On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 17:22:08 +0100, Paul B wrote:

> On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 11:56:22 GMT, Aardvark <EMAIL REMOVED>
> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 03:50:17 -0600, Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>>I highly doubt your judgement in this matter.
>>>
>>> Your spelling of judg-e-ment is so noted.
>>>
>>
>>What's special about Andy spelling judgement correctly?
>
> This will explain his ignorance.
> http://wsu.edu/~brians/errors/judgement.html
>

Well that's a horse of a different colour :-)

--
Registered Linux User 413057.
Both Mandriva 2007 and Ubuntu 6.06
You can have it all. My empire of hurt.

On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 09:50:59 -0600, Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote:

>
> On Sun, 15 Apr 2007, Aardvark <EMAIL REMOVED> wrote:
>>I support spam. I am a spammer myself. There is no such thing as spam. Anybody
>>who questions why Google Groups propagates so much spam is an ***hole.

**** me! I've never seen a copy of OE so b0rked. Its post quoting is
totally out of kilter.

--
Registered Linux User 413057.
Both Mandriva 2007 and Ubuntu 6.06
You can have it all. My empire of hurt.

john sumner wrote:
> Rick Merrill wrote:
>> john sumner wrote:
>>> Rick Merrill wrote:
>>>> Yes, it is because the usenet supports anonymity all too easily.
>>>> Many ISP want to divest themselves of Usenet alltogether - it's a
>>>> path for more criminal intent than mere spam, not to mention trolls,
>>>> and the user places the blame on the ISP, who cannot in fact do
>>>> squat to stop it.
>>>
>>> I think if someone posted a death threat on google groups there are ways
>>> of finding out who done it, like if it was at a public library or
>>> something like that
>>
>> Yes, the ISP has records that connect IP with physical location and
>> the police can get that pretty easily.
> What about libraries rick?i know here in broward county fl you have to
> put your library card so i think that is one way to keep an *** clown
> from doing something like that.

Libraries and "internet cafes" remain open connections for scammers.
Most 419 are originated that way: a hour later they are gonzo!

I don't know what the libraries are doing for tracking, just for
limiting access AFAIK.

Rick Merrill wrote:
> Libraries and "internet cafes" remain open connections for scammers.
> Most 419 are originated that way: a hour later they are gonzo!
>
> I don't know what the libraries are doing for tracking, just for
> limiting access AFAIK.

Internet cafes i can see, but i think the libraries have ways of nailing
people.

john sumner wrote:
> Rick Merrill wrote:
>> Libraries and "internet cafes" remain open connections for scammers.
>> Most 419 are originated that way: a hour later they are gonzo!
>>
>> I don't know what the libraries are doing for tracking, just for
>> limiting access AFAIK.
>
> Internet cafes i can see, but i think the libraries have ways of nailing
> people.

Some library searches require you to enter your card ## but I've
not used the public access email or WWW.

From what I hear there are dozens of 'anonymizers" (sounds like a
skinflint!) that people use to hide their actual location.

On Sun, 15 Apr 2007, Rick Merrill <EMAIL REMOVED> wrote:
>Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote:
>[snip]
>> On Sun, 15 Apr 2007, Aardvark <EMAIL REMOVED> wrote:
>>> I support spam. I am a spammer myself. There is no such thing as spam.
>>> Anybody
>>> who questions why Google Groups propagates so much spam is an ***hole.
>>
>> OK.
>>
>> How about some straight answers? Why are spammers constantly spamming
>> usenet and
>> morphing sock puppets specifically through the Google Groups web to usenet
>> interface,
>> and getting away with it? Is it a stupid question?
>>
>
>Yes, it is because the usenet supports anonymity all too easily. Many
>ISP want to divest themselves of Usenet alltogether - it's a path for
>more criminal intent than mere spam, not to mention trolls, and the user
>places the blame on the ISP, who cannot in fact do squat to stop it.
>
>
So you're saying that, even if they wanted to, Google can do little or nothing
to stop spammers from abusing their Google Groups accounts by posting commercial
spam, and constantly creating new sock puppets to help them promote their
commerical spam, that has been regularly flooding thousands of news groups. Then
what is this address, groups-EMAIL REMOVED, supposed to be for? I guess they
don't consider commerical spamming any kind of abuse, nothing that rises to the
level of getting that commerical spammer's Google Groups account cancelled.

