PcButts caught in another lie on his blog

[Dustin Cook]

On Apr 4, 2:20 pm, "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhonda...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Dustin Cook" <bughunter.dus...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1175708743.599692.159560@b75g2000hsg.googlegr oups.com
>
>
>
> > On Apr 4, 3:13 am, "4Q" <paul_z...@hushmail.com> wrote:
> >> Dustin Cook wrote:
> >>> On Apr 3, 5:54 pm, "4Q" <paul_z...@hushmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> Dustin Cook wrote:
> >>>>> On Apr 1, 10:00 am, "4Q" <paul_z...@hushmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> Dustin Cook wrote:
> >>>>>>> "4Q" <paul_z...@hushmail.com> wrote in
> >>>>>>> news:1175411394.262869.77750 @d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com:
>
> >>>>>>>> Dustin Cook wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhonda...@gmail.com> wrote in
> >>>>>>>>> news:euk7vv$68f$1 @blackhelicopter.databasix.com:
>
> >>>> <snip>
>
> >>>>>>> btw since you never actually looked at the bughunt.exe binary,
> >>>>>>> I'm going to point out a little greeting I left in it for you.
> >>>>>>> Open it with a hex editor, seek to decimal offset 28, and read
> >>>>>>> the next 4 bytes. It's not, heh, hidden code, 4Q, but an
> >>>>>>> amusing marker.
>
> >>>>>> Not even unzipped it. ;]]
>
> >>>>> That might explain why you haven't provided a report nor a
> >>>>> disassembly,
>
> >>>> I love seeing you jig up and down doing
> >>>> a dance.
>
> >>> I'm not doing any sort of dance.
>
> >> Of course not! *Twang!*
>
> >>> Just inquiring as to why you've been
> >>> unable to make good on your threat.
>
> >> You mean trolling you, making you swallow
> >> a hook, yank the line and watch you flap.
> >> *Twang!*
>
> >>> Months later, we find you claim
> >>> you haven't even looked at it.
>
> >> Yeah great isn't it... I do nothing,
> >> waggle my big toe a little bit and twang
> >> the line to watch you dance about.
> >> *Twang!*
>
> >>> This entire time, claiming it's
> >>> malicious and 4Q hasn't even unzipped it.
>
> >> Past experiance, and what everyone can
> >> see now shows that you are the same loon
> >> you've alway been. As Rhonda has pointed
> >> out several times you are capable of
> >> anything (malicious). You are, and have
>
> > Rhonda isn't doing too well these days proving her side.
>
> Proving? I'm not trying to prove anything. I don't need to. You do it
> all for me.
>
> > She forgot to
> > mention her private information was actually a signature to all
> > outgoing emails, so much for any expectation of privacy.
>
> So what? No one else has ever posted my address just because they
> happened to have it. Why would I have expected you to do it when it's
> not a decent thing to do?
>
> > What everyone has seen for 2 years is a legit antimalware program,
> > claims made by yourself which have all been proven as untrue. (It's
> > why you keep changing the claims, and then try to claim your trolling
> > me when your called on it, idiot)
>
> No. What everyone has seen is that you'll do as you please, no matter
> what harm it causes others, if you feel like it.
>
> And then they've seen you try to justify it. You're all over the place.
> First you're sorry, then you're not. It's your fault and it isn't.
>
> It all depends on what suits your mood of the moment.
>
> > You just think you have a wide audience, 4q; But HHI's audience is
> > alot bigger. I hope you enjoy being the ass of our jokes for the next
> > few months. Rhonda's shown her ass again already, nobody email bombed
> > you. lol!
>
> Um...
>
> > Say, somebody in HHI wanted me to ask how your email was doing these
> > days? Getting alot of fan mail? HAHAHAH
>
> news:Xns9907121FF18C4HHI2948AJD832@69.28.186.121

And you think that means he was mailbombed then? Your stupid, Rhonda.
What was meant by that is his greeting in the new .nfo release files.
Dazzle us with more of your ignorance, please.

--
Dustin Cook
http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk

[Dustin Cook]

"no.pencil.necks" <no.pencil.necks@gmail.com> wrote in
news:1175622543.496886.241950@q75g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com:

