Re: Hiding originating IP when posting through CLOSED news servers

From: Dr.Ruud ('t.leven.is.fijn_at_life.i$.great)
Date: 02/25/04

  • Next message: Peter J Ross: "Re: Using Old OS for Security" 
    Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 01:42:48 +0100

    Toen ik Frank Slootweg kietelde, kwam er dit uit:
    > Dr.Ruud:
    >> Frank Slootweg:
    >>> Russ Allbery:

    >>>> Mike could be using it for any of those reasons, or for none of them
    >>>> and for some reason of his own. He's very well-informed as to
    >>>> exactly what XNA does and doesn't do and has made his own decision.

    >>> Correction: *Now* Mike is well-informed (or at least he should be
    >>> :-)). Before this all started he thought that XNA would keep his
    >>> postings out of the archives (because he, incorrectly, assumed) that
    >>> there was only one archive (Google (Groups)).

    >> Frank, I have no idea where you go this from. Mike never expressed
    >> such thought here. Other people's minds wandered and assumed such
    >> things, maybe you have stored those as Mike's?

    > Are you implying that I'm wrong? That is a logical fallacy! :-)
    >
    > But seriously, see my response to Russ.

    You must mean <news:<403b0c6d$0$63135$a344fe98@news.wanadoo.nl>
    that referred to <news:402792dc$0$230$a344fe98@news.wanadoo.nl>,
    but that doesn't show where you have the "Before this all
    started..." from.

    Alan Connor wrote "The Usenet Archives are very important, just
    as important as the Usenet itself, and keeping your posts out
    of it is just plain selfish." That is AFAIK where the XNA came
    into the discussion.

    Mike AFAIK has never said anything about thinking that XNA would
    keep his postings out of the archives, he even mentioned that he
    only knows one other archive than google that honours XNA:
    <news:qk1f20pl5rkmd59k6ljfphr3t49eu5hi2v@4ax.com>
    And I think you missed the meaning of the "as such" there, because
    you replied "there *are* other archives", which Mike always knew.
    (that was one of the misunderstandings I read)

    >>> I *still* think that he
    >>> does not fully realize the limitations of XNA (with regard to
    >>> 'original' copies of his articles in Google Groups).
    >>
    >> No, there was nothing to fix there.
    >
    > True, in the sense that there is nothing 'wrong' with XNA (et al)
    > which *can* be fixed, but that doesn't mean there are no limitations.

    I was talking about Mike. ;) 

    -- 
Affijn, Ruud
  • Next message: Peter J Ross: "Re: Using Old OS for Security"