> They are bounce messages for spams, relayed through a vast number of poorly
                                       =======================================
>> secured Windows machinces, that are using one of our domains in the forged
   =========================
>> "From" header line, so we get the bounces.
>> 
....
> None of which has anything to do with "Windows security".   If the 

Read the underlined part again.

-- 
--Tim Smith

In article <4008611e.403789@news.paradise.net.nz>, Peter wrote:
> It has EVERYTHING to do with Windows security when large numbers of mom
> and pop Windows machines connected to cable or DSL are being used as
> 'zombies' for virus, spam or DoS attacks.  Not to put too fine a

Yup.  Without those zombie machines, a spam run of this size would be hard
to do--it would get the originating ISP blacklisted very quickly.

This spammer is even going so far as to use the Habeas headers
(www.habeas.com) to get past filters, which means they will be sued for
copyright and trademark violations as soon as Habeas can track them down,
but Habeas is having trouble finding them, because of the zombies.

-- 
--Tim Smith

> > Sorry, I don't use my comp as a server.
> > I don't use M$ office.
> > The AV came with the computer for free.
> > Backup is on an external LaCie FW 400 that I picked up for 60$ on eBay.
> > Don't need crash recovery tools.
> > Don't need support.
> > I certainly don't play games on my PC, unless you consider learning and 
> > using 3dstudiomax 6 a "game".
> > What are you smoking, again?  ;)
> > 
> 
> 
> It's called reality and I don't think your quite up to it :)
> 
> Steve

So you're not even running a mail server? Sorry, I thought that was
the topic here?

As we're changing the topic totally, I'd be interested to know how you
got your copy of 3D Studio Max so cheap as it usually retails for a
bit more than the $600 you've spent in total on your software.

"Mattias Honrendgard" <comeand@kissmyfatarse.com> wrote on 1/17/04 11:57 AM:

>>> Sorry, I don't use my comp as a server.
>>> I don't use M$ office.
>>> The AV came with the computer for free.
>>> Backup is on an external LaCie FW 400 that I picked up for 60$ on eBay.
>>> Don't need crash recovery tools.
>>> Don't need support.
>>> I certainly don't play games on my PC, unless you consider learning and
>>> using 3dstudiomax 6 a "game".
>>> What are you smoking, again?  ;)
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> It's called reality and I don't think your quite up to it :)
>> 
>> Steve
> 
> So you're not even running a mail server? Sorry, I thought that was
> the topic here?
> 
> As we're changing the topic totally, I'd be interested to know how you
> got your copy of 3D Studio Max so cheap as it usually retails for a
> bit more than the $600 you've spent in total on your software.

Steve does not know what a topic is... he flip flops more than a chef at
IHOP.

In article <BC2EBA42.3A836%snit@nospam-cableone.net>,
 Snit <snit@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:

> "Steve Carroll" <fretwizz@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote on 1/17/04 10:02 AM:
> 
> > In article <BC2EAB9E.3A813%snit@nospam-cableone.net>,
> > Snit <snit@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
> > 
> >> "Elizabot" <toolittletoolate@poo.com> wrote on 1/17/04 3:47 AM:
> >> 
> >>> Nashton wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>> Steve Carroll wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>>> In article <BGXNb.65565$IF6.1511664@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
> >>>>>  Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>> Steve Carroll wrote:
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> In article <C1VNb.65486$IF6.1506471@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
> >>>>>>> Nicolas <ndk@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> Mattias Honrendgard wrote:
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>> news:<eeONb.13090$zj7.1937@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>> To anyone who says poor Windows security doesn't matter, I was
> >>>>>>>>>> investigating
> >>>>>>>>>> today why a mailbox at work has been getting *ten thousand* more
> >>>>>>>>>> emails a
> >>>>>>>>>> day than it should be getting.
> >>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>> They are bounce messages for spams, relayed through a vast number
> >>>>>>>>>> of poorly
> >>>>>>>>>> secured Windows machinces, that are using one of our domains in
> >>>>>>>>>> the forged
> >>>>>>>>>> "From" header line, so we get the bounces.
> >>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>> That's about 13 megabytes per day.  Note that if the spammers had
> >>>>>>>>>> happened
> >>>>>>>>>> to pick someone's vanity domain, rather than a corporation that
> >>>>>>>>>> has high
> >>>>>>>>>> mail volumes and so is set up to handle things like this, they
> >>>>>>>>>> very likely
> >>>>>>>>>> would be overflowing that person's mailbox, causing that person
> >>>>>>>>>> to lose all
> >>>>>>>>>> their legitimate mail.
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> That isn't a reason. The example you have given makes it your /
> >>>>>>>>> someone elses problem, rather than a problem for the person with the
> >>>>>>>>> poor Microsoft (tm) Windows system. Trust me - they don't care. :)
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> Also, even if it were to affect a mailbox in the way you mention,
> >>>>>>>>> then
> >>>>>>>>> that is a *good* thing. As a Microsot (tm) Windows user you are
> >>>>>>>>> expected to have bought at least $3000 of add-ons to make the system
> >>>>>>>>> near useable.
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> Really? can you enumerate what I need to get my system working? I
> >>>>>>>> have a 600 $ system that works flawlessly along with many Macs that
> >>>>>>>> also work flawlessly and I never needed to spend that much money.
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> Relax George.
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> Nicolas
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> So tell us then, why are your considering Macs over PC's?
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> Steve
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Why, so that you can find another reason to pick nits or spin what I
> >>>>>> say and eventually call me a Wintroll/Bag?
> >>>>>> No thanks, it's getting pretty tired.
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Nicolas
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> I think it's pretty obvious that others have seen your ruse, too.
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> Wow, Carroll. You *really* put me in my place, now.
> >>>> Denial is a terrible thing.
> >>>> 
> >>>>  You
> >>>> 
> >>>>> aren't fooling anyone here, Licoass.
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> Licoass? Grow the fsck up, man...really.
> >>>> See why what you say is like water on a ducks back, AFAIC?
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> liconasty. deal w/it.
> >>> 
> >> Isn't it cute how they come to each other's aid.
> >> 
> > 
> > You've got it all wrong, Snitty... idiot bashing is a group sport:)
> 
> One of two ways of seeing this:
> 
> You see me as the idiot and feel you need support to show it -or-
> You are feeling picked on, since you see yourself as the idiot.
> 
> Which did you mean?
> 

You just cut right to the heart of a matter, don't you? LOL! You are not 
even involved in this insult and are as wrong as you usually are. A 
closer look will show the 'idiot' I referred to here was Nashton... but 
don't let your obsessive paranoid delusions get in your way of mangling 
context :) 

Steve

"Steve Carroll" <fretwizz@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote on 1/17/04 12:05 PM:

>>> You've got it all wrong, Snitty... idiot bashing is a group sport:)
>> 
>> One of two ways of seeing this:
>> 
>> You see me as the idiot and feel you need support to show it -or-
>> You are feeling picked on, since you see yourself as the idiot.
>> 
>> Which did you mean?
>> 
> 
> You just cut right to the heart of a matter, don't you?