> On Mar 30, 11:10 am, "4Q" <paul_z...@hushmail.com> wrote:
>> Albert Dustbinstein wrote:
>> >> > > system... NOW THAT IS entertainment!
>>
>> > > *haha* Another one!
>>
>> http://fourq.host.sk/chars/Dustin_Co...is_Dick_Again/
>>
>>
>>
>> > Yep, I switched C.J with npn, my bad. The original comments/attacks
>> > were directed at the proper poster. It was a long day, sorry.
>>
>> "long day" my arse! What about today?
>> The day has barely even started an you've
>> stepped on it again! *reminder* You
>> aren't suppost to be able to read these
>> words, K/F remember ;]]
>>
>> > >> > Dustin, I know you think you're a blooming genius, but you
>> > >> > have never evidenced much more than an average IQ. You're not
>> > >> > special, so don't kid yourself.
>>
>> > >> Rhonda, I already provided things for 4Q to checkout, the beam
>> > >> awards and such. While I do not consider myself to be a genius,
>> > >> I do, despite what you think, have a high IQ... It's in the
>> > >> 160-180 range last time I was tested, hon.
>>
>> > > *haha* Liar. Genius is 150 and above
>> > > and the scale only goes upto 170.
>>
>> > Which scale are you relying on?
>>
>> The one measured in Miles Per Hour!
>> yours are in KPH where 160 = 100 on the
>> one everyone else uses. i.e. 100 =
>> average (or 50% of the population)
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> > > *You* the genius writing code in
>> > > BASIC!!! *LOL* It's called BASIC because
>> > > it's for beginners... and it's
>> > > simplified so a genius like you can
>> > > hamfisted whack together some ****e
>> > > like this
>>
>> > >http://groups.google.com/group/alt.c...code/msg/60060
>> > >0e47
>> > > 1413116
>>
>> > Two points, The person I said couldn't hold a candle to me has
>> > already stated as much. 2nd, I can program fluently in several
>> > languages and several dialects of basic, including visual basic.
>>
>> Liar.
>>
>> >You may attack me for
>> > code I wrote 10 years ago that was a complete waste of time and
>> > poor use of skills if you wish, but it doesn't deter the fact it
>> > was 10 years ago.
>>
>> Let's see something recent then. My bet
>> is looks almost the same as the ****az
>> you showed Kadaiatcha Man, before he
>> ripped you a new arsehole.
>>
>> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.c...66dc14da7ffec7
>>
>> Don't bother with another one of your high
>> IQ genius replies, Albert... post some
>> code to prove you have improved in the
>> last 10 years. *silence*
>>
>> 4Qhttp://fourq.host.sk/chars/Dustin_Cook/
>
> So in Dustin's courses at the University of Printed Circuit Board
> Repair, he teaches:

Do you intend to respond to my previous post directed towards you?



--
Dustin Cook
Author of BugHunter - MalWare Removal Tool - V2.2
web: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk - email:
bughunter.dustin@gmail.com.removethis
Pad: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk/pad.xml

[Rhonda Lea Kirk]

"Dustin Cook" <bughunter.dustin@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1175645505.598841.78820@y66g2000hsf.googlegro ups.com
> On Apr 3, 4:54 pm, "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhonda...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> "Dustin Cook" <bughunter.dus...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1175629214.937924.41690@o5g2000hsb.googlegrou ps.com
>>> On Apr 3, 6:51 am, "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhonda...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> "Dustin Cook" <spamfilterineffect.see....@nowhere.com> wrote in
>>>> message
>>>> news:Xns990710F21ED9EHHI2948AJD832@69.28.186.121
>>>>> "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhonda...@gmail.com> wrote in news:eur0hf$22$1
>>>>> @blackhelicopter.databasix.com:
>>>>>> "Dustin Cook" <spamfilterineffect.see....@nowhere.com> wrote in
>>>>>> messagenews:Xns990673855344HHI2948AJD832@69.28.186 .121
>>>>>>> "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhonda...@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>>>>> news:eupni3$d7l$1 @blackhelicopter.databasix.com:

<snipped>

>>>>>>> You know what was written years ago. You can either accept the
>>>>>>> fact you jumped to conclusions about me based on bad information
>>>>>>> or you can continue to try and deflect and defend your weak
>>>>>>> arguement, It doesn't make any difference to me at the end of
>>>>>>> the day.
>>>>>> Bad information from your own keyboard.
>>>>> Indeed, from my own keyboard. Yes, when I was doing quasi legal
>>>>> things. Does it change the point I made in the slightest? No.
>>>> You were lying then or you're lying now. Either way, you lie.
>>> Do you know of any humans that do not lie? It's a pointless strawman
>>> Rhonda.
>> Some people only lie about how nice your haircut looks.
> I wouldn't be one of those.

I know.

You lie about lots of things, not just harmless things.

>>>> No one had your emails, I didn't start poking at you until you
>>>> started calling me names and wishing me dead. I even protested the
>>>> treatment you were receiving up until them.
>>> Not entirely true. Are you intentionally misleading persons? I
>>> believe you started hypothesising with kman over why I decided I no
>>> longer wished to speak with you.
>> After you publicly announced it.
> And this was necessary because? Yes, I did something in poor taste,
> announcing it in public. You however began to discuss it further with
> kman in public. You didn't exactly respond in an adult civilized
> manner yourself.

I wrote, "He thinks I'm a slut."

<snipped, either because it's been covered elsewhere or because I can't
be bothered or because you snipped the context>

>>> Rhonda, another misleading? Your address and name YOU willingly
>>> inserted into some program that thought it wise to include it with
>>> each outgoing email. Stop trying to pretend your address was a well
>>> kept secret. I wasn't going to say anything about that, but it's
>>> getting old. Play a new song.
>> I don't email that many people, Dustin.
> The amount of individuals you do email doesn't deter from the point I
> made above, Rhonda. In case you missed it (and I have the reading
> comprehension problem?), You voluntarily entered all of that
> information in some social networking program you made use of. At that
> point, you had no expectation that it would be private information.

