Re: on receiving LEGAL emails from one"s OWN lawyer: *NO FORWARD*

Re: on receiving LEGAL emails from one"s OWN lawyer: NO FORWARD

am 29.01.2006 01:07:01 von Alan Connor

On comp.mail.mutt, in , "Alan Schwartz" wrote:

>
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> Alan Schwartz
> Author/Co-author of: "Managing Mailing Lists", "SpamAssassin",
> "Stopping Spam", and "Practical Unix & Internet Security, 3rd Ed"
> Published by O'Reilly Media, Inc. (http://www.oreilly.com)
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

That illegal sig (having no proper delimiter and too many
lines that are too long and that is an obvious commercial
advertisement) is actually SPAM.

Pretty ironic.

Incredibly hypocritical.

And quite revealing:

Think this fellow is going to teach you how to keep HIS spam out
of your mailboxes?

Well, if HIS spam can get in, spam from others can too.

That's why I ignore the professional spamfighters and
use a challenge-response system:

http://www.earthlink.net/i/testimony.pdf

http://search.earthlink.net/search?q=SpamBlocker&area=earthl ink-s
s&sm=nojs

http://www.spamarrest.com

http://tmda.net

http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/info/spamfoil.html

http://home.earthlink.net/~alanconnor/er1/cr.html

[Note: I don't read the posts of "Sam" or his numerous
sockpuppets or his 'friends', nor any responses to them.]

Alan

--
http://home.earthlink.net/~alanconnor/contact.html
see also: links.html and newsfilter.html
http://slrn.sourceforge.net/docs/README.offline
Other URLs of possible interest in my headers.

FAQ: Canonical list of questions Beavis refuses to answer (V1.50) (was Re: on receiving LEGAL

am 29.01.2006 03:12:41 von Sam

This is a MIME GnuPG-signed message. If you see this text, it means that
your E-mail or Usenet software does not support MIME signed messages.
The Internet standard for MIME PGP messages, RFC 2015, was published in 1996.
To open this message correctly you will need to install E-mail or Usenet
software that supports modern Internet standards.

--=_mimegpg-commodore.email-scan.com-7432-1138500760-0003
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Usenet Beavis writes:

>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>> Alan Schwartz
>> Author/Co-author of: "Managing Mailing Lists", "SpamAssassin",
>> "Stopping Spam", and "Practical Unix & Internet Security, 3rd Ed"
>> Published by O'Reilly Media, Inc. (http://www.oreilly.com)
>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>
> That illegal sig (having no proper delimiter and too many
> lines that are too long and that is an obvious commercial
> advertisement) is actually SPAM.

Beavis, when you finally manage to educate yourself to the point that your
overall IQ becomes competitive with the IQ of Alan's toenail, then you can
lecture him on what spam is or isn't.

> And quite revealing:
>
> Think this fellow is going to teach you how to keep HIS spam out
> of your mailboxes?

No he won't. He did that already, Beavis. Try to keep up.

> Well, if HIS spam can get in, spam from others can too.
>
> That's why I ignore the professional spamfighters and
> use a challenge-response system:

Right, Beavis, and it's so effective that you no longer munge and use your
real address when posting to Usenet.

> [Note: it's not my fault that I'm a complete dumbass. I was dropped on my
> head as a child. See http://www.pearlgates.net/nanae/kooks/alanconnor for

> more information]
>
> Beavis

FAQ: Canonical list of questions Beavis refuses to answer (V1.50)

This is a canonical list of questions that Beavis never answers. This FAQ is
posted on a semi-regular schedule, as circumstances warrant.

For more information on Beavis, see:

http://www.pearlgates.net/nanae/kooks/alanconnor.shtml

Although Beavis has been posting for a long time, he always remains silent
on the subjects enumerated below. His response, if any, usually consists of
replying to the parent post with a loud proclamation that his Usenet-reading
software runs a magical filter that automatically identifies anyone who's
making fun of him, and hides those offensive posts. For more information
see question #9 below.

============================================================ ================

1) If your Challenge-Response spam filter works so well, why are you munging
your address, when posting to Usenet?

2) If spammers avoid forging real E-mail addresses on spam, then where do
all these bounces everyone reports getting (for spam with their return
address was forged onto) come from?

3) If your Challenge-Response filter is so great, why do you still munge
when posting to Usenet?

4) Do you still believe that rsh is the best solution for remote access?
(http://tinyurl.com/5qqb6)

5) What is your evidence that everyone who disagrees with you, and thinks
that you're a moron, is a spammer?

6) How many different individuals do you believe really post to
comp.mail.misc? What is the evidence for your paranoid belief that everyone,
except you, who posts here is some unknown arch-nemesis of yours?

7) How many times, or how often, do you believe is necessary to announce
that you do not read someone's posts? What is your reason for making these
regularly-scheduled proclamations? Who do you believe is so interested in
keeping track of your Usenet-reading habits?

