Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #116458 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-05-19 14:22 +0100 |
| Last post | 2018-05-29 14:00 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 181 — 17 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system
tl;dr: "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-19 14:22 +0100
Re: tl;dr: Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2018-05-19 12:21 -0300
Re: tl;dr: "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-20 09:55 +0100
Re: tl;dr: Wolffan <akwolffan@gmail.com> - 2018-05-20 07:02 -0400
Re: tl;dr: Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-21 07:40 +0100
Re: tl;dr: "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-21 08:02 +0100
Re: tl;dr: nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-21 09:20 -0400
Re: tl;dr: "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-21 15:22 +0100
Re: tl;dr: nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-21 13:01 -0400
Re: tl;dr: "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-21 18:10 +0100
Re: tl;dr: nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-21 15:12 -0400
Re: tl;dr: Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-21 12:51 -0700
Re: tl;dr: Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2018-05-21 18:51 -0300
Re: tl;dr: Wolffan <akwolffan@gmail.com> - 2018-05-21 18:27 -0400
Allow Applicatiosn from... JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2018-05-21 19:41 -0400
Re: Allow Applicatiosn from... nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-21 19:47 -0400
Re: Allow Applicatiosn from... JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2018-05-21 21:30 -0400
Re: Allow Applicatiosn from... nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-21 21:42 -0400
Re: Allow Applicatiosn from... Leonard Blaisdell <leoblaisdell@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-05-21 21:51 -0700
Re: Allow Applicatiosn from... Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-21 22:12 -0700
Re: Allow Applicatiosn from... JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2018-05-22 16:11 -0400
Re: Allow Applicatiosn from... Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2018-05-22 21:14 +0000
Re: Allow Applicatiosn from... Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2018-05-22 12:20 -0400
Re: Allow Applicatiosn from... JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2018-05-22 16:17 -0400
Re: Allow Applicatiosn from... Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2018-05-22 21:14 +0000
Re: Allow Applicatiosn from... "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-22 21:27 +0100
Re: Allow Applicatiosn from... Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-22 15:08 -0700
Re: tl;dr: Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-21 18:48 -0700
Re: tl;dr: "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-22 08:21 +0100
Re: tl;dr: Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-22 03:23 -0700
Re: tl;dr: Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2018-05-22 11:55 -0300
Re: tl;dr: "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-22 16:38 +0100
Re: tl;dr: Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-22 09:23 -0700
Re: tl;dr: Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2018-05-22 19:46 -0300
Re: tl;dr: Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-22 16:12 -0700
Re: tl;dr: Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-22 20:22 -0700
Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-23 21:08 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2018-05-23 13:24 -0700
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-23 13:32 -0700
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2018-05-23 17:34 -0300
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-23 22:09 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.inwalid> - 2018-05-23 23:14 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2018-05-23 16:29 -0700
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-23 17:09 -0700
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-24 12:00 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-24 04:22 -0700
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2018-05-23 22:11 -0300
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-24 03:05 -0700
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-24 05:24 -0700
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-05-24 16:31 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-05-24 16:31 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-24 21:03 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.inwalid> - 2018-05-24 21:29 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-25 12:47 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.inwalid> - 2018-05-25 12:27 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-25 06:47 -0700
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-05-26 03:19 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-27 14:53 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-05-27 18:15 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2018-05-27 15:16 -0300
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-27 21:50 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2018-05-27 18:24 -0300
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-05-28 08:02 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2018-05-25 21:01 -0300
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-05-26 03:19 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-25 21:23 -0700
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-24 15:00 -0700
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2018-05-24 21:22 -0300
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-25 12:44 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.inwalid> - 2018-05-25 12:27 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-25 13:52 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.inwalid> - 2018-05-25 13:31 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-25 14:54 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.inwalid> - 2018-05-25 14:05 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-25 15:48 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.inwalid> - 2018-05-25 15:36 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-25 17:14 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.inwalid> - 2018-05-25 17:13 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-25 19:38 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> - 2018-05-25 14:54 -0500
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.inwalid> - 2018-05-25 20:39 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-27 13:51 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-27 06:49 -0700