Dustin, Plaxo isn't a social networking site. It's an address book that
allows people to update their contacts when their information changes.
The only people who have access to that information are some real life
friends who were designated by me. Like, maybe, three people, because
most of my real-life friends don't use it. I liked the sig. In your
case, I didn't bother to turn it off before I hit send.

A gesture of trust, Dustin.

Good goin'.

And talk about not checking things out.

>> And no one else has published my physical address publicly.
>> Do you notice how you're now trying to minimize and justify what you
>> did?
> I am not minimizing nor justifying my actions. I already apologized
> for doing it. What you perceive to be minimizing is nothing more than
> providing the details of how I came about this information in the
> first place.

I sent it to you. That has never been in dispute.

You're trying to say that it was no big deal because it was available to
a lot of people.

That's bull****. It wasn't.

And it's still not your place to publish my address online. Or allow it
to be published. Especially when it was published to alt.sex with an
invitation to strangers to stop by at any time.

You knew that my daughter and my grandmother live here. You endangered
them.

> I noticed you certainly didn't think it was necessary to
> tell anyone you provided the information automatically to anyone you
> did email because it was a signature... Was it a simple forgetful
> moment on your part, or was it intentional?

As I said above.

I had no reason to believe that you would do me harm, so I left it in.

>> This is exactly why no one should ever trust you.
>
> And this is where you would be wrong, as usual. You really don't know
> anything about me, you should quit showing your ass by pretending that
> you do.

I trusted you, Dustin.

Trusting you was a mistake. That's the point.

You want people to trust you with their valuable data, and you can't be
trusted with an address.

<snipped>

--
Rhonda Lea Kirk

If you ever need some proof that time can heal your wounds,
just step inside my heart and walk around these rooms;
where the shadows used to be.... Mary Chapin Carpenter

[Dustin Cook]

"Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhondalea@gmail.com> wrote in news:ev8j84$dsj$1
@blackhelicopter.databasix.com:

> "Dustin Cook" <bughunter.dustin@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1175645505.598841.78820@y66g2000hsf.googlegro ups.com
>>> Some people only lie about how nice your haircut looks.
>> I wouldn't be one of those.
>
> I know.
>
> You lie about lots of things, not just harmless things.

Minor correction, I have in the past lied about many many things as Raid.
Yes indeedy. this again, isn't exactly anything new. Now, as I said, you
just want a fight. Your still angry.

>> And this was necessary because? Yes, I did something in poor taste,
>> announcing it in public. You however began to discuss it further with
>> kman in public. You didn't exactly respond in an adult civilized
>> manner yourself.
>
> I wrote, "He thinks I'm a slut."

Hmm.. What made you assume that anyhow? And why did you feel the need to
comment about what you assumed I thought in public? Does it somehow
excuse the fact it was also, not in good taste? Tit for tat Rhonda.

>> The amount of individuals you do email doesn't deter from the point I
>> made above, Rhonda. In case you missed it (and I have the reading
>> comprehension problem?), You voluntarily entered all of that
>> information in some social networking program you made use of. At that
>> point, you had no expectation that it would be private information.
>
> Dustin, Plaxo isn't a social networking site. It's an address book that
> allows people to update their contacts when their information changes.
> The only people who have access to that information are some real life
> friends who were designated by me. Like, maybe, three people, because

Okay, an address book that feels it's necessary to update whenever
information changes. My bad, now why exactly does it put your contact
information in as an email signature? You claim to know the type of
person I am, yet you didn't turn this signature off before emailing me?

> most of my real-life friends don't use it. I liked the sig. In your
> case, I didn't bother to turn it off before I hit send.
>
> A gesture of trust, Dustin.

Haha, a gesture of trust. I see. So, you proclaim to know the type of
person I am, who you say cannot be trusted... Were you trolling me in the
first place? Was my 2nd guess that your not a troll, wrong?

> Good goin'.
>
> And talk about not checking things out.

How interesting. I made sure not to snip anything, and attacking HHI was
not something we covered previously. You did read the response, tho.
You know as well as I do that being a member in a group doesn't mean the
group always goes with your ideas. Your a supporter of auk, one could say
your in that group of people. Does this also mean then that you have
control?

>>> And no one else has published my physical address publicly.
>>> Do you notice how you're now trying to minimize and justify what you
>>> did?
>> I am not minimizing nor justifying my actions. I already apologized
>> for doing it. What you perceive to be minimizing is nothing more than
>> providing the details of how I came about this information in the
>> first place.
>
> I sent it to you. That has never been in dispute.

That's alot of drumming today...

> You're trying to say that it was no big deal because it was available
> to a lot of people.
>
> That's bull****. It wasn't.

Well, we'd have to trust what you say about how available your personal
contact information was. I'd say it was just as available as a hooker in
new york, based on the fact it was a signature in every outgoing email...
Hmm. And since you do like to stir things up here on usenet, I'm sure you
email more than a couple of people.

> And it's still not your place to publish my address online. Or allow it
> to be published. Especially when it was published to alt.sex with an
> invitation to strangers to stop by at any time.

