Norton CE detects virus in C:\Recycler...

October 29, 2008

Re: Should we be suspicious?

"TrolLisaTroll" <who@Invalid.anywhere.nowhere.invalid.net> wrote in message

news:eijmEnXOJHA.4424@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> my Mothers favorite sport was the art of the open hand. as she lay dieing,

> she slapped me and said it was time for me to carry on her art. she made

> me promise to use it with out warning on fools and kooks.

> http://little_flower.dogagent.com/

>

> TrolLi

>

"There is no artist who does not like his work praised, and the Divine

Artist of souls is pleased when we do not stop at the exterior, but

penetrating even to the inmost sanctuary which He has chosen for His

dwelling, we admire its beauty."

http://www.littleflower.org/learn/words/others.asp

Please feel free to explore the whole site, Li.

BD

October 29, 2008

Re: Should we be suspicious?

"VanguardLH" <V@nguard.LH> wrote in message

news:ge3jvs$qe$1@registered.motzarella.org...

> ~BD~ wrote:

>

>> Perhaps you can point me in the right direction to ascertain the true

>> credentials of Mr Foldes?

>

> And where are you are going to divulge your private details to identify

> yourself? Usenet is an anarchy. Get used to it. You can't prove that

> a web site have valid information about someone and instead have to

> assign a trust level to it, just like any other venue of news or

> information that comes to you. Why would anyone care about your claims

> regarding Peter Foldes history and behavior when no one can verify who

> you are and your history?

>

> You claimed that Peter lied in some of his posts. Provide proof by

> giving news: URLs or links to Google Groups copies of those posts. Did

> you check his history of posts to see through which newsgroups service

> he repeatedly uses and other header info to determine if those lying

> posts were made by him or an imposter?

>

> http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?en...kiYTQavV7mdW13Q

>

> I took a random sampling of 10 posts from Peter (in newsgroups that I

> visit). One was a jibe and the others were somewhat helpful although

> perhaps a bit terse (whereas, as you can see, I am a bit verbose). That

> was as much effort that I was going to waste in your witchhunt. Prove

> your claim that he lies.

>

> Although I don't bother to participate in such lists, there are those

> that nominate or compile their "kook list". You can only be or pretend

> to be a newbie for so long before the consensus by such folks is that

> you are a troll or kook and you get added to their lists. All you've

> done so far is go around pointing fingers at others. Well, others can

> start pointing fingers at you, too. I'm pretty sure some are now

> considering adding you to their killfiles.

--

I'm still wondering how best to answer you, Vanguard.

In the meantime, here is the full thread (the other was provided simply from

a hasty Google search - my apologies!)

http://www.microsoft.com/communities/newsg...exp=&sloc=en-us

Please also have a look at a recent post I made directly from the Microsoft

site - it appears in Usenet in a newsgroup called

'microsoft.public.security.homeusers'

You will note that I have queried the Microsoft 'look-alike' site here in

this group in a separate post!

Dave

--

October 29, 2008

Re: Should we be suspicious?

"~BD~" <~BD~@no.mail.afraid.com> wrote in message

news:ebJaebbOJHA.4780@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> You will note that I have queried the Microsoft 'look-alike' site here in

> this group in a separate post!

Ooops! I should have been specific - I made that post to the

'microsoft.public.security' group only.

Dave

--

November 6, 2008

Re: Should we be suspicious?

On Oct 27, 8:50Â am, VanguardLH <V...@nguard.LH> wrote:

> ~BD~ wrote:

> > "VanguardLH" <V...@nguard.LH> wrote in message

> >news:ge3jvs$qe$1@registered.motzarella.org...

> >> ~BD~ wrote:

>

> >>> Perhaps you can point me in the right direction to ascertain the true

> >>> credentials of Mr Foldes?

>

> >> And where are you are going to divulge your private details to identify

> >> yourself? Â Usenet is an anarchy. Â Get used to it. Â You can't prove that

> >> a web site have valid information about someone and instead have to

> >> assign a trust level to it, just like any other venue of news or

> >> information that comes to you. Â Why would anyone care about your claims

> >> regarding Peter Foldes history and behavior when no one can verify who

> >> you are and your history?

>

> >> You claimed that Peter lied in some of his posts. Â Provide proof by

> >> giving news: URLs or links to Google Groups copies of those posts. Â Did

> >> you check his history of posts to see through which newsgroups service

> >> he repeatedly uses and other header info to determine if those lying

> >> posts were made by him or an imposter?

>

> >>http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?en...hEAAAAqJW8xcoCt....

>

> >> I took a random sampling of 10 posts from Peter (in newsgroups that I

> >> visit). Â One was a jibe and the others were somewhat helpful although

> >> perhaps a bit terse (whereas, as you can see, I am a bit verbose). Â That

> >> was as much effort that I was going to waste in your witchhunt. Â Prove

> >> your claim that he lies.