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.inwalid> - 2018-05-27 14:57 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-27 16:29 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-05-27 18:15 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2018-05-27 15:24 -0300
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> - 2018-05-27 10:54 -0500
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-05-27 18:15 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2018-05-27 15:14 -0300
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-05-26 03:19 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-27 13:20 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-25 20:22 -0700
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> - 2018-05-25 13:29 -0500
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-05-26 03:19 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-27 13:28 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> - 2018-05-27 10:48 -0500
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2018-05-27 15:03 -0300
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-05-28 08:02 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-05-27 18:15 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2018-05-25 18:25 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-25 19:27 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2018-05-25 21:05 -0300
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-05-26 03:19 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-27 14:19 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.inwalid> - 2018-05-27 14:57 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-27 17:33 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Frozen North <frozennorth.ask@gmail.com> - 2018-05-27 13:20 -0400
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-27 18:40 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Frozen North <frozennorth.ask@gmail.com> - 2018-05-27 14:20 -0400
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-27 21:44 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Frozen North <frozennorth.ask@gmail.com> - 2018-05-27 17:02 -0400
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-27 22:04 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2018-05-27 18:26 -0300
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-05-28 08:02 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-05-28 08:02 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2018-05-27 15:37 -0300
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-27 20:37 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2018-05-27 18:12 -0300
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.inwalid> - 2018-05-27 21:50 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.inwalid> - 2018-05-27 17:53 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-27 19:02 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.inwalid> - 2018-05-27 18:47 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-27 20:53 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.inwalid> - 2018-05-27 21:50 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-05-28 08:02 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-05-28 08:02 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-28 05:23 -0700
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-05-27 18:15 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-27 22:02 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.inwalid> - 2018-05-27 22:11 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-05-28 08:02 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2018-05-27 15:31 -0300
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-27 09:57 -0700
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> - 2018-05-27 10:34 -0500
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> - 2018-05-27 11:02 -0500
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-05-27 18:15 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-27 21:28 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Frozen North <frozennorth.ask@gmail.com> - 2018-05-27 16:48 -0400
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-27 21:53 +0100
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-05-28 08:02 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) eyes@wideshut.com (Sycho) - 2018-05-28 04:25 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-05-28 08:02 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2018-05-27 18:21 -0300
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-05-28 08:02 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-05-28 08:02 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Frozen North <frozennorth.ask@gmail.com> - 2018-05-25 10:50 -0400
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-25 11:29 -0700
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> - 2018-05-25 09:52 -0500
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> - 2018-05-25 09:56 -0500
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-05-26 03:19 +0000
Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-05-26 03:19 +0000
Re: tl;dr: Wolffan <akwolffan@gmail.com> - 2018-05-22 22:37 -0400
Re: tl;dr: "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-23 06:25 +0100
Re: tl;dr: nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-23 08:46 -0400
Re: tl;dr: Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2018-05-23 10:57 -0300
Re: tl;dr: "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-23 18:16 +0100
Re: tl;dr: Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2018-05-23 15:17 -0300
Re: tl;dr: "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-23 20:22 +0100
Re: tl;dr: Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2018-05-23 17:30 -0300
Re: tl;dr: "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-23 22:13 +0100
Re: tl;dr: nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-23 17:59 -0400
Re: tl;dr: Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2018-05-23 22:10 -0300
Re: tl;dr: Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-23 18:12 -0700
Re: tl;dr: Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-23 12:29 -0700
Re: tl;dr: Wolffan <akwolffan@gmail.com> - 2018-05-23 18:31 -0400
Re: tl;dr: nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-05-23 18:33 -0400
Re: tl;dr: Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2018-05-21 18:42 -0300
Re: tl;dr: "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-22 10:15 +0100
Re: tl;dr: Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2018-05-22 12:00 -0300
Re: tl;dr: "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> - 2018-05-22 16:32 +0100
Re: tl;dr: Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-22 08:37 -0700