An important distinction rhonda, You published your address. *I* didn't
publish anything. I shared the information *you* voluntarily provided. I
sure as hell didn't ask for your address or number contact information.

> You knew that my daughter and my grandmother live here. You endangered
> them.

Using your contact information when emailing persons you do not know
online is your own fault, and you are the one endangering people by doing
it. And you try to justify your actions by laying the guilt trip on me?

I already apologized for sharing the information, it wasn't a responsible
thing to do. But I'm not going to take the blame for any risk posed to
your family, as you *provided* the information to anyone you felt the
need to email out of the blue. The responsibility for keeping yourself
and your family safe while online lies with you, no one else.

>> I noticed you certainly didn't think it was necessary to
>> tell anyone you provided the information automatically to anyone you
>> did email because it was a signature... Was it a simple forgetful
>> moment on your part, or was it intentional?
>
> As I said above.
>
> I had no reason to believe that you would do me harm, so I left it in.

Bull****. You "know" the type of person I am. Shall I quote you?

>>> This is exactly why no one should ever trust you.
>>
>> And this is where you would be wrong, as usual. You really don't know
>> anything about me, you should quit showing your ass by pretending that
>> you do.
>
> I trusted you, Dustin.
>
> Trusting you was a mistake. That's the point.
>
> You want people to trust you with their valuable data, and you can't be
> trusted with an address.

Entirely Bull****. You "know" the type of person I am. According to you,
I cannot be trusted. Your pissed off with me, still, and you think I'm
trying to con you by admitting my mistakes. Well, your wrong, as usual.

I said it before, You do not know me Rhonda, you don't know the "type" of
person I am, you don't know anything about me other than what I've told
you. You screwed up previously anyway, you admit this latest barage of
posts is an attempt by you with the hopeful? help of auk to try and
discredit me or something in the antimalware field. It's a war you
couldn't win on a cold snowy day in hell, but you've tried anyway.

Don't you get it yet? At the end of the day, it doesn't matter what you
think of me, either as a person, coder, or what. BugHunter continues to
prove it's usefulness, and earn me respect; despite your posts.

I've said sorry Rhonda, your the petty one at this point, and don't think
it doesn't show.


--
Dustin Cook
Author of BugHunter - MalWare Removal Tool - V2.2
web: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk - email:
bughunter.dustin@gmail.com.removethis
Pad: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk/pad.xml

[Dustin Cook]

"4Q" <paul_zest@hushmail.com> wrote in news:1175635351.878860.9710
@y66g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:

> http://fourq.host.sk/chars/Dustin_Cook/

What happened to my fansite?

You changed the html page.. The Raid one has also been edited, but you
****ed up the background color; it's grey, not quiet black. Were you in a
rush?

The Dustin_Cook link pagesource as of Sunday 12:17am ... Hrm...

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
</head>
<body style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); background-color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"
alink="#464646" link="#464646" vlink="#464646">
<div align="center">
<center>
<table bordercolordark="#000000" bordercolorlight="#000000"
bgcolor="#ffcc00" border="1" bordercolor="#000000" cellpadding="10"
width="90%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>
<p align="center"><font color="#464646" size="7"><strong>4Q's
*******<img src="../../images/4Q.gif" height="48" width="48"> Philosophy
</strong></font><font
color="#000000" size="2">and satire<br>

</font></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</center>
</div>
<hr color="#ffcc00" width="90%">
<div align="center">
<center>
<table bordercolordark="#000000" bordercolorlight="#000000" border="0"
bordercolor="#000000" cellpadding="10" cellspacing="0" width="90%">
<tbody>

<tr>
<td>
<table border="0" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>&nbsp;</td>
<td align="center"><font color="#ffcc00" size="4">
Rants/Satire/Humor/*******
Philosophy</font></td>
<td align="right">&nbsp;</td>

</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</center>
</div>
<HTML>
<BODY>


</BODY>
</HTML>




And here's the Raid one. Essentially, it's the same thing, but I like the
dark black in the Dustin Cook one better.

<html>
<body bgcolor="#464646" link="#464646" vlink="#464646"
alink="#464646">
<div align="center"><center>

<table border="1" cellpadding="10" width="90%" bgcolor="#FFCC00"
bordercolor="#000000" bordercolordark="#000000"
bordercolorlight="#000000">
<tr>
<td><p align="center"><font color="#464646" size="7"><strong>4Q's
*******<img src="../../images/4Q.gif" width="48" height="48">
Philosophy</strong></font><font color="#000000" size="2">and
satire<br>
</font></p>
</td>

</tr>
</table>
</center></div>

<hr width="90%" color="#FFCC00">
<div align="center"><center>

<table border="0" cellpadding="10" cellspacing="0" width="90%"
bordercolor="#000000" bordercolordark="#000000"
bordercolorlight="#000000">
<tr>
<td><table border="0" width="100%">
<tr>
<td>&nbsp;</td>

<td align="center"><font color="#FFCC00" size="4">
Rants/Satire/Humor/*******
Philosophy</font></td>
<td align="right">&nbsp;</td>
</tr>
</table>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
</center></div>

<HTML>

<BODY>


</BODY>
</HTML>


4Q, get my fansite back online soon man. I was enjoying it!