8) When was the last time you saw Bigfoot (http://tinyurl.com/23r3f)?

9) If your C-R system employs a spam filter so that it won't challenge spam,
then why does any of the mail that passes the filter, and is thusly presumed
not to be spam, need to be challenged?

10) You claim that the software you use to read Usenet magically identifies
any post that makes fun of you. In http://tinyurl.com/3swes you explain
that "What I get in my newsreader is a mock post with fake headers and no
body, except for the first parts of the Subject and From headers."

Since your headers indicate that you use slrn and, as far as anyone knows,
the stock slrn doesn't work that way, is this interesting patch to slrn
available for download anywhere?

11) You regularly post alleged logs of your procmail recipe autodeleting a
bunch of irrelevant mail that you've received. Why, and who exactly do you
believe is interested in your mail logs?

12) How exactly do you "enforce" an "order" to stay out of your mailbox,
supposedly (http://tinyurl.com/cs8jt)? Since you issue this "order" about
every week, or so, apparently nobody wants to follow it. What are you going
to do about it?

13) What's with your fascination with shit? (also http://tinyurl.com/cs8jt)?

14) You complain about some arch-nemesis of yours always posting forged
messages in your name. Can you come up with even a single URL, as an example
of what you're talking about?

15) You always complain about some mythical spammers that pretend to be
spamfighters (http://tinyurl.com/br4td). Who exactly are those people, and
can you post a copy of a spam that you supposedly received from them, that
proves that they're really spammers, and not spamfighters?

--=_mimegpg-commodore.email-scan.com-7432-1138500760-0003
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBD3CSYx9p3GYHlUOIRAvg0AJ9Xm7kGe8YrykYs+0gwfSedXi/p4ACf YIyk
OwPv6U30J+ab6nXFoEHwILc=
=1QEP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=_mimegpg-commodore.email-scan.com-7432-1138500760-0003--

Re: FAQ: Canonical list of questions Beavis refuses to answer (V1.50) (was Re: on receiving

am 29.01.2006 06:24:49 von Alan Connor

On comp.mail.mutt, in , "Sam" wrote:

I ignore the professional spamfighters (because they only want
to fight the _other_ guy's spam, not their own) and use a
challenge-response system:

http://www.earthlink.net/i/testimony.pdf

http://search.earthlink.net/search?q=SpamBlocker&area=earthl ink-ss&sm=nojs

http://www.spamarrest.com

http://tmda.net

http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/info/spamfoil.html

http://home.earthlink.net/~alanconnor/er1/cr.html

Thanks for the opportunity to post that again, "Sam".

No. I'm never going to read your list of questions.

You are not permitted to send articles to computer
via the Usenet. Haven't been for years.

[Note: I don't read the posts of "Sam" or his numerous
sockpuppets or his 'friends', nor any responses to them.]

Alan

--
http://home.earthlink.net/~alanconnor/contact.html
see also: links.html and newsfilter.html
http://slrn.sourceforge.net/docs/README.offline
Other URLs of possible interest in my headers.

Re: FAQ: Canonical list of questions Beavis refuses to answer (V1.50) (was Re: on receiving L

am 29.01.2006 07:11:46 von NetworkElf

Alan Connor wrote:

I snipped the bullshit and nothing was left. How telling. You should
have Bigfoot proof your posts first, Beavis.

--
NetworkElf: Super Genius, Computer Guy, Harley Owner!
Blindly serving the covert purposes of the criminal-minded maniac behind
Spews since 2003. Certified since 2005. 99.9% annoyance free.

Re: FAQ: Canonical list of questions Beavis refuses to answer (V1.50) (was Re: on receiving L

am 29.01.2006 18:23:55 von Sam

Re: FAQ: Canonical list of questions Beavis refuses to answer(V1.50) (was Re: on receiving LEGAL ema

am 30.01.2006 20:43:51 von Keith Thompson

Sam writes:
[lengthy reply to Alan Connor snipped]

___________________
/| /| | |
||__|| | Please do |
/ O O\__ NOT |
/ \ feed the |
/ \ \ trolls |
/ _ \ \ ______________|
/ |\____\ \ ||
/ | | | |\____/ ||
/ \|_|_|/ \ __||
/ / \ |____| ||
/ | | /| | --|
| | |// |____ --|
* _ | |_|_|_| | \-/
*-- _--\ _ \ // |
/ _ \\ _ // | /
* / \_ /- | - | |
* ___ c_c_c_C/ \C_c_c_c____________

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.

Re: FAQ: Canonical list of questions Beavis refuses to answer (V1.50) (was Re: on receiving LEGAL em

am 31.01.2006 16:16:23 von Frank Slootweg

Keith Thompson wrote:
> Sam writes:
> [lengthy reply to Alan Connor snipped]

[ASCII-'art' "Please do NOT feed the trolls"]

Sound advice, but why do you ignore it?