Re: tl;dr: Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-20 05:40 -0700
Re: tl;dr: Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2018-05-20 10:31 -0300
Re: tl;dr: Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-20 07:29 -0700
Re: "BurfordTJustice" <burford/associate@uk.MI15> - 2018-05-19 14:55 -0400
Re: Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-19 15:35 -0700
Re: tl;dr: Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-19 11:57 -0700
(OT) David Brooks A known stalker! Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2018-05-28 23:32 +0000
Re: (OT) David Brooks A known stalker! Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-28 20:31 -0700
Re: (OT) David Brooks A known stalker! Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-05-29 14:00 -0700
Page 4 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 10 Next page →
| From | "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-27 21:50 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) |
| Message-ID | <pef5mh$uva$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #116748 |
On 27-May-18 7:16 PM, Shadow wrote: > On Sun, 27 May 2018 14:53:43 +0100, "David B." > <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> wrote: > >> On 26-May-18 4:19 AM, Diesel wrote: >>> I still get the last laugh because he is unable to extract the .zip >>> file which does contain the original video file. >> >> THAT video is the only version which could prove that you DON'T have a >> lisp, Dustin. > > I'm more interested in the video that proves you don't talk > through your arse all the time. > Do you have a link ? Yes, thanks. As you don't click on my links though, I'll keep it to myself. This fellow sounds like a really nice chap. Read about him instead. http://tekrider.net/pages/about.php -- D.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Shadow <Sh@dow.br> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-27 18:24 -0300 |
| Subject | Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) |
| Message-ID | <cc8mgddnf7s38us2hmso8vf00uhpnv1ujp@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #116760 |
On Sun, 27 May 2018 21:50:22 +0100, "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> wrote: >On 27-May-18 7:16 PM, Shadow wrote: >> On Sun, 27 May 2018 14:53:43 +0100, "David B." >> <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> wrote: >> >>> On 26-May-18 4:19 AM, Diesel wrote: >>>> I still get the last laugh because he is unable to extract the .zip >>>> file which does contain the original video file. >>> >>> THAT video is the only version which could prove that you DON'T have a >>> lisp, Dustin. >> >> I'm more interested in the video that proves you don't talk >> through your arse all the time. >> Do you have a link ? > >Yes, thanks. > >As you don't click on my links though, I'll keep it to myself. > >This fellow sounds like a really nice chap. Read about him instead. > >http://tekrider.net/pages/about.php I know, I frequently visit this webpage: https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php Just to check if there are any new nyms. Nice the way the photo tilts as if it's drunk. A public service, IMHO. The site is safe. 10/10 on WOT. []'s -- Don't be evil - Google 2004 We have a new policy - Google 2012
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Diesel <me@privacy.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-28 08:02 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) |
| Message-ID | <XnsA8F02A6F16F76HT1@63GuV.Q50m5CvD2.9762H0> |
| In reply to | #116760 |
"David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> news:pef5mh$uva$1@dont-email.me Sun, 27 May 2018 20:50:22 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote: > On 27-May-18 7:16 PM, Shadow wrote: >> On Sun, 27 May 2018 14:53:43 +0100, "David B." >> <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> wrote: >> >>> On 26-May-18 4:19 AM, Diesel wrote: >>>> I still get the last laugh because he is unable to extract the >>>> .zip file which does contain the original video file. >>> >>> THAT video is the only version which could prove that you DON'T >>> have a lisp, Dustin. >> >> I'm more interested in the video that proves you don't talk >> through your arse all the time. >> Do you have a link ? > > Yes, thanks. > > As you don't click on my links though, I'll keep it to myself. That's never stopped you before. Why the sudden change? > This fellow sounds like a really nice chap. Read about him > instead. Compared to you, he's Jesus. -- To prevent yourself from being a victim of cyber stalking, it's highly recommended you visit here: https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php =================================================== Brother, can you s'paradigm?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Shadow <Sh@dow.br> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-25 21:01 -0300 |
| Subject | Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) |
| Message-ID | <ft8hgd1kok8pv0s3hcglc5v4rgp078u0g9@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #116655 |
On Fri, 25 May 2018 12:47:56 +0100, "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> wrote: >Once you've removed my 'Special Page' from your web site I'll take the >pressure off you. What pressure ? It's a fact page, people love to visit it. I know I do. To prevent yourself from being a victim of cyber stalking, it's highly recommended you visit here: https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php The site is safe. 10/10 on WOT. []'s -- Don't be evil - Google 2004 We have a new policy - Google 2012
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Diesel <me@privacy.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-26 03:19 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) |
| Message-ID | <XnsA8EDEE84FF5CFHT1@f49NaSF4OqHmBf7RDEk356k813dR09foiV2ZmoA6yh9MJ76.h8x16> |
| In reply to | #116655 |