Seems that way.... thanks for noting.

> LOL! You are not even involved in this insult

Who else do you call "Snitty"?

> and are as wrong as you usually are.

Since I am usually right, you are actually right here.  You twist words in
your normal way, but, yeah, since I am usually right and I am right here,
your argument is actually correct.

> A closer look will show the 'idiot' I referred to here was Nashton... but
> don't let your obsessive paranoid delusions get in your way of mangling
> context :) 

Who were you in reference to with the term "Snitty"

In article <BC2ED759.3A86E%snit@nospam-cableone.net>,
 Snit <snit@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:

> "Steve Carroll" <fretwizz@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote on 1/17/04 12:05 PM:
> 
> >>> You've got it all wrong, Snitty... idiot bashing is a group sport:)
> >> 
> >> One of two ways of seeing this:
> >> 
> >> You see me as the idiot and feel you need support to show it -or-
> >> You are feeling picked on, since you see yourself as the idiot.
> >> 
> >> Which did you mean?
> >> 
> > 
> > You just cut right to the heart of a matter, don't you?
> 
> Seems that way.... thanks for noting.
> 
> > LOL! You are not even involved in this insult
> 
> Who else do you call "Snitty"?
> 
> > and are as wrong as you usually are.
> 
> Since I am usually right, you are actually right here.  You twist words in
> your normal way, but, yeah, since I am usually right and I am right here,
> your argument is actually correct.

That doesn't even make any sense. You DO realize that, don't you? 
Anyway... no one is going to fall for the ensuing bullshit of yours 
where you claim that you always admit when you're are wrong. You do what 
you just did in this thread on a daily basis... and I'm not talking 
about your admission here.

Steve

Nicolas <ndk@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote ...

> Really? can you enumerate what I need to get my system working?

that's easy to answer ...

wipe your hard disk and install any BSD or Linux system or Solaris x86
on that PC. Et voila ... you have a working system. You could even get
Darwin and GNUstep/OpenStep, the predecessor to OSX and Aqua so to
speak, the closest you can get to an OSX Mac on an Intel box.

But beware! Defenestration is highly addictive and it will put you at
odds with 90 something percent of the herd.

rgds
bk

Steve Carroll <fretwizz@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote in message news:<fretwizz-1FC2D3.13243017012004@netnews.comcast.net>...
> In article <BC2ED759.3A86E%snit@nospam-cableone.net>,
>  Snit <snit@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
> 
> > "Steve Carroll" <fretwizz@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote on 1/17/04 12:05 PM:
> > 
> > >>> You've got it all wrong, Snitty... idiot bashing is a group sport:)
> > >> 
> > >> One of two ways of seeing this:
> > >> 
> > >> You see me as the idiot and feel you need support to show it -or-
> > >> You are feeling picked on, since you see yourself as the idiot.
> > >> 
> > >> Which did you mean?
> > >> 
> > > 
> > > You just cut right to the heart of a matter, don't you?
> > 
> > Seems that way.... thanks for noting.
> > 
> > > LOL! You are not even involved in this insult
> > 
> > Who else do you call "Snitty"?
> > 
> > > and are as wrong as you usually are.
> > 
> > Since I am usually right, you are actually right here.  You twist words in
> > your normal way, but, yeah, since I am usually right and I am right here,
> > your argument is actually correct.
> 
> That doesn't even make any sense. You DO realize that, don't you? 
> Anyway... no one is going to fall for the ensuing bullshit of yours 
> where you claim that you always admit when you're are wrong. You do what 
> you just did in this thread on a daily basis... and I'm not talking 
> about your admission here.
> 
> Steve

you are so full of shit your eyes are brown. you could not argue your
way out of a paper bag.  read what snit wote.  better yet shut the
hell up and go away.

Snit wrote:
> "Steve Carroll" <fretwizz@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote on 1/17/04 10:02 AM:
> 
> 
>>In article <BC2EAB9E.3A813%snit@nospam-cableone.net>,
>>Snit <snit@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Elizabot" <toolittletoolate@poo.com> wrote on 1/17/04 3:47 AM:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Nashton wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Steve Carroll wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>In article <BGXNb.65565$IF6.1511664@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
>>>>>> Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Steve Carroll wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>In article <C1VNb.65486$IF6.1506471@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
>>>>>>>>Nicolas <ndk@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Mattias Honrendgard wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>news:<eeONb.13090$zj7.1937@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>To anyone who says poor Windows security doesn't matter, I was
>>>>>>>>>>>investigating
>>>>>>>>>>>today why a mailbox at work has been getting *ten thousand* more
>>>>>>>>>>>emails a
>>>>>>>>>>>day than it should be getting.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>They are bounce messages for spams, relayed through a vast number
>>>>>>>>>>>of poorly
>>>>>>>>>>>secured Windows machinces, that are using one of our domains in
>>>>>>>>>>>the forged
>>>>>>>>>>>"From" header line, so we get the bounces.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>That's about 13 megabytes per day.  Note that if the spammers had
>>>>>>>>>>>happened
>>>>>>>>>>>to pick someone's vanity domain, rather than a corporation that
>>>>>>>>>>>has high
>>>>>>>>>>>mail volumes and so is set up to handle things like this, they
>>>>>>>>>>>very likely
>>>>>>>>>>>would be overflowing that person's mailbox, causing that person
>>>>>>>>>>>to lose all
>>>>>>>>>>>their legitimate mail.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>That isn't a reason. The example you have given makes it your /
>>>>>>>>>>someone elses problem, rather than a problem for the person with the
>>>>>>>>>>poor Microsoft (tm) Windows system. Trust me - they don't care. :)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Also, even if it were to affect a mailbox in the way you mention,
>>>>>>>>>>then
>>>>>>>>>>that is a *good* thing. As a Microsot (tm) Windows user you are
>>>>>>>>>>expected to have bought at least $3000 of add-ons to make the system
>>>>>>>>>>near useable.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Really? can you enumerate what I need to get my system working? I
>>>>>>>>>have a 600 $ system that works flawlessly along with many Macs that
>>>>>>>>>also work flawlessly and I never needed to spend that much money.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Relax George.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Nicolas
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>So tell us then, why are your considering Macs over PC's?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Steve
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Why, so that you can find another reason to pick nits or spin what I
>>>>>>>say and eventually call me a Wintroll/Bag?
>>>>>>>No thanks, it's getting pretty tired.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Nicolas
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I think it's pretty obvious that others have seen your ruse, too.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Wow, Carroll. You *really* put me in my place, now.
>>>>>Denial is a terrible thing.
>>>>>
>>>>> You
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>aren't fooling anyone here, Licoass.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Licoass? Grow the fsck up, man...really.
>>>>>See why what you say is like water on a ducks back, AFAIC?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>liconasty. deal w/it.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Isn't it cute how they come to each other's aid.
>>>
>>
>>You've got it all wrong, Snitty... idiot bashing is a group sport:)
> 
> 
> One of two ways of seeing this:
> 
> You see me as the idiot and feel you need support to show it -or-
> You are feeling picked on, since you see yourself as the idiot.
> 
> Which did you mean?
> 