--
Dustin Cook
Author of BugHunter - MalWare Removal Tool - V2.2a
web: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk - email:
bughunter.dustin@gmail.com.removethis
Pad: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk/pad.xml

[Rhonda Lea Kirk]

"Dustin Cook" <spamfilterineffect.see.sig@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:Xns990C16BC457FHHI2948AJD832@69.28.186.121
> "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhondalea@gmail.com> wrote in news:ev8j84$dsj$1
> @blackhelicopter.databasix.com:
>
>> "Dustin Cook" <bughunter.dustin@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1175645505.598841.78820@y66g2000hsf.googlegro ups.com
>>>> Some people only lie about how nice your haircut looks.
>>> I wouldn't be one of those.
>>
>> I know.
>>
>> You lie about lots of things, not just harmless things.
>
> Minor correction, I have in the past lied about many many things as
> Raid. Yes indeedy. this again, isn't exactly anything new. Now, as I
> said, you just want a fight. Your still angry.

How can anyone know you're not still lying, when your history is that of
a liar?

>>> And this was necessary because? Yes, I did something in poor taste,
>>> announcing it in public. You however began to discuss it further
>>> with kman in public. You didn't exactly respond in an adult
>>> civilized manner yourself.
>>
>> I wrote, "He thinks I'm a slut."
>
> Hmm.. What made you assume that anyhow?

I was right, wasn't I?

You certainly confirmed it, didn't you?

> And why did you feel the need
> to comment about what you assumed I thought in public? Does it somehow
> excuse the fact it was also, not in good taste? Tit for tat Rhonda.

Thinking I'm a slut is in bad taste, Dustin.

But it was a comment on your announcement that you wouldn't be writing
to me anymore, remember?

You'd already told me in email, and I'd responded with "Take care of
yourself, Dustin."

Then you made your post.

>>> The amount of individuals you do email doesn't deter from the point
>>> I made above, Rhonda. In case you missed it (and I have the reading
>>> comprehension problem?), You voluntarily entered all of that
>>> information in some social networking program you made use of. At
>>> that point, you had no expectation that it would be private
>>> information.
>>
>> Dustin, Plaxo isn't a social networking site. It's an address book
>> that allows people to update their contacts when their information
>> changes. The only people who have access to that information are
>> some real life friends who were designated by me. Like, maybe, three
>> people, because
>
> Okay, an address book that feels it's necessary to update whenever
> information changes. My bad, now why exactly does it put your contact
> information in as an email signature?

Why don't you go to the Plaxo site and read about it.

> You claim to know the type of
> person I am, yet you didn't turn this signature off before emailing
> me?

I knew just from reading your posts that you'd had a difficult time as a
kid. It seemed to me, at the time, that you were working on making your
life better than it was and making yourself a better person than you'd
been.

I, too, had a difficult childhood, but I was lucky enough to have
intervention so that my path took a different turn. I was very lucky. I
have a lot of empathy for the sort of person I perceived you to be,
because you seem so vulnerable.

Unfortunately, although it appeared to me--and still does, to some
extent--that you're trying to be a good and decent person--your downfall
is that when you are pushed, you revert.

That's the point, Dustin. Walking the straight and narrow only works if
you don't fall off each time you meet some resistance. And that's what
you do. Every single time.

Go back and read all those posts in date order and see if you recognize
the progression and escalation between us. Recall that until you made a
public scene, I tried to intervene in what was happening to the extent I
felt did not encroach on the rights of others to do and say what they
want.

And then take it from there.

>> most of my real-life friends don't use it. I liked the sig. In your
>> case, I didn't bother to turn it off before I hit send.
>>
>> A gesture of trust, Dustin.
>
> Haha, a gesture of trust. I see. So, you proclaim to know the type of
> person I am, who you say cannot be trusted... Were you trolling me in
> the first place? Was my 2nd guess that your not a troll, wrong?

See above. You asked for it, now it's there in plain sight.

>> Good goin'.
>>
>> And talk about not checking things out.
>
> How interesting. I made sure not to snip anything, and attacking HHI
> was not something we covered previously. You did read the response,
> tho. You know as well as I do that being a member in a group
> doesn't mean the group always goes with your ideas. Your a supporter
> of auk, one could say your in that group of people. Does this also
> mean then that you have control?

Do you know how smarmy this makes you sound?

>>>> And no one else has published my physical address publicly.
>>>> Do you notice how you're now trying to minimize and justify what
>>>> you did?
>>> I am not minimizing nor justifying my actions. I already apologized
>>> for doing it. What you perceive to be minimizing is nothing more
>>> than providing the details of how I came about this information in
>>> the first place.
>>
>> I sent it to you. That has never been in dispute.
>
> That's alot of drumming today...
>
>> You're trying to say that it was no big deal because it was available
>> to a lot of people.
>>
>> That's bull****. It wasn't.
>
> Well, we'd have to trust what you say about how available your
> personal contact information was. I'd say it was just as available as
> a hooker in new york, based on the fact it was a signature in every
> outgoing email... Hmm. And since you do like to stir things up here
> on usenet, I'm sure you email more than a couple of people.