"David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> news:pe8t5n$jof$1@dont-email.me Fri, 25 May 2018 11:47:56 GMT in alt.computer.workshop, wrote: > On 24-May-18 10:29 PM, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote: >> David B. STALKER wrote: >> >>> On 24-May-18 5:31 PM, Diesel wrote: >>>> "David B." wrote: >>>>> >>>>> The site is NOT safe according to this warning. >>>> >>>> You're lying about that, again. You've already been made aware >>>> of the fact that the tool you used is well known for generating >>>> false positives and other errors. You've also been told that >>>> it's a false positive hit on the tekrider site. And, various >>>> urls have been provided which back the statements up. >>> >>> Why does the Sucuri URL test site now report this? >>> >>> "Site returning error (40x): HTTP/1.1 403 Forbidden" >> >> Ho hum. Nothing more or different than the hundreds of other >> sites and forums where you have been BANNED. >> >> I've been ignoring you for quite some time now; how about YOU do >> the same for *me*. > > Once you've removed my 'Special Page' from your web site I'll take > the pressure off you. What pressure? Are you so drunk as to think you're actually convincing anyone not to visit the site and learn more about you? If so, you're a damn fool! The amount of people who respond to you in a negative manner is growing. It's going to continue to grow because you won't stop doing what you do. You're oblivious to the fact that the majority of people do NOT condone or appreciate in any possible way what you typically do. And the following is but one example of it: http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=152728286700 Btw, you also lied in the post you wrote; You blamed your deletion of the audio track from the original file you didn't preserve on me as well as claimed I have a lisp or other speech issue? I don't. So you actually lied twice, copyright infringed my video (you've done that so many times now, I've actually lost count) via a usenet post where you admitted it was to make it difficult if not impossible to remove and yet, still think you aren't deserving of the page hosted at tekrider. I really don't understand your reasoning. -- To prevent yourself from being a victim of cyber stalking, it's highly recommended you visit here: https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php =================================================== purrpetmeorIscratchyoureyesoutpurr - common feline term
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-25 21:23 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) |
| Message-ID | <8b594412-25a2-4bbb-964d-472e27637268@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #116696 |
On Friday, May 25, 2018 at 8:19:23 PM UTC-7, Diesel wrote: > "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> > news:pe8t5n$jof$1@dont-email.me Fri, 25 May 2018 11:47:56 GMT in > alt.computer.workshop, wrote: > > > On 24-May-18 10:29 PM, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote: > >> David B. STALKER wrote: > >> > >>> On 24-May-18 5:31 PM, Diesel wrote: > >>>> "David B." wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> The site is NOT safe according to this warning. > >>>> > >>>> You're lying about that, again. You've already been made aware > >>>> of the fact that the tool you used is well known for generating > >>>> false positives and other errors. You've also been told that > >>>> it's a false positive hit on the tekrider site. And, various > >>>> urls have been provided which back the statements up. > >>> > >>> Why does the Sucuri URL test site now report this? > >>> > >>> "Site returning error (40x): HTTP/1.1 403 Forbidden" > >> > >> Ho hum. Nothing more or different than the hundreds of other > >> sites and forums where you have been BANNED. > >> > >> I've been ignoring you for quite some time now; how about YOU do > >> the same for *me*. > > > > Once you've removed my 'Special Page' from your web site I'll take > > the pressure off you. > > What pressure? Are you so drunk as to think you're actually > convincing anyone not to visit the site and learn more about you? If > so, you're a damn fool! > > The amount of people who respond to you in a negative manner is > growing. It's going to continue to grow because you won't stop doing > what you do. You're oblivious to the fact that the majority of people > do NOT condone or appreciate in any possible way what you typically > do. And the following is but one example of it: > > http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=152728286700 > > Btw, you also lied in the post you wrote; You blamed your deletion of > the audio track from the original file you didn't preserve on me as > well as claimed I have a lisp or other speech issue? I don't. So you > actually lied twice, copyright infringed my video (you've done that > so many times now, I've actually lost count) via a usenet post where > you admitted it was to make it difficult if not impossible to remove > and yet, still think you aren't deserving of the page hosted at > tekrider. I really don't understand your reasoning. > > > -- > To prevent yourself from being a victim of cyber > stalking, it's highly recommended you visit here: > https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php > =================================================== > purrpetmeorIscratchyoureyesoutpurr - common feline term i3wm is perhaps my second favorite DE and the only one I suggest to Windows converts. Primary interface is Budgie, though. A good web browser is all you want after grasping the basics. He's incontrovertibly trolling, he got called out on it and he's doing the familiar ego protecting tricks learned in https://goo.gl/k5FDFL as he endeavors to regain a smattering of honor... but it will not work. I am working on an idea which will be more than anything Desk Rabbit can do! Desk Rabbit is just thrilled that Steven Petruzzellis is on the other end. Imagine if Desk Rabbit walked up to a wall and delivered the punch line. It wouldn't be worth it. Desk Rabbit is being controlled by the MSM. Steven Petruzzellis and Desk Rabbit had their no-gos and their errors. But one played it as the effect of ghosts and didn't do anything too shocking that could not be supported with made up data. Of course my first statement stands sincere and correct. - My Snoring Solution! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhOfBmWwCVY http://www.5z8.info/trojan_p4g1zy_how-to-skin-a-gerbil Jonas Eklundh Communication AB
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-24 15:00 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) |
| Message-ID | <191ef1d6-b4ba-4bd9-aa96-348e7616f697@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #116638 |
