pcbutts!

[pcbutts1]

C'mon now tell the truth. I had a few posts cancelled strictly because I
encouraged the posting of HJT logs. The was not and there still are no rules
against posting of logs in any MS group. I never violated anything. You and
JE were gung ho and biased in your removal of my posts and it cost him his
position as admin and probably your job I don't know, I don't know you.
Removing posts is way different from being banned. You didn't even bother to
check the headers. Get your facts straight. That case went way beyond you
and JE. If you want to blame somebody for that then blame the big headed
MVP's who thought they owned the MS newsgroups. That's why they don't like
me because they could not stop me.


--

Newsgroup Trolls. Read about mine here http://www.pcbutts1.com/downloads
The list grows. Leythos the stalker http://www.leythosthestalker.com, David
H. Lipman, Max M Wachtell III aka What's in a Name?, Fitz,
Rhonda Lea Kirk, Meat Plow, F Kwatu F, George Orwell



<jaydeflix@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1192381836.133724.274330@e34g2000pro.googlegr oups.com...
> On Oct 14, 5:30 am, "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhonda...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Leythos wrote:
>> > In article <fercbj$bq...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com>,pcbut ts1
>> > @leythosthestalker.com says...
>> >> You can't find it becausePcbutts1is not my real name. I use my
>> >> real name in the MS groups complete with my MVP sig.
>>
>> > And yet all of your posts asPCBUTTS1were banned because of your
>> > unethical actions.
>>
>> IIRC, he was banned because he refused to comply with the Microsoft TOS,
>> not because of "unethical actions." The only server from which his posts
>> are filtered are the Microsoft server. If he posts using a different
>> NNTP provider (as I do), those posts will be available on all usenet
>> servers but the Microsoft server.
>
> You are correct. I never cared about his ethics. I had complaints
> about the content of his posts, I investigated the situation, I
> explained them to him, he refused to follow the rules, and I blocked
> him *solely* from Microsoft's servers. I wanted to make sure that
> when we canceled a message, we did not ship that cancel message off to
> USENET as a whole. We (well, Microsoft.. I'm putting my MS hat back
> on) don't own USENET. We own our servers, and we had full right to
> remove what we wanted from our own servers. I'm not doing it anymore,
> my Newsgroup Admin role ended back in 2005 and I am not currently
> employed by Microsoft.
>
>> Microsoft has a dubious history when it comes to banning and censorship,
>> so if I were you, I would not use butts' banning from its server as a
>> data point in support of the case against him.
>
> You are more than welcome to question me with regards to anything
> regarding the newsgroup servers between, roughly, 2003 and 2005. That
> was my job and I took pride in ensuring that *only* ToS violators and
> true USENET spammers were banned.
>
>> I reported the Sharon Franks ID the first time I saw it (June 2006, when
>> he posted one of his infamous links), but nothing was done then and
>> nothing has been done since.
>
> That was after my time, so I can't speak about that.
>
> You can feel free to believe I'm not really the John Eddy who was in
> charge of the servers.
> You can feel free to believe what PCButts1 has said about his
> interactions with me, none of which have been true.
>
> ....
> And, since it is now stuck in my head, let me get it stuck in yours
> too....
> You can dance if you want to.
> You can leave your friends behind....
>
> -jd
>

[Rhonda Lea Kirk]

jaydeflix@gmail.com wrote:
> On Oct 14, 5:30 am, "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhonda...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Leythos wrote:
>>> In article <fercbj$bq...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com>,pcbut ts1
>>> @leythosthestalker.com says...
>>>> You can't find it becausePcbutts1is not my real name. I use my
>>>> real name in the MS groups complete with my MVP sig.
>>
>>> And yet all of your posts asPCBUTTS1were banned because of your
>>> unethical actions.
>>
>> IIRC, he was banned because he refused to comply with the Microsoft
>> TOS, not because of "unethical actions." The only server from which
>> his posts are filtered are the Microsoft server. If he posts using a
>> different NNTP provider (as I do), those posts will be available on
>> all usenet servers but the Microsoft server.
>
> You are correct. I never cared about his ethics. I had complaints
> about the content of his posts, I investigated the situation, I
> explained them to him, he refused to follow the rules, and I blocked
> him *solely* from Microsoft's servers. I wanted to make sure that
> when we canceled a message, we did not ship that cancel message off to
> USENET as a whole. We (well, Microsoft.. I'm putting my MS hat back
> on) don't own USENET. We own our servers, and we had full right to
> remove what we wanted from our own servers. I'm not doing it anymore,
> my Newsgroup Admin role ended back in 2005 and I am not currently
> employed by Microsoft.
>
>> Microsoft has a dubious history when it comes to banning and
>> censorship, so if I were you, I would not use butts' banning from
>> its server as a data point in support of the case against him.
>
> You are more than welcome to question me with regards to anything
> regarding the newsgroup servers between, roughly, 2003 and 2005. That
> was my job and I took pride in ensuring that *only* ToS violators and
> true USENET spammers were banned.

