I'll try this again; Netcom has this nasty habit of just dying for 10 minutes at a time right in the middle of my pasting e-mail. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Greg Broiles wrote,

I second Hal's suggestion to route Detweiler's traffic through Xenon's remailer.

(Xenon - the point isn't to keep Detweiler off the net. We all know that's impossible. The point is to keep Detweiler from getting remailers shut down by abusing them. That's why this is particularly unlike censorship; Detweiler's goal is to keep all people from using remailers.)

Sure, send me YOUR garbage. Why isn't Larry abusing MY remailer? This peer pressure is childish. I no longer really need qwerty as a remailer, and will happily shut it down as soon as YOU people start abusing it. I admit I created a lot of negative feelings out there with my statement that I didn't want to block Larry's addresses. However, say I retract that statement, and say I do not want to block him, but that I AM willing to give into such peer pressure and try TO block him? I now ask you to, with compassion, educate me about how the arguments I express against the MEANS you tell me to use, are not valid. I don't mind blocking the address of some undergrad who is sending silly stuff to Usenet, but must I always have to demonstrate to you things that I cannot seem to convey in words? OK. I shall write a script to telnet to port 25 of a given remailer, and forge mail from various non-existent addresses at Netcom. They will include names like "S.Boxx@netcom.com", "Executioner@netcom.com", and "Fuckyou@netcom.com". What will you do then, block incoming from netcom.com? Yeah right ;-) ! I sent myself mail this way via Hal's remailer. It WORKED. Larry knew how to do this when I was still trying to work my newsreader. Again, as I have said before, it is my feeling that all of our trying to block Larry's current known addresses will only fuel the fire, and next time he will REALLY cause problems. He isn't a stupid guy. And he IS the type of person who if you fight him, he will fight back with more energy than before. So far I am not impressed with the level of sophistication in the words I hear coming from the remailer operators and other interested parties out here. We need an ABUSE filter, not a Detweiler filter, for with current sendmail, we CANNOT block a determined person from abusing the remailers. And it is my belief that trying to do so will renew their fanaticism and dedication to upsetting the remailers. He already seems to have a new anon.penet.fi address. He can have as many more as he wants, brand spanking new, by telnetting to anon.penet.fi 25 and faking his address. I have tried this and it too WORKS. Give me a real solution, one that will not make the problem WORSE. Many of you out here remind me of government bureaucrats, in how you want to try quick very short term fixes, which in the end only backfire and make the problems worse. You think Larry isn't willing to fork over $20 to get a Netcom account and then spend another $50 to buy e-postage, then send out much MORE damning abuses (since you made it harder for him to do damage by quantity alone), this time with real religious zeal, since now he has gotten you guys to finally fight back, and as you must realize, he takes this all VERY seriously. And after all, isn't our installing ABUSE filters what Larry is trying to tell us to do in the first place? I do not find this an unreasonable request. It is a wonderful solution that avoids accountability problems, after the fact, upon someone posting an abusive message to Usenet, since they are unable to post such an abuse in the first place. Why don't we appease Larry? How? The answer is painful and obvious: Moderated remailers. You already have to trust the remailer operator with your privacy. E-postage is a fun idea especially for ME ;-), but the logistics and loss of traffic are real problems. Besides, I can't charge as much for a Netcom remailer, as it is not as secure as some others. Is it not unfortunate that an AI program cannot ever hope to accomplish what the human eye and brain can do in a millisecond? Hit a 'd' key in responses to abusive mail. Send me such a script! Until Usenet is fully moderated, and realize that MOST people on Usenet do NOT feel like pandering to "those cowards and irresponsible people afraid to use their real names". THAT is the attitude out there. There must be moderation, if only for remailing to Usenet. Since such moderation is unlikely in the next year, for all of Usenet, the moderation must lie within the remailers. Yes, anon.penet.fi has survived without this, but Julf keeps people's REAL addresses on his hard disk, and keeps FULL logs (not content though). Still, it is possible for Larry to send out a hundred Usenet posts, by forging e-mail to anon.penet.fi. Fortunately for Julf, he is busy enough upsetting us. If full moderation not be practical, then fairly smart scripts for detecting abuse could do SOME good. Certainly a barrage of posts to Usenet could be detected and blocked. But that only causes someone to post more damaging posts in fewer numbers. "I am afraid of knowing the truth, for when you offer it to people, they call you mad." -=Xenon=- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3 iQCVAgUBLWI1bASzG6zrQn1RAQHPEwP/Wf/jCuEV6sE9vs89NvC25T1ejBrr6nxq +65zorNvaSpaTYJraH5kD7NHSerXX5XlNKllG10RoqwnpjwQ56FCsVQzqDrkYH+9 DXk5VP2ay0B0DFIRxgTGXhl4fXi6K6bjiS4dRi4AxvnOeZaGlzTQMu1CGJJZ1pNk Cv+P0X/rYcw= =tO7R -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----