Classic Freudian projection. In fact, this ng is riddled with 
individuals, such as nobodies of the ilk of Carroll, who find spewing 
their bile and frustrations on Usenet, an acceptable pastime;)

Nicolas

sigmond wrote:

> Steve Carroll <fretwizz@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote in message news:<fretwizz-1FC2D3.13243017012004@netnews.comcast.net>...
> 
>>In article <BC2ED759.3A86E%snit@nospam-cableone.net>,
>> Snit <snit@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Steve Carroll" <fretwizz@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote on 1/17/04 12:05 PM:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>You've got it all wrong, Snitty... idiot bashing is a group sport:)
>>>>>
>>>>>One of two ways of seeing this:
>>>>>
>>>>>You see me as the idiot and feel you need support to show it -or-
>>>>>You are feeling picked on, since you see yourself as the idiot.
>>>>>
>>>>>Which did you mean?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>You just cut right to the heart of a matter, don't you?
>>>
>>>Seems that way.... thanks for noting.
>>>
>>>
>>>>LOL! You are not even involved in this insult
>>>
>>>Who else do you call "Snitty"?
>>>
>>>
>>>>and are as wrong as you usually are.
>>>
>>>Since I am usually right, you are actually right here.  You twist words in
>>>your normal way, but, yeah, since I am usually right and I am right here,
>>>your argument is actually correct.
>>
>>That doesn't even make any sense. You DO realize that, don't you? 
>>Anyway... no one is going to fall for the ensuing bullshit of yours 
>>where you claim that you always admit when you're are wrong. You do what 
>>you just did in this thread on a daily basis... and I'm not talking 
>>about your admission here.
>>
>>Steve
> 
> 
> you are so full of shit your eyes are brown. you could not argue your
> way out of a paper bag.  read what snit wote.  better yet shut the
> hell up and go away.

How can he? Do you have another outlet to propose to him? He obviously 
is in dire need of counseling, at least this activity keeps the 
unemployed, such as him, off the streets;)

Nicolas

Snit wrote:

> "Mattias Honrendgard" <comeand@kissmyfatarse.com> wrote on 1/17/04 11:57 AM:
> 
> 
>>>>Sorry, I don't use my comp as a server.
>>>>I don't use M$ office.
>>>>The AV came with the computer for free.
>>>>Backup is on an external LaCie FW 400 that I picked up for 60$ on eBay.
>>>>Don't need crash recovery tools.
>>>>Don't need support.
>>>>I certainly don't play games on my PC, unless you consider learning and
>>>>using 3dstudiomax 6 a "game".
>>>>What are you smoking, again?  ;)
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>It's called reality and I don't think your quite up to it :)
>>>
>>>Steve


Can it, Carroll. Go play elsewhere;) Get a paper and start circling 
potential jobs instead of sitting on your fat ass;)

>>So you're not even running a mail server? Sorry, I thought that was
>>the topic here?
>>
>>As we're changing the topic totally, I'd be interested to know how you
>>got your copy of 3D Studio Max so cheap as it usually retails for a
>>bit more than the $600 you've spent in total on your software.

I bought it.
But I would have had to buy it if it were available for Macs too.

Nicolas

> Steve does not know what a topic is... he flip flops more than a chef at
> IHOP.
> 

In article <z6xOb.67109$IF6.1571666@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
 Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:

> sigmond wrote:
> 
> > Steve Carroll <fretwizz@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote in message 
> > news:<fretwizz-1FC2D3.13243017012004@netnews.comcast.net>...
> > 
> >>In article <BC2ED759.3A86E%snit@nospam-cableone.net>,
> >> Snit <snit@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>"Steve Carroll" <fretwizz@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote on 1/17/04 12:05 PM:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>>You've got it all wrong, Snitty... idiot bashing is a group sport:)
> >>>>>
> >>>>>One of two ways of seeing this:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>You see me as the idiot and feel you need support to show it -or-
> >>>>>You are feeling picked on, since you see yourself as the idiot.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Which did you mean?
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>You just cut right to the heart of a matter, don't you?
> >>>
> >>>Seems that way.... thanks for noting.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>LOL! You are not even involved in this insult
> >>>
> >>>Who else do you call "Snitty"?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>and are as wrong as you usually are.
> >>>
> >>>Since I am usually right, you are actually right here.  You twist words in
> >>>your normal way, but, yeah, since I am usually right and I am right here,
> >>>your argument is actually correct.
> >>
> >>That doesn't even make any sense. You DO realize that, don't you? 
> >>Anyway... no one is going to fall for the ensuing bullshit of yours 
> >>where you claim that you always admit when you're are wrong. You do what 
> >>you just did in this thread on a daily basis... and I'm not talking 
> >>about your admission here.
> >>
> >>Steve
> > 
> > 
> > you are so full of shit your eyes are brown. you could not argue your
> > way out of a paper bag.  read what snit wote.  better yet shut the
> > hell up and go away.
> 
> How can he? Do you have another outlet to propose to him? He obviously 
> is in dire need of counseling, at least this activity keeps the 
> unemployed, such as him, off the streets;)
> 
> Nicolas

It seems the fact that I've called you on your pretense of being a Mac 
advocate has you all shook up, Nic:) Tell me again... why are you 
considering Macs vs PC with your new purchase? LOL! BTW... when you're 
done with your tutor, have your mommy send him over to sigmond's house:)