I guess that answers the second question, that either there is no practical
way to stop it, or the desire on the part of Google to stop them is nonexistent,
persuaded, perhaps, by some financial interests in allowing Google Groups account
abusers to continue with their commercial spamming activities, unchecked.

But that doesn't address the first question, which someone else suggested was
accomplished by something called "botnets," noticing that commerical spam
originating from Google Groups account abusers shows IP blocks coming from all
over the free world. How do they do this? Is it an international usenet
"link-exchange" program, or is it being done by sophisticated computer hackers,
what gives?

I find it fascinating that, so far, no one seems to want to address this first
question, perhaps afraid that the all powerful Google overlords might drop their
PR for criticizing them in public?


Paranoid

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 11:30:37 -0600 (MDT), Borked Pseudo Mailed
<Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:

> I find it fascinating that, so far, no one seems to want to address this first
>question, perhaps afraid that the all powerful Google overlords might drop their
>PR for criticizing them in public?

Both your questions were addressed, you apparently don't want to accept the
answers.

1) Blackhole all google messages.

2) Botnets, or Zombie networks are nothing new and use regular "campaign"
updates from their handlers to send out spam in *all* its forms.

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007, Default User <EMAIL REMOVED> wrote:
>On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 11:30:37 -0600 (MDT), Borked Pseudo Mailed
><Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:
>
>> I find it fascinating that, so far, no one seems to want to address this
>> first
>>question, perhaps afraid that the all powerful Google overlords might drop
>>their
>>PR for criticizing them in public?
>
>Both your questions were addressed, you apparently don't want to accept the
>answers.

They were? You can, of course, provide a valid message ID where my specific
questions were specifically answered. Post that message ID in the white space
below, so that everybody can look it up and read the article that verifies your
claim:


>
>1) Blackhole all google messages.

What does that mean? If you are suggesting that readers globally "kill file"
all Google Groups messages, that is no practical solution at all. Readers in
Google Groups don't have that capability, for one, and a significant number of
Google Groups posters are legitimate contributors, not commerical spammers, or
even spammers at all. Granted, some of them may be idiots, but every newsgroup
server that allows posting gets its fair share of idiots posting through it.
>
>2) Botnets, or Zombie networks are nothing new and use regular "campaign"
>updates from their handlers to send out spam in *all* its forms.

But how do they post through Google Groups? Can you cite a web site page
that specifically describes how Google Groups posters use "botnets" or "zombie
networks" to successfully post through the Google Groups network? If so,
please post the technical description page's URL in the white space below:


Paranoid

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

john sumner <EMAIL REMOVED> wrote in
news:evu6tp$oah$EMAIL REMOVED:

> Rick Merrill wrote:
>> Yes, it is because the usenet supports anonymity all too easily. Many
>> ISP want to divest themselves of Usenet alltogether - it's a path for
>> more criminal intent than mere spam, not to mention trolls, and the
>> user places the blame on the ISP, who cannot in fact do squat to stop
>> it.
>
> I think if someone posted a death threat on google groups there are
> ways of finding out who done it, like if it was at a public library or
> something like that

Not if they used something like this

http://eelbash.yi.org:8080/scriptes/remail.php

(or a chain of anonymous remailers and a mail2news gateway) to send it.
In that case they'd be untraceable.

- --
HTTP://peculiarplace.com/joseph.shtml
HTTP://peculiarplace.com/joseph2.shtml
HTTP://peculiarplace.com/keymanage.shtml
HTTP://peculiarplace.com/keysign.shtml