On Thursday, May 24, 2018 at 1:03:53 PM UTC-7, David B. wrote: > On 24-May-18 5:31 PM, Diesel wrote: > > "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> > > news:pe4hom$jca$1@dont-email.me Wed, 23 May 2018 20:08:52 GMT in > > alt.computer.workshop, wrote: > > > >> On 22-May-18 11:46 PM, Shadow wrote: > >> > >>> PS Please stop removing my anti-STALKING warning. > >> > >> No. You are misleading people. > > > > How's that? > > > >>> It's tedious to have to paste it in every time I reply to your > >>> phishing/spamming/stalking/copyright infringement posts. > >>> TIA > >> > >> Hard cheese! Your warning has become tedious. > > > > The warning is valid. You're a potential danger to other people and > > their privacy. > > > >>> To prevent yourself from being a victim of cyber > >>> stalking, it's highly recommended you visit here: > >>> https://tekrider.net > >>> > >>> The site is safe. 10/10 on WOT. > >>> []'s > >> > >> The site is NOT safe according to this warning. > > > > You're lying about that, again. You've already been made aware of the > > fact that the tool you used is well known for generating false > > positives and other errors. You've also been told that it's a false > > positive hit on the tekrider site. And, various urls have been > > provided which back the statements up. > > Why does the Sucuri URL test site now report this? > > "Site returning error (40x): HTTP/1.1 403 Forbidden" > > https://sitecheck.sucuri.net/results/www.tekrider.net# At times, fantasy is more valuable than truth. Jeremy is the outcome of the reality that morons have been hired to take over responsibility for indoctrinating children. It is not an accident that he is a foolish Russian sympathizer. Enjoy the view in the overflowing septic tank of my KF. Over and over, the claim is he wants to "talk tech", but Jeremy spends most of his time whining about "obsession". Another successful Systemd test. That is if you count slow and buggy as a success. - This broke the Internet https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhOfBmWwCVY http://www.macadvocacy.pw/2005/Nov/09/236626.html http://www.5z8.info/lemon-party-redux_v1o7pm_nakedgrandmas.jpg Jonas Eklundh Communication
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Shadow <Sh@dow.br> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-24 21:22 -0300 |
| Subject | Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) |
| Message-ID | <imlegddjp4a70em5oti0etsec8uenu9bdk@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #116638 |
On Thu, 24 May 2018 21:03:48 +0100, "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> wrote: >On 24-May-18 5:31 PM, Diesel wrote: >> "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> >> news:pe4hom$jca$1@dont-email.me Wed, 23 May 2018 20:08:52 GMT in >> alt.computer.workshop, wrote: >> >>> On 22-May-18 11:46 PM, Shadow wrote: >>> >>>> PS Please stop removing my anti-STALKING warning. >>> >>> No. You are misleading people. >> >> How's that? >> >>>> It's tedious to have to paste it in every time I reply to your >>>> phishing/spamming/stalking/copyright infringement posts. >>>> TIA >>> >>> Hard cheese! Your warning has become tedious. >> >> The warning is valid. You're a potential danger to other people and >> their privacy. >> >>>> To prevent yourself from being a victim of cyber >>>> stalking, it's highly recommended you visit here: >>>> https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php >>>> >>>> The site is safe. 10/10 on WOT. >>>> []'s >>> >>> The site is NOT safe according to this warning. >> >> You're lying about that, again. You've already been made aware of the >> fact that the tool you used is well known for generating false >> positives and other errors. You've also been told that it's a false >> positive hit on the tekrider site. And, various urls have been >> provided which back the statements up. > >Why does the Sucuri URL test site now report this? ><CUT_IGNORANT_CRAP> Why does it matter ? To prevent yourself from being a victim of cyber stalking, it's highly recommended you visit here: https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php The site is safe. 10/10 on WOT. []'s -- Don't be evil - Google 2004 We have a new policy - Google 2012
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-25 12:44 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) |
| Message-ID | <pe8sv5$hs6$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #116646 |
On 25-May-18 1:22 AM, Shadow asked ... > Why does it matter ? According the the site certificate information, the cert is valid. Use your unidentified web browser to look at the details of a site's cert. However, I noticed that the cert's CA (certificate authority) is using the freebie Let's Encrypt which really isn't a CA. Many sources consider those certs as insecure. Let's Encrypt never validates who asked to get a certificate. Since no money was exchanged, there is no way to "follow the money". The whole process is automated so there is no overseer on issuance of the certs. Sites using Let's Encrypt might as well as use their self-signed certs for as "secure" as those would be regarding actually identifying the registrant of a cert. This is like users getting freebie e-mail certs to do x.509 SMIME digital signing and encryption of their e-mails but there is no validation of just WHO got that e-mail cert, only that the registrant used the mailbox for which the e-mail cert was issued which is hardly identifying who owns the cert. Similar to sending the free e-mail cert via e-mail to whoever requested it (to verify the registrant has, at least, access to that e-mail account), Lets Encrypt uses ACME (Automated Certificate Management Environment) to check the server is the one that gets the site cert. Uh huh, yep, that really identified the registrant: the one asking for the cert is the one that validates it was them that asked for it. That's like getting a blank driver's license and whatever you write on it, oh sure, that must be you. Only because web browsers pre-install the Let's Encrypt root cert lets users of those web browsers visit sites using that pseudo-CA. The Let's Encrypt root certificate is pre-installed in Google Chrome (wasn't a while ago so Chrome would complain the Let's Encrypt-ed site was not secure). Mozilla added the root cert to Firefox because, gee, Mozilla is one of the founders of Let's Encrypt (and, no, if you've used Firefox for a long time then you know Mozilla does NOT have the user's security fully prioritized but add lots of shit to assist web sites). In Chrome, you'll see the cert listed under Lets Encrypt. In Firefox, it is listed as IdenTrust. Sites going cheap by getting free certs from Lets Encrypt had problems at first because web browsers didn't have that pseudo-CA listed/added to their cert store. https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/13/lets_encrypt_certificate_drama/ (do a search and you'll find other gotchas with Lets Encrypt) It was a nuisance to have to pay for site certs and having to trust a 3rd party as the regulator but that had some validity and checking as who got the cert. With the freebies from Lets Encrypt, the registrant validates themself (rolls eyes). As for Securi, well, the part you omitted in your post was they said: Our automated scan was unable to run on your website. Okay, that could be something as simple as the site uses robots.txt with a directive telling web crawlers to NOT crawl their web site. I tried clicking on Securi's "More details" button for "Scanning errors" but they just re-painted the same web page. I was trying to see WHY they report they cannot scan/crawl that web site. I