You're making a lot of assumptions. But when it comes down to it, even
if I've been emailing all of usenet, the only person who posted my
address was you.

>> And it's still not your place to publish my address online. Or allow
>> it to be published. Especially when it was published to alt.sex with
>> an invitation to strangers to stop by at any time.
>
> An important distinction rhonda, You published your address. *I*
> didn't publish anything. I shared the information *you* voluntarily
> provided. I sure as hell didn't ask for your address or number
> contact information.

I didn't publish my address publicly.

You published it in alt.sex with an invitation for people to come to my
house.

Do you not understand the gravity of this?

>> You knew that my daughter and my grandmother live here. You
>> endangered them.
>
> Using your contact information when emailing persons you do not know
> online is your own fault, and you are the one endangering people by
> doing it. And you try to justify your actions by laying the guilt
> trip on me?

Why are you trying to blame me for your bad acts, Dustin?

> I already apologized for sharing the information, it wasn't a
> responsible thing to do. But I'm not going to take the blame for any
> risk posed to your family, as you *provided* the information to
> anyone you felt the need to email out of the blue. The responsibility
> for keeping yourself and your family safe while online lies with you,
> no one else.

You have no idea who I provided the information to, and what I do with
my information is not your business.

Responsibility isn't contingent that way. You're responsible for your
bad acts, not for what you believe I've done.

Posting my information in alt.sex with an invitation to the world
endangered my family. That has nothing to do with anything I've done.

>>> I noticed you certainly didn't think it was necessary to
>>> tell anyone you provided the information automatically to anyone you
>>> did email because it was a signature... Was it a simple forgetful
>>> moment on your part, or was it intentional?
>>
>> As I said above.
>>
>> I had no reason to believe that you would do me harm, so I left it
>> in.
>
> Bull****. You "know" the type of person I am. Shall I quote you?

See above.

It just didn't occur to me that you would do /that/.

>>>> This is exactly why no one should ever trust you.
>>>
>>> And this is where you would be wrong, as usual. You really don't
>>> know anything about me, you should quit showing your ass by
>>> pretending that you do.
>>
>> I trusted you, Dustin.
>>
>> Trusting you was a mistake. That's the point.
>>
>> You want people to trust you with their valuable data, and you can't
>> be trusted with an address.
>
> Entirely Bull****. You "know" the type of person I am. According to
> you, I cannot be trusted. Your pissed off with me, still, and you
> think I'm trying to con you by admitting my mistakes. Well, your
> wrong, as usual.

Again, Dustin, see above.

> I said it before, You do not know me Rhonda, you don't know the
> "type" of person I am, you don't know anything about me other than
> what I've told you. You screwed up previously anyway, you admit this
> latest barage of posts is an attempt by you with the hopeful? help of
> auk to try and discredit me or something in the antimalware field.
> It's a war you couldn't win on a cold snowy day in hell, but you've
> tried anyway.

You have no idea what these posts are about.

> Don't you get it yet? At the end of the day, it doesn't matter what
> you think of me, either as a person, coder, or what. BugHunter
> continues to prove it's usefulness, and earn me respect; despite your
> posts.

There ya go, then. I hope it doesn't backfire on all those people who
are trusting you--like it backfired on me.

You really don't see the parallel, do you.

I trusted you with my address. They trust you with their data.

You ****ed me.

Don't **** them, okay?

> I've said sorry Rhonda, your the petty one at this point, and don't
> think it doesn't show.

Okay.
--
Rhonda Lea Kirk

If you ever need some proof that time can heal your wounds,
just step inside my heart and walk around these rooms;
where the shadows used to be.... Mary Chapin Carpenter

[4Q]

Dustin Cook wrote:
> "4Q" <paul_zest@hushmail.com> wrote in news:1175635351.878860.9710
> @y66g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:
>
> > http://fourq.host.sk/chars/Dustin_Cook/
>
> What happened to my fansite?
>
> You changed the html page.. The Raid one has also been edited, but you
> ****ed up the background color; it's grey, not quiet black. Were you in a
> rush?

You stepped on it again ;]]

I'm surprized a massive 180 IQ like
yours can't figure out how a server
glitch would make you tap dance all
over your peepee so easily *lol*


4Q
http://fourq.host.sk/chars/Dustin_Co...is_Dick_Again/

[Dustin Cook]

"Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhondalea@gmail.com> wrote in news:evamb7$32d$1
@blackhelicopter.databasix.com:

> "Dustin Cook" <spamfilterineffect.see.sig@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns990C16BC457FHHI2948AJD832@69.28.186.121
>> "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhondalea@gmail.com> wrote in news:ev8j84$dsj$1
>> @blackhelicopter.databasix.com:
>>
>>> "Dustin Cook" <bughunter.dustin@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:1175645505.598841.78820@y66g2000hsf.googlegro ups.com
>>>>> Some people only lie about how nice your haircut looks.
>>>> I wouldn't be one of those.
>>>
>>> I know.
>>>
>>> You lie about lots of things, not just harmless things.
>>
>> Minor correction, I have in the past lied about many many things as
>> Raid. Yes indeedy. this again, isn't exactly anything new. Now, as I
>> said, you just want a fight. Your still angry.
>
> How can anyone know you're not still lying, when your history is that
of
> a liar?