>

> >> Although I don't bother to participate in such lists, there are those

> >> that nominate or compile their "kook list". Â You can only be or pretend

> >> to be a newbie for so long before the consensus by such folks is that

> >> you are a troll or kook and you get added to their lists. Â All you've

> >> done so far is go around pointing fingers at others. Â Well, others can

> >> start pointing fingers at you, too. Â I'm pretty sure some are now

> >> considering adding you to their killfiles.

>

> > Thank you for taking the trouble to help me check Vanguard.

>

> > It's half-term in the UK and my son, his wife and my 3 grandsons have come

> > to visit. I'll therefore not have much time for 'computing' for a couple of

> > days but you may care to review this thread in the meantime.

> >http://www.stolenknowledge.com/communities...en-us/default.a...

>

> > If you wish, we may take my issue to email. As I believe you may have picked

> > up already, my 'profile' in Google Groups is 'BoaterDave' and the email

> > address shown the is valid.

>

> > Thanks again.

>

> > Dave

>

> Never used that site nor do I care for webnews-for-dummies interfaces.

> One problem with that webnews interface to Usenet is that the headers

> for the post cannot be viewed which means I cannot see the list of

> References to track threads nor see the Message-ID (to use it in a

> Google Groups search). Â The thread is incomplete and it is hard to

> determine the post hierarchy based merely on indentation. Â Those posts

> seem to be in the microsoft.public.security newsgroup so I did a search

> on Peter's posts over there. Â

>

> I could not verify the thread you claim exists based on a link to a

> suspect site that tries to pretend it is a Microsoft site. Â That thread

> does not exist on my NNTP server. Â It cannot be found in a search at

> Google Groups. Â www.stolenknowledge.comis NOT a Microsoft web site.

> After reviewing the dearth and almost deliberately covert registrant

> information for the domain's registration and even for its nameserver's

> domain, I trust NOTHING recorded at that web site. Â Hell, they won't

> even load a web page if you just go to their home page.

>

> According the timestamp for Peter's post at that suspect web site, I

> started looking at posts around 9/17/2008 11:51 AM PST in the

> microsoft.public.security newsgroup by searching Google Groups on all

> posters with author having "foldes" from 1 to 30 September. Â Since he

> doesn't use the X-No-Archive header, his posts will remain at Google

> Groups. Â I don't bother keeping posts in my newsreader that are over a

> month old so I had to use Google Groups to see if there was a copy of

> the thread in Usenet rather than at some unknown web site that pretends

> to be a Microsoft web site. Â What I found was:

>

> http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.p...ty/browse_frm/t...

>

> You were told back then to stop referring to external forums. Â This is

> Usenet, not a forum. Â So either point at Microsoft's article ID for

> their gatewayed post (i.e., a URL link to the article using Microsoft's

> webnews-for-dummies "Communities" gateway to Usenet), provide the news:

> URL to the post, or provide a URL link to the Google Groups copy of the

> Usenet thread.

>

> Apparently you deliberately attempt to prevent following the discussion

> by your repeated changing of the Subject header. Â You claim that Peter

> submitted lying posts. Â Bitch, insult, and opinion posts are not lying

> posts. Â That are you not well liked by some regular posters doesn't make

> them liars. Â It means they have opinions just like you do.

>

> Perhaps no one has yet provided you with some useful information as to

> how you should be posting to Usenet. Â Read the articles below:

>

> What is Usenet:

> Â http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet

> Â http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newsgroups

> Â http://www.masonicinfo.com/newsgroups.htm

> Â http://www.mcfedries.com/Ramblings/usenet-primer.asp

>

> How to post to newsgroups:

> Â http://66.39.69.143/goodpost.htm

> Â http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375

> Â http://users.tpg.com.au/bzyhjr/liszt.html

>

> http://www.newsreaders.com/guide/netiquett...es/rfc1855.txt- Hide quoted text -

>

> - Show quoted text -

Thank you so much for providing all these links Vanguard. I have now

visited all of them.

http://66.39.69.143/forums.html followed on from hxxp://66.39.69.143/goodpost.htm

and, interestingly, mentioned Aumha and DTS-L

Earlier this year the DTS-L web site took one to SPAM sites. When

questioned in a straight-forward and non-provocative manner as to why

this might be, I was stone-walled. Bad news. NO explanation!

Blind trust? No-way!

In real life there are bad guys. On the Internet, too! There is no way

to tell which is which on the 'net - is there?

I KNOW I'm a good guy - I've no idea about everyone else! style_emoticons/

Dave

--

November 19, 2008

Re: Should we be suspicious?

On Oct 27, 5:14Â pm, "---Fitz---" <---fitz...@invalid.com> wrote:

> Â He has been stalking select people for some time in

> these groups for being suspicious...PA Bear, Peter Foldes, etc, ad nauseum.

I have! I'd describe it as watching and waiting - the long game!