Steve

Steve Carroll wrote:

> In article <z6xOb.67109$IF6.1571666@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
>  Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
> 
> 
>>sigmond wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Steve Carroll <fretwizz@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote in message 
>>>news:<fretwizz-1FC2D3.13243017012004@netnews.comcast.net>...
>>>
>>>
>>>>In article <BC2ED759.3A86E%snit@nospam-cableone.net>,
>>>>Snit <snit@nospam-cableone.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"Steve Carroll" <fretwizz@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote on 1/17/04 12:05 PM:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>You've got it all wrong, Snitty... idiot bashing is a group sport:)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>One of two ways of seeing this:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>You see me as the idiot and feel you need support to show it -or-
>>>>>>>You are feeling picked on, since you see yourself as the idiot.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Which did you mean?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>You just cut right to the heart of a matter, don't you?
>>>>>
>>>>>Seems that way.... thanks for noting.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>LOL! You are not even involved in this insult
>>>>>
>>>>>Who else do you call "Snitty"?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>and are as wrong as you usually are.
>>>>>
>>>>>Since I am usually right, you are actually right here.  You twist words in
>>>>>your normal way, but, yeah, since I am usually right and I am right here,
>>>>>your argument is actually correct.
>>>>
>>>>That doesn't even make any sense. You DO realize that, don't you? 
>>>>Anyway... no one is going to fall for the ensuing bullshit of yours 
>>>>where you claim that you always admit when you're are wrong. You do what 
>>>>you just did in this thread on a daily basis... and I'm not talking 
>>>>about your admission here.
>>>>
>>>>Steve
>>>
>>>
>>>you are so full of shit your eyes are brown. you could not argue your
>>>way out of a paper bag.  read what snit wote.  better yet shut the
>>>hell up and go away.
>>
>>How can he? Do you have another outlet to propose to him? He obviously 
>>is in dire need of counseling, at least this activity keeps the 
>>unemployed, such as him, off the streets;)
>>
>>Nicolas
> 
> 
> It seems the fact that I've called you on your pretense of being a Mac 
> advocate has you all shook up, Nic:)

Don't flatter yourself;)

  Tell me again... why are you
> considering Macs vs PC with your new purchase? LOL! BTW... when you're 
> done with your tutor, have your mommy send him over to sigmond's house:)


Good work, Carroll. A+ for being consistent;) Any sandboxes in the 
neighborhood?

Nicolas

Nicolas
> Steve

Steve Carroll wrote:

> In article <Kl8Ob.66246$IF6.1533041@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
>  Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
> 
> 
>>Steve Carroll wrote:
>>
>>
>>>In article <BGXNb.65565$IF6.1511664@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
>>> Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Steve Carroll wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>In article <C1VNb.65486$IF6.1506471@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
>>>>>Nicolas <ndk@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Mattias Honrendgard wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message 
>>>>>>>news:<eeONb.13090$zj7.1937@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>To anyone who says poor Windows security doesn't matter, I was 
>>>>>>>>investigating
>>>>>>>>today why a mailbox at work has been getting *ten thousand* more emails 
>>>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>>day than it should be getting.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>They are bounce messages for spams, relayed through a vast number of 
>>>>>>>>poorly
>>>>>>>>secured Windows machinces, that are using one of our domains in the 
>>>>>>>>forged
>>>>>>>>"From" header line, so we get the bounces.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>That's about 13 megabytes per day.  Note that if the spammers had 
>>>>>>>>happened
>>>>>>>>to pick someone's vanity domain, rather than a corporation that has 
>>>>>>>>high
>>>>>>>>mail volumes and so is set up to handle things like this, they very 
>>>>>>>>likely
>>>>>>>>would be overflowing that person's mailbox, causing that person to lose 
>>>>>>>>all
>>>>>>>>their legitimate mail.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>That isn't a reason. The example you have given makes it your /
>>>>>>>someone elses problem, rather than a problem for the person with the
>>>>>>>poor Microsoft (tm) Windows system. Trust me - they don't care. :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Also, even if it were to affect a mailbox in the way you mention, then
>>>>>>>that is a *good* thing. As a Microsot (tm) Windows user you are
>>>>>>>expected to have bought at least $3000 of add-ons to make the system
>>>>>>>near useable.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Really? can you enumerate what I need to get my system working? I have a 
>>>>>>600 $ system that works flawlessly along with many Macs that also work 
>>>>>>flawlessly and I never needed to spend that much money.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Relax George.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Nicolas
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>So tell us then, why are your considering Macs over PC's?
>>>>>
>>>>>Steve
>>>>
>>>>Why, so that you can find another reason to pick nits or spin what I say 
>>>>and eventually call me a Wintroll/Bag?
>>>>No thanks, it's getting pretty tired.
>>>>
>>>>Nicolas
>>>
>>>
>>>I think it's pretty obvious that others have seen your ruse, too.
>>
>>Wow, Carroll. You *really* put me in my place, now.
>>Denial is a terrible thing.
> 
> 
> Just what is your place? It certainly isn't as a Mac advocate. Tell us 
> again why you're considering Macs for your pending purchase. It's quite 
> humorous that you think other people are fooled by your bullshit:) 

I own FMP, Simple Accounting for Mac (OS 9), have purchased PS 7 and 
Illustrator 10 and my kids have games for the platform (Sims, Z tycoon, 
lego, etc). I enjoy working with Macs plus I've got lots of money 
invested in sw and hw.
I already have many iMacs and a PB Pismo that have been relatively 
trouble-free.
OTOH, my recent experience with WXP and the fact that I need a bare 
bones systems at the price I put together my PC , makes PCs more 
appealing, especially since my practice is expanding and I'm thinking 
about adding a new location.
Ask your mommy to explain this to you, if you are experiencing 
difficulty with comprehension;)

>>  You
>>
>>>aren't fooling anyone here, Licoass.
>>
>>Licoass? Grow the fsck up, man...really.
> 
> 
> Can't handle it when the adults sink to your level, can you...

I never started with the name-calling, blatant liar. *You* did, to your 
utter discredit.

>>See why what you say is like water on a ducks back, AFAIC?
> 
> 
> Get a new crack pipe?

I don't do drugs, Carroll. Never did, never will. Never drink either.
Do you?