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32) - GPGshell v3.52

iQEVAwUBRiPUMHV+YnyE1GYEAQiCTAf+IN+IoyBGzUDSwF2xTJ hmjCeLd67jvuf/
k1TFsLHwpo9TYOCMyr/r59ZPeIMcbm1e+jl4zI2qM/USoKyW4tA6d4sXF7meIGZ2
xY9OWx7Hs24ciKc9RG9e8dugS+EFbEkxv6sUqGy/ouDpVKWfnINguOVVsIN/DBpo
IDZti9sZ8IJIlL5YofR+7+tMK/PGXmSM6OHd4FOQBlgltxalNR3F3TJGdpDxHuxy
o2iq/lI6C+SyVZuUpEsBkl34HtZKnKCLwBmBsgKdQ4mMWikkp7jTcH+ iS5K0JaDL
VlvJViscpewekrDJN3MUJTLxI3PUlSa6Taz3fZHLajReG4wYsS NC7A==
=CQbZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007, Borked Pseudo Mailed <EMAIL REMOVED> wrote:
>Borked Pseudo Mailed <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 15 Apr 2007, Rick Merrill <EMAIL REMOVED> wrote:
>> >Borked Pseudo Mailed wrote:
>> >[snip]
>> >> On Sun, 15 Apr 2007, Aardvark <EMAIL REMOVED> wrote:
>> >>> I support spam. I am a spammer myself. There is no such thing as spam.
>> >>> Anybody
>> >>> who questions why Google Groups propagates so much spam is an ***hole.
>> >>
>> >> OK.
>> >>
>> >> How about some straight answers? Why are spammers constantly spamming
>> >> usenet and
>> >> morphing sock puppets specifically through the Google Groups web to usenet
>> >> interface,
>> >> and getting away with it? Is it a stupid question?
>> >>
>> >
>> >Yes, it is because the usenet supports anonymity all too easily. Many
>> >ISP want to divest themselves of Usenet alltogether - it's a path for
>> >more criminal intent than mere spam, not to mention trolls, and the user
>> >places the blame on the ISP, who cannot in fact do squat to stop it.
>> >
>> >
>> So you're saying that, even if they wanted to, Google can do little or
>> nothing
>> to stop spammers from abusing their Google Groups accounts by posting
>> commercial
>
>Yup. That's about the size of it. It takes a lot longer to identify a
>spammer's account and act on that information than it does to create an
>account. The math works out against Google or any service of this type.
>They ALL get abused, Google is just more visible than the rest by
>virtue of its size.

That "sounds" like a reasonable explanation. True or not, it sure gives
Google a black eye. But when you're that rich, who cares?

>
>> spam, and constantly creating new sock puppets to help them promote their
>> commerical spam, that has been regularly flooding thousands of news groups.
>> Then
>> what is this address, groups-EMAIL REMOVED, supposed to be for? I guess
>> they
>> don't consider commerical spamming any kind of abuse, nothing that rises to
>> the
>> level of getting that commerical spammer's Google Groups account cancelled.
>
>Your "guess" sounds more like a foregone conclusion you'll go to great
>lengths to defend at this point. For whatever reasons you apparently
>have a hardon for Google.

No, but specifically against Google Groups commerical spammers who regularly
abuse their Google Groups accounts, apparently with impunity.

> Some of those reasons may be justified, but
>most are almost certainly not. Fact is you sound an awful lot like
>someone who has had an account at Google terminated for abuse, whining
>about other abusers.

You got me. I am a Google Groups spammer who got his account terminated
for spamming. But why does Google only pick on me, and not the millions of
"other" commericial spammers who keep posting through Google Groups, without
their accounts being terminated? And what's with all the Google Groups sock
puppets that keep crawling out of the woodwork. Bzzzzt! Does not compute.
>
>> I guess that answers the second question, that either there is no
>> practical
>> way to stop it, or the desire on the part of Google to stop them is
>> nonexistent,
>> persuaded, perhaps, by some financial interests in allowing Google Groups
>> account
>> abusers to continue with their commercial spamming activities, unchecked.
>>
>> But that doesn't address the first question, which someone else suggested
>> was
>> accomplished by something called "botnets," noticing that commerical spam
>> originating from Google Groups account abusers shows IP blocks coming from
>> all
>> over the free world. How do they do this? Is it an international usenet
>> "link-exchange" program, or is it being done by sophisticated computer
>> hackers,
>> what gives?
>
>You might want to Google/Wikipedia "botnet". You're lacking some very
>basic information here. Questions are better received when it's
>apparent the interrogator has invested at least a minimal amount of
>effort in finding an answer themselves.

Take you, for example, since you're dodging the question. You need to go
back to troll school. It's the oldest trick in the book, "I could answer the
question, but I won't, because you are an idiot." Thanks for the laugh.
>
>> I find it fascinating that, so far, no one seems to want to address this
>> first
>> question, perhaps afraid that the all powerful Google overlords might drop
>> their
>> PR for criticizing them in public?
>
>Utter nonsense. Your questions have been answered multiple times but
>you keep ignoring those answers so you can go back to barking about how
>Google "doesn't care".

If that is the case, and my specific questions have been specifically
answered, then you, of course, can post the URLs of said replies in this thread
here. Use the whitespace below:
>
>Obviously. Maybe just a little too much so.

Obviously. And nobody cares about their Google PR, either.


Paranoid