had to allow the mxpnl.com source for scripts in both uMatrix and uBlock Origin to get the script needed when clicking on the "More details" button. Then all they said was the same forbidden error they reported above. No further information. They won't even tell you that actual error status that was returned by the server when attempt to visit that page. Instead they just show "40x" as the error status. Yeah, right, very unhelpful. Apparently to get more details means having to sign-up at Securi. Go read: https://sucuri.net/website-security-platform/signup Then you'll see Securi is using their so-called web site scan as a lure to get users (perhaps only the site owner) to buy into their site scan service. Dump Securi. They're a lureware site. If you want to externally validate a site's SSL certificate rather than trusting what your own web browser reports, go to: https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/ That will test lots of aspects of a site (SSL) cert. That it reports deficiencies does not mean the cert is invalid or misleading, only that the site needs to improve. Note that for www.tekrider.net, SSLlabs reports it supports TLS 1.0 but not SSL 3.0. Alas, TLS 1.0 was just a renaming of SSL 3.0 but with some incompatibilities to differentiate it from SSL 3.0. A site using TLS 1.0 is no more secure than one using SSL 3.0. SSllabs will note which ciphers are supported by the site, including those the site will accept that are considered weak. Although not specifically an overt red flag, I ponder what dixie-metal-detectors.com (2nd site cert issued by GoDaddy but which SSLlabs says is not trusted probably due to a SA [Subject Alternative] mismatch on multiple domains to which the cert is registered) has to do with tekrider.net (1st cert using free Lets Encrypt). Also: nslookup www.tekrider.net gives an IP address of 192.251.238.3 (which hides using a private domain registration at GoDaddy) but a reverse DNS lookup on 192.251.238.3 gives alvin.genwebserver.com (which hides using a private domain registration at privacygarden.org) and the IP address of 192.251.238.3 is in the IP pool owned by Webby Enterprises LLC (webbytech.net) who appears to be the webhoster. I'm not sure Securi is trying to provide for information on a site's certificate but it appears they are a lure to a paid service. Use SSLlabs if you want more info on a site's cert than what your web browser tells you. -- David B.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.inwalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-25 12:27 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) |
| Message-ID | <pe8vfr$odj$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #116654 |
David B. STALKER wrote: > On 25-May-18 1:22 AM, Shadow asked ... >> Why does it matter ? > > According the the site certificate information, [CUT-A-HUNDRED-LINES-YOU- DON'T-UNDERSTAND] > Then you'll see Securi is using their so-called web site scan as a lure > to get users (perhaps only the site owner) to buy into their site scan > service. Dump Securi. They're a lureware site. ...and... > I'm not sure Securi is trying to provide for information on a site's > certificate but it appears they are a lure to a paid service. You were told that the day you discovered securi.net. After all these years, do you finally believe it now?? Do you think it is even remotely possible Securi is falsifying that it discovers "malware" in order to get you to *PAY for this service*? -- -bts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-25 13:52 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) |
| Message-ID | <pe90u1$bgj$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #116658 |
On 25-May-18 1:27 PM, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote: > David B. STALKER wrote: > >> On 25-May-18 1:22 AM, Shadow asked ... >>> Why does it matter ? >> >> According the the site certificate information, [CUT-A-HUNDRED-LINES-YOU- > DON'T-UNDERSTAND] > >> Then you'll see Securi is using their so-called web site scan as a lure >> to get users (perhaps only the site owner) to buy into their site scan >> service. Dump Securi. They're a lureware site. > ...and... >> I'm not sure Securi is trying to provide for information on a site's >> certificate but it appears they are a lure to a paid service. > > You were told that the day you discovered securi.net. After all these > years, do you finally believe it now?? Do you think it is even remotely > possible Securi is falsifying that it discovers "malware" in order to get > you to *PAY for this service*? What would *convince* me would be for you to remove the 'block' on your web site (robots.txt?) so that Sucuri can, once again, scan Tekrider.net. If the scan STILL shows that there is malware on your site I will accept that Sucuri is, indeed, a "lureware" site. Are you willing to do that? -- David B.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.inwalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-25 13:31 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) |
| Message-ID | <pe9372$hmr$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #116660 |
David B. STALKER wrote: > On 25-May-18 1:27 PM, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote: >> David B. STALKER wrote: >> >>> On 25-May-18 1:22 AM, Shadow asked ... >>>> Why does it matter ? >>> >>> According the the site certificate information, >>> [CUT-A-HUNDRED-LINES-YOU- >> DON'T-UNDERSTAND] Aha. Now I know *where* you got those hundred lines. You copied, word-for- word - and *WITHOUT ATTRIBUTION* - the words of VanguardLH in the Windows10 group. Shame on you for doing that, stalker. MID: <1r5jonybn4br0$.dlg@v.nguard.lh> Is "Steve Carroll" a new nym of yours? (Of course it is...) MID: <OYONC.388869$XF1.225599@fx27.fr7> > What would *convince* me would be for you to remove the 'block' on your > web site (robots.txt?) No. "Stalker-Detection V. 2.0" > so that Sucuri can, once again, scan Tekrider.net. > > If the scan STILL shows that there is malware on your site I will accept > that Sucuri is, indeed, a "lureware" site. > > Are you willing to do that? Why should I? Do I think you could ever change? -- -bts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-25 14:54 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) |
| Message-ID | <pe94jc$2oo$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #116661 |