Nicolas

> Steve

"Nashton" <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote on 1/18/04 9:53 AM:

> Steve Carroll wrote:
>> Just what is your place? It certainly isn't as a Mac advocate. Tell us
>> again why you're considering Macs for your pending purchase. It's quite
>> humorous that you think other people are fooled by your bullshit:)
> 
> I own FMP, Simple Accounting for Mac (OS 9), have purchased PS 7 and
> Illustrator 10 and my kids have games for the platform (Sims, Z tycoon,
> lego, etc). I enjoy working with Macs plus I've got lots of money
> invested in sw and hw.
> I already have many iMacs and a PB Pismo that have been relatively
> trouble-free.
> OTOH, my recent experience with WXP and the fact that I need a bare
> bones systems at the price I put together my PC , makes PCs more
> appealing, especially since my practice is expanding and I'm thinking
> about adding a new location.
> Ask your mommy to explain this to you, if you are experiencing
> difficulty with comprehension;)

My view is there is value in knowing both.  For *me*, generally the Mac is
the better platform, and I do feel this is true for many others, even those
that do not realize it (those that do not use the Mac often or know it
well). There are, of course, exceptions to this.

In your case, however, sounds like you are using both - and trying to learn
both.  Good; sounds like you are making an informed choice.  Why someone
would try to talk you out of that I do not know.

> >>As we're changing the topic totally, I'd be interested to know how you
> >>got your copy of 3D Studio Max so cheap as it usually retails for a
> >>bit more than the $600 you've spent in total on your software.
> 
> I bought it.
> But I would have had to buy it if it were available for Macs too.
> 

Like I said, I'd love to know where you got it from because I'll have
a copy at that price!

Even the upgrade from 5 to 6 is $795.00

http://estore.discreet.com/dr/v2/ec_MAIN.Entry16?SP=10024&PN=29&xid=37482&V1=30013513&V2=30013513&V3=&V4=&V5=11000172&S1=&S2=&S3=&S4=&S5=&DSP=0&CUR=840&PGRP=0&CACHE_ID=0

Snit wrote:
> "Nashton" <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote on 1/18/04 9:53 AM:
> 
> 
>>Steve Carroll wrote:
>>
>>>Just what is your place? It certainly isn't as a Mac advocate. Tell us
>>>again why you're considering Macs for your pending purchase. It's quite
>>>humorous that you think other people are fooled by your bullshit:)
>>
>>I own FMP, Simple Accounting for Mac (OS 9), have purchased PS 7 and
>>Illustrator 10 and my kids have games for the platform (Sims, Z tycoon,
>>lego, etc). I enjoy working with Macs plus I've got lots of money
>>invested in sw and hw.
>>I already have many iMacs and a PB Pismo that have been relatively
>>trouble-free.
>>OTOH, my recent experience with WXP and the fact that I need a bare
>>bones systems at the price I put together my PC , makes PCs more
>>appealing, especially since my practice is expanding and I'm thinking
>>about adding a new location.
>>Ask your mommy to explain this to you, if you are experiencing
>>difficulty with comprehension;)
> 
> 
> My view is there is value in knowing both.  For *me*, generally the Mac is
> the better platform, and I do feel this is true for many others, even those
> that do not realize it (those that do not use the Mac often or know it
> well). There are, of course, exceptions to this.
> 
> In your case, however, sounds like you are using both - and trying to learn
> both.  Good; sounds like you are making an informed choice.  Why someone
> would try to talk you out of that I do not know.
> 

I don't think that trolls of the ilk of Carroll can ever dissuade me or 
anyone else from doing anything, let alone make a major purchasing 
decision that I'll have to live with for many years to come.
These are not Mac advocates but Mac bullies, something the platform 
needs not.

Nicolas

"Nashton" <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote on 1/18/04 12:12 PM:

> Snit wrote:
>> "Nashton" <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote on 1/18/04 9:53 AM:
>> 
>> 
>>> Steve Carroll wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Just what is your place? It certainly isn't as a Mac advocate. Tell us
>>>> again why you're considering Macs for your pending purchase. It's quite
>>>> humorous that you think other people are fooled by your bullshit:)
>>> 
>>> I own FMP, Simple Accounting for Mac (OS 9), have purchased PS 7 and
>>> Illustrator 10 and my kids have games for the platform (Sims, Z tycoon,
>>> lego, etc). I enjoy working with Macs plus I've got lots of money
>>> invested in sw and hw.
>>> I already have many iMacs and a PB Pismo that have been relatively
>>> trouble-free.
>>> OTOH, my recent experience with WXP and the fact that I need a bare
>>> bones systems at the price I put together my PC , makes PCs more
>>> appealing, especially since my practice is expanding and I'm thinking
>>> about adding a new location.
>>> Ask your mommy to explain this to you, if you are experiencing
>>> difficulty with comprehension;)
>> 
>> 
>> My view is there is value in knowing both.  For *me*, generally the Mac is
>> the better platform, and I do feel this is true for many others, even those
>> that do not realize it (those that do not use the Mac often or know it
>> well). There are, of course, exceptions to this.
>> 
>> In your case, however, sounds like you are using both - and trying to learn
>> both.  Good; sounds like you are making an informed choice.  Why someone
>> would try to talk you out of that I do not know.
>> 
> 
> I don't think that trolls of the ilk of Carroll can ever dissuade me or
> anyone else from doing anything, let alone make a major purchasing
> decision that I'll have to live with for many years to come.
> These are not Mac advocates but Mac bullies, something the platform
> needs not.

True.  I hope people can tell reasonable advice from just screaming.  And
even with the reasonable advice, take it as that. *advice* not the word of
Jobs.  :)

In article <qSyOb.67155$IF6.1575476@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
 Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:

> Steve Carroll wrote:
> 
> > In article <Kl8Ob.66246$IF6.1533041@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
> >  Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >>Steve Carroll wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>In article <BGXNb.65565$IF6.1511664@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
> >>> Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Steve Carroll wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>In article <C1VNb.65486$IF6.1506471@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
> >>>>>Nicolas <ndk@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>Mattias Honrendgard wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message 
> >>>>>>>news:<eeONb.13090$zj7.1937@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>To anyone who says poor Windows security doesn't matter, I was 
> >>>>>>>>investigating
> >>>>>>>>today why a mailbox at work has been getting *ten thousand* more 
> >>>>>>>>emails 
> >>>>>>>>a
> >>>>>>>>day than it should be getting.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>They are bounce messages for spams, relayed through a vast number of 
> >>>>>>>>poorly
> >>>>>>>>secured Windows machinces, that are using one of our domains in the 
> >>>>>>>>forged
> >>>>>>>>"From" header line, so we get the bounces.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>That's about 13 megabytes per day.  Note that if the spammers had 
> >>>>>>>>happened
> >>>>>>>>to pick someone's vanity domain, rather than a corporation that has 
> >>>>>>>>high
> >>>>>>>>mail volumes and so is set up to handle things like this, they very 
> >>>>>>>>likely
> >>>>>>>>would be overflowing that person's mailbox, causing that person to 
> >>>>>>>>lose 
> >>>>>>>>all
> >>>>>>>>their legitimate mail.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>That isn't a reason. The example you have given makes it your /
> >>>>>>>someone elses problem, rather than a problem for the person with the
> >>>>>>>poor Microsoft (tm) Windows system. Trust me - they don't care. :)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Also, even if it were to affect a mailbox in the way you mention, then
> >>>>>>>that is a *good* thing. As a Microsot (tm) Windows user you are
> >>>>>>>expected to have bought at least $3000 of add-ons to make the system
> >>>>>>>near useable.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Really? can you enumerate what I need to get my system working? I have 
> >>>>>>a 
> >>>>>>600 $ system that works flawlessly along with many Macs that also work 
> >>>>>>flawlessly and I never needed to spend that much money.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Relax George.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Nicolas
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>So tell us then, why are your considering Macs over PC's?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Steve
> >>>>
> >>>>Why, so that you can find another reason to pick nits or spin what I say 
> >>>>and eventually call me a Wintroll/Bag?
> >>>>No thanks, it's getting pretty tired.
> >>>>
> >>>>Nicolas
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>I think it's pretty obvious that others have seen your ruse, too.
> >>
> >>Wow, Carroll. You *really* put me in my place, now.
> >>Denial is a terrible thing.
> > 
> > 
> > Just what is your place? It certainly isn't as a Mac advocate. Tell us 
> > again why you're considering Macs for your pending purchase. It's quite 
> > humorous that you think other people are fooled by your bullshit:) 
> 
> I own FMP, Simple Accounting for Mac (OS 9), have purchased PS 7 and 
> Illustrator 10 and my kids have games for the platform (Sims, Z tycoon, 
> lego, etc). I enjoy working with Macs plus I've got lots of money 
> invested in sw and hw.
> I already have many iMacs and a PB Pismo that have been relatively 
> trouble-free.
> OTOH, my recent experience with WXP and the fact that I need a bare 
> bones systems at the price I put together my PC , makes PCs more 
> appealing, especially since my practice is expanding and I'm thinking 
> about adding a new location.
> Ask your mommy to explain this to you, if you are experiencing 
> difficulty with comprehension;)
> 
> >>  You
> >>
> >>>aren't fooling anyone here, Licoass.
> >>
> >>Licoass? Grow the fsck up, man...really.
> > 
> > 
> > Can't handle it when the adults sink to your level, can you...
> 
> I never started with the name-calling, blatant liar. *You* did, to your 
> utter discredit.
> 
> >>See why what you say is like water on a ducks back, AFAIC?
> > 
> > 
> > Get a new crack pipe?
> 
> I don't do drugs, Carroll. Never did, never will. Never drink either.
> Do you?
> 
> Nicolas
> 
> > Steve

I drink lightly a few times a month. I don't take anything but aspirin 
and I have smoked pot when I was younger several times... didn't really 
like it much. Are you trying to convey the idea that because you're as 
pure as the driven Snow that makes you special:) I'll admit the name 
calling was out of line but I think your intentions here aren't quite in 
sync with your actions... my opinion. Just so we don't get mixed up as 
to what integrity actually is, or who here has any, I won't say anything 
on the internet that I wouldn't say in person. If you'd like the 
opportunity to tell me I'm full of shit to my face I can provide it for 
you. To be clear, I'm not threatening you, just giving you an 
opportunity to display some of the class and integrity you seem to feel 
you have that I don't.

Steve

Steve Carroll wrote:

> In article <qSyOb.67155$IF6.1575476@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
>  Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
> 
> 
>>Steve Carroll wrote:
>>
>>
>>>In article <Kl8Ob.66246$IF6.1533041@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
>>> Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Steve Carroll wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>In article <BGXNb.65565$IF6.1511664@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
>>>>>Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Steve Carroll wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>In article <C1VNb.65486$IF6.1506471@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
>>>>>>>Nicolas <ndk@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Mattias Honrendgard wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message 
>>>>>>>>>news:<eeONb.13090$zj7.1937@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>To anyone who says poor Windows security doesn't matter, I was 
>>>>>>>>>>investigating
>>>>>>>>>>today why a mailbox at work has been getting *ten thousand* more 
>>>>>>>>>>emails 
>>>>>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>>>>day than it should be getting.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>They are bounce messages for spams, relayed through a vast number of 
>>>>>>>>>>poorly
>>>>>>>>>>secured Windows machinces, that are using one of our domains in the 
>>>>>>>>>>forged
>>>>>>>>>>"From" header line, so we get the bounces.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>That's about 13 megabytes per day.  Note that if the spammers had 
>>>>>>>>>>happened
>>>>>>>>>>to pick someone's vanity domain, rather than a corporation that has 
>>>>>>>>>>high
>>>>>>>>>>mail volumes and so is set up to handle things like this, they very 
>>>>>>>>>>likely
>>>>>>>>>>would be overflowing that person's mailbox, causing that person to 
>>>>>>>>>>lose 
>>>>>>>>>>all
>>>>>>>>>>their legitimate mail.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>That isn't a reason. The example you have given makes it your /
>>>>>>>>>someone elses problem, rather than a problem for the person with the
>>>>>>>>>poor Microsoft (tm) Windows system. Trust me - they don't care. :)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Also, even if it were to affect a mailbox in the way you mention, then
>>>>>>>>>that is a *good* thing. As a Microsot (tm) Windows user you are
>>>>>>>>>expected to have bought at least $3000 of add-ons to make the system
>>>>>>>>>near useable.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Really? can you enumerate what I need to get my system working? I have 
>>>>>>>>a 
>>>>>>>>600 $ system that works flawlessly along with many Macs that also work 
>>>>>>>>flawlessly and I never needed to spend that much money.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Relax George.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Nicolas
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>So tell us then, why are your considering Macs over PC's?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Steve
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Why, so that you can find another reason to pick nits or spin what I say 
>>>>>>and eventually call me a Wintroll/Bag?
>>>>>>No thanks, it's getting pretty tired.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Nicolas
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I think it's pretty obvious that others have seen your ruse, too.
>>>>
>>>>Wow, Carroll. You *really* put me in my place, now.
>>>>Denial is a terrible thing.
>>>
>>>
>>>Just what is your place? It certainly isn't as a Mac advocate. Tell us 
>>>again why you're considering Macs for your pending purchase. It's quite 
>>>humorous that you think other people are fooled by your bullshit:) 
>>
>>I own FMP, Simple Accounting for Mac (OS 9), have purchased PS 7 and 
>>Illustrator 10 and my kids have games for the platform (Sims, Z tycoon, 
>>lego, etc). I enjoy working with Macs plus I've got lots of money 
>>invested in sw and hw.
>>I already have many iMacs and a PB Pismo that have been relatively 
>>trouble-free.
>>OTOH, my recent experience with WXP and the fact that I need a bare 
>>bones systems at the price I put together my PC , makes PCs more 
>>appealing, especially since my practice is expanding and I'm thinking 
>>about adding a new location.
>>Ask your mommy to explain this to you, if you are experiencing 
>>difficulty with comprehension;)
>>
>>
>>>> You
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>aren't fooling anyone here, Licoass.
>>>>
>>>>Licoass? Grow the fsck up, man...really.
>>>
>>>
>>>Can't handle it when the adults sink to your level, can you...
>>
>>I never started with the name-calling, blatant liar. *You* did, to your 
>>utter discredit.
>>
>>
>>>>See why what you say is like water on a ducks back, AFAIC?
>>>
>>>
>>>Get a new crack pipe?
>>
>>I don't do drugs, Carroll. Never did, never will. Never drink either.
>>Do you?
>>
>>Nicolas
>>
>>
>>>Steve
> 
> 
> I drink lightly a few times a month. I don't take anything but aspirin 
> and I have smoked pot when I was younger several times... didn't really 
> like it much. Are you trying to convey the idea that because you're as 
> pure as the driven Snow that makes you special:)