> He believes there are terrorists in these newsgroups...

In all probability there are! Can you be sure there aren't?

>Â If there was an internet police force, he would be the chief of police. >Â He's apparently on a self righteous crusade.

>Â He's kinda like chewing gum on a shoe.

You are correct.

May I refer you to the well known poem by Rudyard Kipling, here:-

http://www.kipling.org.uk/poems_if.htm

IF.....

IF you can keep your head when all about you

Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,

If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,

But make allowance for their doubting too;

If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,

Or being lied about, don't deal in lies,

Or being hated, don't give way to hating,

And yet don't look too good, nor talk too wise:

If you can dream - and not make dreams your master;

If you can think - and not make thoughts your aim;

If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster

And treat those two impostors just the same;

If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken

Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,

Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,

And stoop and build 'em up with worn-out tools:

If you can make one heap of all your winnings

And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss,

And lose, and start again at your beginnings

And never breathe a word about your loss;

If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew

To serve your turn long after they are gone,

And so hold on when there is nothing in you

Except the Will which says to them: 'Hold on!'

If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,

' Or walk with Kings - nor lose the common touch,

if neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you,

If all men count with you, but none too much;

If you can fill the unforgiving minute

With sixty seconds' worth of distance run,

Yours is the Earth and everything that's in it,

And - which is more - you'll be a Man, my son!

--

Dave

November 19, 2008

Re: Should we be suspicious?

On Nov 19, 8:14Â am, BoaterDave <BoaterD...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

> On Oct 27, 5:14Â pm, "---Fitz---" <---fitz...@invalid.com> wrote:

>

> > Â He has been stalking select people for some time in

> > these groups for being suspicious...PA Bear, Peter Foldes, etc, ad nauseum.

>

> I have! I'd describe it as watching and waiting - the long game!

>

> > He believes there are terrorists in these newsgroups...

>

> In all probability there are! Can you be sure there aren't?

>

> >Â If there was an internet police force, he would be the chief of police. >Â He's apparently on a self righteous crusade.

> >Â He's kinda like chewing gum on a shoe.

>

> You are correct.

>

> May I refer you to the well known poem by Rudyard Kipling, here:-http://www.kipling.org.uk/poems_if.htm

>

> IF.....

>

> IF you can keep your head when all about you

> Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,

> If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,

> But make allowance for their doubting too;

> If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,

> Or being lied about, don't deal in lies,

> Or being hated, don't give way to hating,

> And yet don't look too good, nor talk too wise:

>

> If you can dream - and not make dreams your master;

> If you can think - and not make thoughts your aim;

> If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster

> And treat those two impostors just the same;

> If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken

> Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,

> Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,

> And stoop and build 'em up with worn-out tools:

>

> If you can make one heap of all your winnings

> And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss,

> And lose, and start again at your beginnings

> And never breathe a word about your loss;

> If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew

> To serve your turn long after they are gone,

> And so hold on when there is nothing in you

> Except the Will which says to them: 'Hold on!'

>

> If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,

> ' Or walk with Kings - nor lose the common touch,

> if neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you,

> If all men count with you, but none too much;

> If you can fill the unforgiving minute

> With sixty seconds' worth of distance run,

> Yours is the Earth and everything that's in it,

> And - which is more - you'll be a Man, my son!

>

> --

>

> Dave

Forgive me. For those who do not keep a constant watch in these

groups,

the original thread started out as this subject .........

Norton CE detects virus in C:\Recycler... 24 Oct by Jordon

HTH

Dave

--

November 19, 2008

Re: Should we be suspicious?

BoaterDave wrote:

> Forgive me. For those who do not keep a constant watch in these

> groups, the original thread started out as this subject

>

> Norton CE detects virus in C:Recycler... 24 Oct by Jordon

That really should read...

"Forgive me for high-jacking Jordon's thread".

--

Jordon

November 19, 2008

Re: Should we be suspicious?

OK - hand smacked!

I am sorry Jordon. Really. Forgive me , please.

It is in a good cause, I assure you!

Dave

--

"Jordon" <jordon@REMOVEgrahamtrucking.com> wrote in message

news:gg1pvg$olr$1@news.motzarella.org...

> BoaterDave wrote:

>> Forgive me. For those who do not keep a constant watch in these

>> groups, the original thread started out as this subject

>>

>> Norton CE detects virus in C:Recycler... 24 Oct by Jordon

>

> That really should read...

>

> "Forgive me for high-jacking Jordon's thread".

>

> --

> Jordon

Sign In

Norton CE detects virus in C:\Recycler...

Recommended Posts

Guest ~BD~

Popular Days

Popular Days

Guest ~BD~

Guest ~BD~

Guest BoaterDave

Guest BoaterDave

Guest BoaterDave

Guest Jordon

Guest ~BD~

Join the conversation

Browse

Activity

Support