Depends on which history your commenting on. My life as a Vxer, or the
freeware author previous to that, or the freeware author I've resumed
being. As I said, you are misleading persons.

Your painting a very shady view of me, and don't get me wrong; I know I
deserve some of it. I did some very bad things prior to meeting you, I
don't deny that, and I really am sorry for my previous actions.

>>>> And this was necessary because? Yes, I did something in poor taste,
>>>> announcing it in public. You however began to discuss it further
>>>> with kman in public. You didn't exactly respond in an adult
>>>> civilized manner yourself.
>>>
>>> I wrote, "He thinks I'm a slut."
>>
>> Hmm.. What made you assume that anyhow?
>
> I was right, wasn't I?

You were, yes.

> You certainly confirmed it, didn't you?

I believe I did.

>> And why did you feel the need
>> to comment about what you assumed I thought in public? Does it somehow
>> excuse the fact it was also, not in good taste? Tit for tat Rhonda.
>
> Thinking I'm a slut is in bad taste, Dustin.
>
> But it was a comment on your announcement that you wouldn't be writing
> to me anymore, remember?
>
> You'd already told me in email, and I'd responded with "Take care of
> yourself, Dustin."
>
> Then you made your post.

And again, I am very sorry I ever did that in the first place!

>> You claim to know the type of
>> person I am, yet you didn't turn this signature off before emailing
>> me?
>
> I knew just from reading your posts that you'd had a difficult time as
> a kid. It seemed to me, at the time, that you were working on making
> your life better than it was and making yourself a better person than
> you'd been.

We're not discussing what life was like for me as a kid, everyone has bad
days. I have changed my view on many things... What I said and did ten
years ago doesn't apply today.

> Unfortunately, although it appeared to me--and still does, to some
> extent--that you're trying to be a good and decent person--your
> downfall is that when you are pushed, you revert.

This doesn't make any sense, BugHunter has been available for 2 years
now. I've been pushed regarding it, certainly. It has yet to do anything
malicious to anyone.

Contrary to your opinions in fact, BugHunter continues to earn the
respect of others as it works to remove malicious executables and scripts
from a persons computer.

> That's the point, Dustin. Walking the straight and narrow only works if
> you don't fall off each time you meet some resistance. And that's what
> you do. Every single time.

Your assumptions need work.

> And then take it from there.

You have attacked the program yourself, trying to cause doubt concerning
whether or not the program is malicious. You did this ONLY after my
public announcement.

>> How interesting. I made sure not to snip anything, and attacking HHI
>> was not something we covered previously. You did read the response,
>> tho. You know as well as I do that being a member in a group
>> doesn't mean the group always goes with your ideas. Your a supporter
>> of auk, one could say your in that group of people. Does this also
>> mean then that you have control?
>
> Do you know how smarmy this makes you sound?

That's it? That's your response to my entire paragraph? The truth really
isn't so harmful to me, eh? Shrug, sorry.

> You're making a lot of assumptions. But when it comes down to it, even
> if I've been emailing all of usenet, the only person who posted my
> address was you.

To cut to the chase and the point, Two words "Portable Application" Look
it up, it will explain why the news client, and settings are the same.
The LAN situation already explains the IP situation, well, er to anyone
who isn't technologically illiterate as you seem to be.

> You published it in alt.sex with an invitation for people to come to my
> house.

See above.

> Do you not understand the gravity of this?

I apologized for my part in that, I provided the information. *I* did
*not* make the post, nor was I aware of it the moment it occured.

>>> You knew that my daughter and my grandmother live here. You
>>> endangered them.
>>
>> Using your contact information when emailing persons you do not know
>> online is your own fault, and you are the one endangering people by
>> doing it. And you try to justify your actions by laying the guilt
>> trip on me?
>
> Why are you trying to blame me for your bad acts, Dustin?

I think you mistake blame for sharing responsibility.

>> I already apologized for sharing the information, it wasn't a
>> responsible thing to do. But I'm not going to take the blame for any
>> risk posed to your family, as you *provided* the information to
>> anyone you felt the need to email out of the blue. The responsibility
>> for keeping yourself and your family safe while online lies with you,
>> no one else.
>
> You have no idea who I provided the information to, and what I do with
> my information is not your business.

ehh, "The responsibility for keeping yourself and your family safe while
online lies with you, no one else."


> Posting my information in alt.sex with an invitation to the world
> endangered my family. That has nothing to do with anything I've done.

Portable Application.

> It just didn't occur to me that you would do /that/.

*I* didn't.