On 25-May-18 2:31 PM, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote: > David B. wrote: [....] >> What would *convince* me would be for you to remove the 'block' on your >> web site (robots.txt?) > > No. "Stalker-Detection V. 2.0" Much the same result, I suspect! ;-) >> so that Sucuri can, once again, scan Tekrider.net. >> >> If the scan STILL shows that there is malware on your site I will accept >> that Sucuri is, indeed, a "lureware" site. >> >> Are you willing to do that? > > Why should I? Simply to demonstrate that you are *not* one of the bad guys and that you really do have nothing to hide. > Do I think you could ever change? Yes. My working days are over. -- David B.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.inwalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-25 14:05 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) |
| Message-ID | <pe956c$1bp$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #116663 |
David B. STALKER wrote: > On 25-May-18 2:31 PM, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote: >> David B. STALKER wrote: > [....] >>> What would *convince* me would be for you to remove the 'block' on >>> your web site (robots.txt?) >>> so that Sucuri can, once again, scan Tekrider.net. >>> >>> If the scan STILL shows that there is malware on your site I will >>> accept that Sucuri is, indeed, a "lureware" site. >>> >>> Are you willing to do that? >> >> Why should I? > > Simply to demonstrate that you are *not* one of the bad guys and that > you really do have nothing to hide. Okay, go for it. https://sitecheck.sucuri.net/results/www.tekrider.net >> Do I think you could ever change? > > Yes. My working days are over. We'll see about that... -- -bts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-25 15:48 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) |
| Message-ID | <pe97oa$n79$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #116664 |
On 25-May-18 3:05 PM, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote: > David B. STALKER wrote: > >> On 25-May-18 2:31 PM, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote: >>> David B. STALKER wrote: >> [....] >>>> What would *convince* me would be for you to remove the 'block' on >>>> your web site (robots.txt?) >>>> so that Sucuri can, once again, scan Tekrider.net. >>>> >>>> If the scan STILL shows that there is malware on your site I will >>>> accept that Sucuri is, indeed, a "lureware" site. >>>> >>>> Are you willing to do that? >>> >>> Why should I? >> >> Simply to demonstrate that you are *not* one of the bad guys and that >> you really do have nothing to hide. > > Okay, go for it. > > https://sitecheck.sucuri.net/results/www.tekrider.net That all seems fine now. *THANK YOU* :-) Can you account for the original result I got way back? https://www.dropbox.com/s/6nj382qhv4wzmju/Tekrider.net%20-%20Infected%20with%20malware%20%28Sucuri%29.tiff?dl=0 What do YOU think was amiss? Was it actually your site which had a 'problem', was it maybe my computer which had been compromised in some way or was it Sucuri itself trying to 'pull a fast one'? >>> Do I think you could ever change? >> >> Yes. My working days are over. > > We'll see about that... What I'd LIKE is for you and I not to be at loggerheads. Is that possible as far as you are concerned? Can we 'start over' as it were? As an aside, now - were you involved in military aviation at some stage? I answered all your questions and queries as best as I was able and you appeared to understand what I was telling you. -- David B.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.inwalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-25 15:36 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) |
| Message-ID | <pe9aia$u1$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #116666 |
David B. STALKER wrote: > On 25-May-18 3:05 PM, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote: >> David B. STALKER wrote: >>> On 25-May-18 2:31 PM, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote: >>>> David B. STALKER wrote: >>> [....] >>>>> What would *convince* me would be for you to remove the 'block' on >>>>> your web site (robots.txt?) >>>>> so that Sucuri can, once again, scan Tekrider.net. >>>>> >>>>> If the scan STILL shows that there is malware on your site I will >>>>> accept that Sucuri is, indeed, a "lureware" site. >>>>> >>>>> Are you willing to do that? >>>> >>>> Why should I? >>> >>> Simply to demonstrate that you are *not* one of the bad guys and that >>> you really do have nothing to hide. >> >> Okay, go for it. >> >> https://sitecheck.sucuri.net/results/www.tekrider.net > > That all seems fine now. *THANK YOU* :-) Was that sincere? Will you remember that my site has NO malware? > Can you account for the original result I got way back? > > https://www.dropbox.fake-news > What do YOU think was amiss? Was it actually your site which had a > 'problem', was it maybe my computer which had been compromised in some > way or was it Sucuri itself trying to 'pull a fast one'? You have been told *a thousand times* what the problem was. How many times is that necessary? Oh yeah: every twenty minutes (as that seems to be the limit of your memory). > What I'd LIKE is for you and I not to be at loggerheads. You stalk; a loggerhead emerges. > Is that possible as far as you are concerned? Can we 'start over' as it > were? That would never be possible. As I said *a thousand times* I am open to removing your 'Special page' IF you stop stalking completely, after a period of time with no violations. > As an aside, now - were you involved in military aviation at some stage? Yes. -- -bts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-25 17:14 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) |
| Message-ID | <pe9cq1$p9u$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #116671 |
On 25-May-18 4:36 PM, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote: > David B. wrote: > >> On 25-May-18 3:05 PM, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote: >>> David B. STALKER wrote: >>>> On 25-May-18 2:31 PM, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote: >>>>> David B. STALKER wrote: >>>> [....] >>>>>> What would *convince* me would be for you to remove the 'block' on >>>>>> your web site (robots.txt?) >>>>>> so that Sucuri can, once again, scan Tekrider.net. >>>>>> >>>>>> If the scan STILL shows that there is malware on your site I will >>>>>> accept that Sucuri is, indeed, a "lureware" site. >>>>>> >>>>>> Are you willing to do that? >>>>> >>>>> Why should I? >>>> >>>> Simply to demonstrate that you are *not* one of the bad guys and that >>>> you really do have nothing to hide. >>> >>> Okay, go for it. >>> >>> https://sitecheck.sucuri.net/results/www.tekrider.net >> >> That all seems fine now. *THANK YOU* :-) > > Was that sincere? Yes, it WAS sincere. > Will you remember that my site has NO malware? Whilst it has no malware now, it might have tomorrow unless you use a service like that offered by Sucuri. *DO* you use such a service? >> Can you account for the original result I got way back? >> >> https://www.dropbox.fake-news You've been told before not to 