Re: Another of Gary Burnore's Lies Exposed
gburnore@netcom.com (Gary L. Burnore) wrote:
X-No-Archive: yes
:This puts all other claimed forgeries from a mail2news gateway, that you :have taken an issue with, and used as a basis to form your claims against :UCE-baiting, and such, as suspect.
Sure it does in your mind and I'm sure in the mind of the anon-asshole.
Call someone an "asshole" all you like, but when you have to qualify that and call him a "black asshole", "gay asshole", "Jewish asshole", or "anon asshole", it only demonstrates your personal prejudice and bigotry. Your arguments are so weak that you must resort to ad hominem argumentation to divert attention from the facts. Repeating your unproven accusations over and over does not make them true.
All of that aside, the point is it has stopped since the remailers blocked the address. Note btw, that the anon asshole is still claiming databasix does this and databasix does that and yet databasix hasn't been connected to the net since august.
Are you claiming that all the DataBasix personnel no longer have access to the Internet simply because the databasix.com domain is down? Considering how lax Netcom is with their servers, any abuse you might allege could easily have come from someone with a Netcom account. You might as well reconnect databasix.com to the net because having it down is not a credible alibi -- not when most of the players involved have Netcom accounts, and a few even have shell accounts from which they could have run Perl scripts.
The issue now is as it was then. An asshole, posting anonymously, apparently in an attempt to cause troubles for remailers at my expense is still at it.
He OBVIOUSLY wants remailers shut down. I obviously don't.
Your cute little conspiracy theory does not exactly square with the account of one of the remailer operators that you along with fellow DataBasix staffers Belinda Bryan and William J. McClatchie (aka "Wotan") harassed. Reread his message exposing your anti-remailer activities: http://infinity.nus.sg/cypherpunks/dir.archive-97.11.13-97.11.19/0432.html
End of story as far as I am concerned.
Not as long as you want to keep it alive by claiming that you are a "victim" of some grand forgery, "UCE-baiting", "cyber stalking" scheme. Sam is right in doubting your claims that most of the things you allege happened to you even occurred. He pointed out that the one flimsy piece of evidence you've been able to produce more recently than February of 1997 originated from YOUR OWN DOMAIN! --
gburnore@netcom.com (Gary L. Burnore) wrote:
X-No-Archive: yes
You're still posting lies. You say I'm anti-remailer and anti-anonymous yet YOU are the one with the apparent agenda. YOU are the one who continues the lies. YOU are the one who hasn't posted proof of your alligations. YOU are the one who's actions give remailers a bad name.
Post your demands and your motives. What's in it for you?
I've done it several times, but you seem to be stuck in transmit-only mode. My "demand" is that you explain YOUR motives for your written demands to Jeff Burchell that he violate the privacy of ALL of the users of his remailer by turning over his logs to you and Belinda Bryan <eridani@ix.netcom.com>, listing the name and address of EVERYONE who either SENT or RECEIVED anonymous e-mail from the Huge Cajones Remailer. If you don't like hearing that, then you'd better stop asking the same question over and over. It quite obviously took you by surprise that Jeff chose to reveal to all of his users just what you and Belinda had attempted. Did you not want remailer users to know what you'd tried to do? Contrary to your accusations, not all of Jeff's post was "speculation". The attempt by staff members of DataBasix to circumvent the security of the Huge Cajones remailer and violate the privacy of its users was a very FACTUAL statement which you have neither denied nor explained. No one has to take my word for it. Anyone who cares to can read if for himself: http://calvo.teleco.ulpgc.es/listas/cypherpunks-unedited@toad.com/HTML-1997-... [Although Gary Burnore has chosen to have his side of that thread removed from the archives (for reasons known only to him), Jeff's comments can still be found using DejaNews and searching their "old" archives]: http://search.dejanews.com/dnquery.xp?QRY=%7Ea+toxic@wired.com&svcclass=dnold&defaultOp=AND&maxhits=20&ST=QS&format=terse&site=dn My demands? To keep the remailers open and usable. Of the two of us, I'm the only one who is actually using them (or at least admitting to it). You're the one with the least to lose if more get shut down due to harassment of the type you, Belinda, and William J. McClatchie subjected Jeff Burchell to. OTOH, if they get shut down, I'd lose my ability to post anonymously and challenge the assertions and false accusations of people like you. Your pitiful attempt at logic makes no sense. You've been invited, on several occasions, to start your own remailer if you REALLY think they're valuable, and you claim to have so much insight into how they "ought to be" run. You still have not done so. As for "giving remailers a bad name", perhaps most users would rather they be usable, full-featured, reliable, secure, and uncensored than that they have a "good name" with censorious people like you, DataBasix, Janet Reno, and the Church of Scientology. When have dissidents ever desired a "good name"? When has being popular ever been more valuable than being free? ---
participants (2)
-
Anonymous -
nobody＠REPLAY.COM