>> Don't you get it yet? At the end of the day, it doesn't matter what
>> you think of me, either as a person, coder, or what. BugHunter
>> continues to prove it's usefulness, and earn me respect; despite your
>> posts.
>
> There ya go, then. I hope it doesn't backfire on all those people who
> are trusting you--like it backfired on me.

Ahh, the beauty of code, even if it is closed source it can still be
studied by independent persons. It's not a matter of trusting me as much
as it is the fact the program is being watched like a hawk, Rhonda. I
couldn't hide anything malicious in it for any period of time even if I
wanted too.

The antimalware community would not allow me to get away with such
sillyness. You really don't understand this field.

> You really don't see the parallel, do you.

Have aliens visited you recently?

> I trusted you with my address. They trust you with their data.

BugHunter isn't interested in personal data, it's interested in malicious
software. And they don't have to trust me, they can always submit files
BugHunter flags to various sites for 2nd and 3rd opinions.

BugHunter isn't perfect, I'm sure it's got false alarm potential still.


--
Dustin Cook
Author of BugHunter - MalWare Removal Tool - V2.2
web: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk - email:
bughunter.dustin@gmail.com.removethis
Pad: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk/pad.xml

[Dustin Cook]

"4Q" <paul_zest@hushmail.com> wrote in
news:1176036039.559776.221860@w1g2000hsg.googlegro ups.com:

> Dustin Cook wrote:
>> "4Q" <paul_zest@hushmail.com> wrote in news:1175635351.878860.9710
>> @y66g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> > http://fourq.host.sk/chars/Dustin_Cook/
>>
>> What happened to my fansite?
>>
>> You changed the html page.. The Raid one has also been edited, but
>> you ****ed up the background color; it's grey, not quiet black. Were
>> you in a rush?
>
> You stepped on it again ;]]

For reporting a site being down? Your a strange one.

> I'm surprized a massive 180 IQ like
> yours can't figure out how a server
> glitch would make you tap dance all
> over your peepee so easily *lol*

A server glitch provides me with old placeholder html code, and then
later provides the code it was supposed to have provided me in the first
place...Who are you trying to bull****?

Your so damn sloppy lately, you screwed up the html placeholder code for
the background. Dark black was better, it matched your color scheme. Grey
did not. Oh wait, I suppose the server ****ed that up too right? *grin*

Such a bser you are.



--
Dustin Cook
Author of BugHunter - MalWare Removal Tool - V2.2
web: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk - email:
bughunter.dustin@gmail.com.removethis
Pad: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk/pad.xml

[4Q]

Dustin Cook wrote:
> "4Q" <paul_zest@hushmail.com> wrote in
> news:1176036039.559776.221860@w1g2000hsg.googlegro ups.com:
>
> > Dustin Cook wrote:
> >> "4Q" <paul_zest@hushmail.com> wrote in news:1175635351.878860.9710
> >> @y66g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:
> >>
> >> > http://fourq.host.sk/chars/Dustin_Cook/
> >>
> >> What happened to my fansite?
> >>
> >> You changed the html page.. The Raid one has also been edited, but
> >> you ****ed up the background color; it's grey, not quiet black. Were
> >> you in a rush?
> >
> > You stepped on it again ;]]
>
> For reporting a site being down? Your a strange one.
>

Listen to you, worm twisting like a
****er. You *weren't* reporting a site
being down at all, you were asking
what happened (i.e. no clue). Then you
racked your feeble mind to come up with
a conclusion the page had been edited
(clueless again)... Then you made
another clueless remark about the
background color.

For you information, the old 4Q site
background color was grey. The Raid
page was a template from the old site.
The Dustbin KoOk page started out with
a grey background (from the old template
Mr. Clueless)... When I added the
new sections to your cluelessness page
I changed the background to black.
Maybe you need to re-check your archives
before you come into a public space and
dance all over *it* ;]]


> > I'm surprized a massive 180 IQ like
> > yours can't figure out how a server
> > glitch would make you tap dance all
> > over your peepee so easily *lol*
>
> A server glitch provides me with old placeholder html code, and then
> later provides the code it was supposed to have provided me in the first
> place...Who are you trying to bull****?
>

No you clueless clown it's the same
page (the current page), truncated by the
server, not an old page. I haven't
touched any pages. Get a clue, maybe
read a book on how PHP is handled by a
server before you embarrass yourself,
again.


> Your so damn sloppy lately, you screwed up the html placeholder code for
> the background.

See the comment above so that your next
foot tapping dance isn't so sloppy as
this current one.

> Dark black was better,

idiot, black not "Dark" black *haha*


>it matched your color scheme. Grey
> did not.

The grey was the original color tardboi
checkout http://fourq.host.sk
it's grey NOT black or *DARK* black

> Oh wait, I suppose the server ****ed that up too right? *grin*
>

Looks like you have ****ed up Dustbin!
see the following image of what my
big ****ing grin looks like.

http://fourq.host.sk/img/4Q.gif <-- big ****ing grin ;]]


> Such a bser you are.
>

You've been caught with your pants down
again, Dust****.


4Q
http://fourq.host.sk/chars/Dustin_Cook/ <-- check out the "dark"
black ;]]