Not really. You're assuming again, like you've done so many times in the 
past based on your faulty perceptions of myself and my intentions.

  I'll admit the name
> calling was out of line

You don't have to admit to anything, I already know you were out of line 
and that's enough for me.

  but I think your intentions here aren't quite in
> sync with your actions... my opinion. 

Instead of acting like a a tween, this is what you should have said from 
the onset.

Just so we don't get mixed up as
> to what integrity actually is, or who here has any, I won't say anything 
> on the internet that I wouldn't say in person. 

Doesn't make what you said any better or any worse, neither does it add 
a veneer of credibility, for that matter. If a poster is a dweeb on 
Usenet, chances are he's/she's a dweeb in real life.

If you'd like the
> opportunity to tell me I'm full of shit to my face I can provide it for 
> you.

Telling you on Usenet is enough for me.

  To be clear, I'm not threatening you, just giving you an
> opportunity to display some of the class and integrity you seem to feel 
> you have that I don't.

Been there, done that;)

Nicolas
> 
> Steve

Mattias Honrendgard wrote:

>>>>As we're changing the topic totally, I'd be interested to know how you
>>>>got your copy of 3D Studio Max so cheap as it usually retails for a
>>>>bit more than the $600 you've spent in total on your software.
>>
>>I bought it.
>>But I would have had to buy it if it were available for Macs too.
>>
> 
> 
> Like I said, I'd love to know where you got it from because I'll have
> a copy at that price!
> 
> Even the upgrade from 5 to 6 is $795.00
> 
> http://estore.discreet.com/dr/v2/ec_MAIN.Entry16?SP=10024&PN=29&xid=37482&V1=30013513&V2=30013513&V3=&V4=&V5=11000172&S1=&S2=&S3=&S4=&S5=&DSP=0&CUR=840&PGRP=0&CACHE_ID=0

Upgraded from 4. Put me out close to 1300$. I had bought 4 from an 
aquaitence that sold his comp (PC) after swtching to Maya on OS X. He 
wasn't going to use it anymore so he sold me the licence.

But this is not what the discussion is about.

Nicolas

In article <ZgDOb.67304$IF6.1587903@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
 Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:

> Steve Carroll wrote:
> 
> > In article <qSyOb.67155$IF6.1575476@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
> >  Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >>Steve Carroll wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>In article <Kl8Ob.66246$IF6.1533041@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
> >>> Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Steve Carroll wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>In article <BGXNb.65565$IF6.1511664@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
> >>>>>Nashton <ndk@NOSPAMDAMN.nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>Steve Carroll wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>In article <C1VNb.65486$IF6.1506471@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>,
> >>>>>>>Nicolas <ndk@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>Mattias Honrendgard wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message 
> >>>>>>>>>news:<eeONb.13090$zj7.1937@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>To anyone who says poor Windows security doesn't matter, I was 
> >>>>>>>>>>investigating
> >>>>>>>>>>today why a mailbox at work has been getting *ten thousand* more 
> >>>>>>>>>>emails 
> >>>>>>>>>>a
> >>>>>>>>>>day than it should be getting.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>They are bounce messages for spams, relayed through a vast number 
> >>>>>>>>>>of 
> >>>>>>>>>>poorly
> >>>>>>>>>>secured Windows machinces, that are using one of our domains in the 
> >>>>>>>>>>forged
> >>>>>>>>>>"From" header line, so we get the bounces.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>That's about 13 megabytes per day.  Note that if the spammers had 
> >>>>>>>>>>happened
> >>>>>>>>>>to pick someone's vanity domain, rather than a corporation that has 
> >>>>>>>>>>high
> >>>>>>>>>>mail volumes and so is set up to handle things like this, they very 
> >>>>>>>>>>likely
> >>>>>>>>>>would be overflowing that person's mailbox, causing that person to 
> >>>>>>>>>>lose 
> >>>>>>>>>>all
> >>>>>>>>>>their legitimate mail.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>That isn't a reason. The example you have given makes it your /
> >>>>>>>>>someone elses problem, rather than a problem for the person with the
> >>>>>>>>>poor Microsoft (tm) Windows system. Trust me - they don't care. :)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>Also, even if it were to affect a mailbox in the way you mention, 
> >>>>>>>>>then
> >>>>>>>>>that is a *good* thing. As a Microsot (tm) Windows user you are
> >>>>>>>>>expected to have bought at least $3000 of add-ons to make the system
> >>>>>>>>>near useable.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>Really? can you enumerate what I need to get my system working? I 
> >>>>>>>>have 
> >>>>>>>>a 
> >>>>>>>>600 $ system that works flawlessly along with many Macs that also 
> >>>>>>>>work 
> >>>>>>>>flawlessly and I never needed to spend that much money.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>Relax George.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>Nicolas
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>So tell us then, why are your considering Macs over PC's?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Steve
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Why, so that you can find another reason to pick nits or spin what I 
> >>>>>>say 
> >>>>>>and eventually call me a Wintroll/Bag?
> >>>>>>No thanks, it's getting pretty tired.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Nicolas
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>I think it's pretty obvious that others have seen your ruse, too.
> >>>>
> >>>>Wow, Carroll. You *really* put me in my place, now.
> >>>>Denial is a terrible thing.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Just what is your place? It certainly isn't as a Mac advocate. Tell us 
> >>>again why you're considering Macs for your pending purchase. It's quite 
> >>>humorous that you think other people are fooled by your bullshit:) 
> >>
> >>I own FMP, Simple Accounting for Mac (OS 9), have purchased PS 7 and 
> >>Illustrator 10 and my kids have games for the platform (Sims, Z tycoon, 
> >>lego, etc). I enjoy working with Macs plus I've got lots of money 
> >>invested in sw and hw.
> >>I already have many iMacs and a PB Pismo that have been relatively 
> >>trouble-free.
> >>OTOH, my recent experience with WXP and the fact that I need a bare 
> >>bones systems at the price I put together my PC , makes PCs more 
> >>appealing, especially since my practice is expanding and I'm thinking 
> >>about adding a new location.
> >>Ask your mommy to explain this to you, if you are experiencing 
> >>difficulty with comprehension;)
> >>
> >>
> >>>> You
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>aren't fooling anyone here, Licoass.
> >>>>
> >>>>Licoass? Grow the fsck up, man...really.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Can't handle it when the adults sink to your level, can you...
> >>
> >>I never started with the name-calling, blatant liar. *You* did, to your 
> >>utter discredit.
> >>
> >>
> >>>>See why what you say is like water on a ducks back, AFAIC?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Get a new crack pipe?
> >>
> >>I don't do drugs, Carroll. Never did, never will. Never drink either.
> >>Do you?
> >>
> >>Nicolas
> >>
> >>
> >>>Steve
> > 
> > 
> > I drink lightly a few times a month. I don't take anything but aspirin 
> > and I have smoked pot when I was younger several times... didn't really 
> > like it much. Are you trying to convey the idea that because you're as 
> > pure as the driven Snow that makes you special:)
> 
> Not really. You're assuming again, like you've done so many times in the 
> past based on your faulty perceptions of myself and my intentions.
> 
>   I'll admit the name
> > calling was out of line
> 
> You don't have to admit to anything, I already know you were out of line 
> and that's enough for me.
> 
>   but I think your intentions here aren't quite in
> > sync with your actions... my opinion. 
> 
> Instead of acting like a a tween, this is what you should have said from 
> the onset.
> 
> Just so we don't get mixed up as
> > to what integrity actually is, or who here has any, I won't say anything 
> > on the internet that I wouldn't say in person. 
> 
> Doesn't make what you said any better or any worse, neither does it add 
> a veneer of credibility, for that matter. If a poster is a dweeb on 
> Usenet, chances are he's/she's a dweeb in real life.
> 
> If you'd like the
> > opportunity to tell me I'm full of shit to my face I can provide it for 
> > you.
> 
> Telling you on Usenet is enough for me.
> 
>   To be clear, I'm not threatening you, just giving you an
> > opportunity to display some of the class and integrity you seem to feel 
> > you have that I don't.
> 
> Been there, done that;)
> 
> Nicolas
> > 
> > Steve

So much for your integrity...

Steve

In article <eeONb.13090$zj7.1937@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>, Tim
Smith wrote:
> To anyone who says poor Windows security doesn't matter, I was
> investigating today why a mailbox at work has been getting *ten thousand*
> more emails a day than it should be getting.
> 
> They are bounce messages for spams, relayed through a vast number of
> poorly secured Windows machinces, that are using one of our domains in the
> forged "From" header line, so we get the bounces.

To those reading in COLA, I posted the above here and on
comp.sys.mac.advocacy.  There is an amazing response from Daeron over in
CSMA only, where he says the above post is me being a Microsoft apologist!
According to him, what I'm trying to do is distract people from the real
cause of spam, which is Microsoft.

Anyone want to explain this to me: by blaming Microsoft's poor security for
the problem, I'm trying to distract people from Microsoft's involvement in
the problem???

-- 
--Tim Smith

Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> writes:

> Anyone want to explain this to me: by blaming Microsoft's poor security for
> the problem, I'm trying to distract people from Microsoft's involvement in
> the problem???

Daeron's an idiot?

-- 
Jesse F. Hughes
"[Lancelot] sighed, defeated. "It is as practical to hurry an acorn
toward treeness as to urge a damsel when her mind is set."
  -- John Steinbeck, /The Acts of King Arthur and His Noble Knights/

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Tim Smith
<reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com>
 wrote
on Sat, 17 Jan 2004 18:39:47 GMT
<TjfOb.14587$zj7.8077@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>:
> In article <4008611e.403789@news.paradise.net.nz>, Peter wrote:
>> It has EVERYTHING to do with Windows security when large numbers of mom
>> and pop Windows machines connected to cable or DSL are being used as
>> 'zombies' for virus, spam or DoS attacks.  Not to put too fine a
> 
> Yup.  Without those zombie machines, a spam run of this size would be hard
> to do--it would get the originating ISP blacklisted very quickly.
> 
> This spammer is even going so far as to use the Habeas headers
> (www.habeas.com) to get past filters, which means they will be sued for
> copyright and trademark violations as soon as Habeas can track them down,
> but Habeas is having trouble finding them, because of the zombies.
> 

Is Habeas at least attempting to contact the owners of the
infected machines, or the ISP to which they're connected?

Would it make sense to do so?

-- 
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
It's still legal to go .sigless.

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, BK
<bk_usenet@yahoo.co.uk>
 wrote
on 17 Jan 2004 17:54:42 -0800
<39d9c156.0401171754.7cb63f2d@posting.google.com>:
> Nicolas <ndk@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote ...
> 
>> Really? can you enumerate what I need to get my system working?
> 
> that's easy to answer ...
> 
> wipe your hard disk and install any BSD or Linux system or Solaris x86
> on that PC. Et voila ... you have a working system. You could even get
> Darwin and GNUstep/OpenStep, the predecessor to OSX and Aqua so to
> speak, the closest you can get to an OSX Mac on an Intel box.
> 
> But beware! Defenestration is highly addictive and it will put you at
> odds with 90 something percent of the herd.
> 
> rgds
> bk

And going against the herd is a bad thing precisely...why? :-)

-- 
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
It's still legal to go .sigless.