'doctor' posts. That includes links. >> What do YOU think was amiss? Was it actually your site which had a >> 'problem', was it maybe my computer which had been compromised in some >> way or was it Sucuri itself trying to 'pull a fast one'? > > You have been told *a thousand times* what the problem was. How many times > is that necessary? Oh yeah: every twenty minutes (as that seems to be the > limit of your memory). You exaggerate too! >> What I'd LIKE is for you and I not to be at loggerheads. > > You stalk; a loggerhead emerges. I investigate things which I do not understand. >> Is that possible as far as you are concerned? Can we 'start over' as it >> were? > > That would never be possible. As I said *a thousand times* I am open to > removing your 'Special page' IF you stop stalking completely, after a > period of time with no violations. The choice is yours. I cannot influence your actions in any way. >> As an aside, now - were you involved in military aviation at some stage? > > Yes. Thanks. I'm sorry you didn't make it as a pilot. Did I tell you that I was once involved in a RIMPAC exercise when I was serving with the Royal Australian Navy? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exercise_RIMPAC Hard work, but two weeks alongside in Oahu made up for it. :-) Enjoy your bike riding while you still can. -- Regards, David B.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.inwalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-25 17:13 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) |
| Message-ID | <pe9g6t$9s3$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #116672 |
David B. STALKER wrote: > On 25-May-18 4:36 PM, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote: >> David B. STALKER wrote: > >> Will you remember that my site has NO malware? > > Whilst it has no malware now, it might have tomorrow unless you use a > service like that offered by Sucuri. *DO* you use such a service? No, it is not necessary for someone who knows how things work. >>> https://www.dropbox.fake-news > > You've been told before not to 'doctor' posts. That includes links. Perhaps I am just following YOUR procedures. You post-edit all the time. > I investigate things which I do not understand. ..which is nearly EVERYTHING related to computers... and then you forget what the answers were. Oh, and your methods of "investigation" really suck. -- -bts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-25 19:38 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) |
| Message-ID | <pe9ooe$c8b$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #116673 |
On 25-May-18 6:13 PM, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote: > David B. STALKER wrote: > >> On 25-May-18 4:36 PM, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote: >>> David B. STALKER wrote: >> >>> Will you remember that my site has NO malware? >> >> Whilst it has no malware now, it might have tomorrow unless you use a >> service like that offered by Sucuri. *DO* you use such a service? > > No, it is not necessary for someone who knows how things work. OK >>>> https://www.dropbox.fake-news >> >> You've been told before not to 'doctor' posts. That includes links. > > Perhaps I am just following YOUR procedures. You post-edit all the time. Only very occasionally. >> I investigate things which I do not understand. > > ..which is nearly EVERYTHING related to computers... and then you forget > what the answers were. Yes, I *DO* forget, so remind me. Please account for the original result I got way back. https://www.dropbox.com/s/6nj382qhv4wzmju/Tekrider.net%20-%20Infected%20with%20malware%20%28Sucuri%29.tiff?dl=0 What do YOU think was amiss? Was it actually your site which had a 'problem', was it maybe my computer which had been compromised in some way or was it Sucuri itself trying to 'pull a fast one'? > Oh, and your methods of "investigation" really suck. You are welcome to your opinion, but I HAVE shut down the Annexcafe forums and the Aumha forums too. AND had IdentIt.ca taken down! ;-) -- Regards, David B.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-05-25 14:54 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Sucuri Warning (was tl;dr:) |
| Message-ID | <v7qggddiqhg3tq89qmvln9q8a4niqgaelf@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #116678 |
On Fri, 25 May 2018 19:38:53 +0100, "David B." <DavidB@nomail.afraid.org> wrote: >On 25-May-18 6:13 PM, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote: >> David B. STALKER wrote: >> >>> On 25-May-18 4:36 PM, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote: >>>> David B. STALKER wrote: >>> >>>> Will you remember that my site has NO malware? >>> >>> Whilst it has no malware now, it might have tomorrow unless you use a >>> service like that offered by Sucuri. *DO* you use such a service? >> >> No, it is not necessary for someone who knows how things work. > >OK > >>>>> https://www.dropbox.fake-news >>> >>> You've been told before not to 'doctor' posts. That includes links. >> >> Perhaps I am just following YOUR procedures. You post-edit all the time. > >Only very occasionally. > >>> I investigate things which I do not understand. >> >> ..which is nearly EVERYTHING related to computers... and then you forget >> what the answers were. > >Yes, I *DO* forget, so remind me. > >Please account for the original result I got way back. > >https://www.dropbox.com/s/6nj382qhv4wzmju/Tekrider.net%20-%20Infected%20with%20malware%20%28Sucuri%29.tiff?dl=0 > >What do YOU think was amiss? Was it actually your site which had a >'problem', was it maybe my computer which had been compromised in some >way or was it Sucuri itself trying to 'pull a fast one'? Why not just refer back to any of the hundreds of times you've already asked that question and gotten the answer? Heck, just print it out and tack it to the wall beside your desk so you can refer to it anytime you start to forget again. > > Oh, and your methods of "investigation" really suck. > >You are welcome to your opinion, but I HAVE shut down the Annexcafe >forums and the Aumha forums too. AND had IdentIt.ca taken down! ;-) Wow, three lies all came tumbling out at once. As you and many others know, you had nothing to do with any of what you're claiming. Just be honest for once. OK, David? Is it really that hard for you to tell the truth? -- Still not sure about David Brooks? https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php The drunken kook bluffs about about filing a lawsuit: "It appears that we'll now have to meet in court as YOU are unlawfully hosting a copyright photograph of ME on YOUR web site *without permission*." -David Brooks 2017-11-4
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 10 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system
csiph-web