To the best of my knowledge, there is no evidence to the contrary.
Moreover, it was not my intention to take a swipe at you. In addition to
the memory detailed above, I have another recollection that you were a
hands-on and responsive administrator in maintaining the Microsoft
groups.

I do, however, stand by the assertion that being banned by a newsgroup
administrator is not sufficient evidence to establish the state of one's
ethical compass. (Not that I think Butts' has an ethical compass--given
some of his antics, it's a pretty obvious he does not.)

>> I reported the Sharon Franks ID the first time I saw it (June 2006,
>> when he posted one of his infamous links), but nothing was done then
>> and nothing has been done since.
>
> That was after my time, so I can't speak about that.

"After your time" was the "dubious history" to which I was specifically
referring above. If it will make you more comfortable, I'll say "dubious
recent history."

> You can feel free to believe I'm not really the John Eddy who was in
> charge of the servers.

I well know how irritating it can be to be told one is not who or what
one is, so I'll take your word that you are who you say you are.

> You can feel free to believe what PCButts1 has said about his
> interactions with me, none of which have been true.

You can rest assured that if Butts says it, I will assume it's untrue
until I'm provided with incontrovertible evidence to the contrary.

> ....
> And, since it is now stuck in my head, let me get it stuck in yours
> too....
> You can dance if you want to.
> You can leave your friends behind....
>
> -jd

Foolproof get rich quick scheme: Invent a firewall to block the dreaded
earworm trojan.

--
Rhonda Lea Kirk

AUK Galactic Killfile, 15 May 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.u...766545e259d53c
Winner, Golden Killfile, April 2007
Co-Office Holder, Ministry of Circle Jerks, April and May 2007
Member, Human O-Ring Society, March 2003
NCB#16 BJDS#2 INAC#77 PSLCK#1 SBG#1 A-29204

Some are tempted to think of life in cyberspace as insignificant,
as escape or meaningless diversion. It is not. Our experiences there
are serious play. We belittle them at our risk. Sherry Turkle

[jaydeflix@gmail.com]

On Oct 14, 11:29 am, "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhonda...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> You can't find it becausePcbutts1is not my real name. I use my
> >>>> real name in the MS groups complete with my MVP sig.
>
> >>> And yet all of your posts asPCBUTTS1were banned because of your
> >>> unethical actions.
>
> >> IIRC, he was banned because he refused to comply with the Microsoft
> >> TOS, not because of "unethical actions." The only server from which
> >> his posts are filtered are the Microsoft server. If he posts using a
> >> different NNTP provider (as I do), those posts will be available on
> >> all usenet servers but the Microsoft server.
>
> > You are correct. I never cared about his ethics. I had complaints
> > about the content of his posts, I investigated the situation, I
> > explained them to him, he refused to follow the rules, and I blocked
> > him *solely* from Microsoft's servers. I wanted to make sure that
> > when we canceled a message, we did not ship that cancel message off to
> > USENET as a whole. We (well, Microsoft.. I'm putting my MS hat back
> > on) don't own USENET. We own our servers, and we had full right to
> > remove what we wanted from our own servers. I'm not doing it anymore,
> > my Newsgroup Admin role ended back in 2005 and I am not currently
> > employed by Microsoft.
>
> >> Microsoft has a dubious history when it comes to banning and
> >> censorship, so if I were you, I would not use butts' banning from
> >> its server as a data point in support of the case against him.
>
> > You are more than welcome to question me with regards to anything
> > regarding the newsgroup servers between, roughly, 2003 and 2005. That
> > was my job and I took pride in ensuring that *only* ToS violators and
> > true USENET spammers were banned.
>
> To the best of my knowledge, there is no evidence to the contrary.
> Moreover, it was not my intention to take a swipe at you. In addition to
> the memory detailed above, I have another recollection that you were a
> hands-on and responsive administrator in maintaining the Microsoft
> groups.

I tried to be. And I didn't feel swiped at personally. It's a
generic swipe at a company without a face, something I have no
problems with people doing. I figured if I could field any questions
now that I'm no longer working there, I'd do it. =)

> I do, however, stand by the assertion that being banned by a newsgroup
> administrator is not sufficient evidence to establish the state of one's
> ethical compass. (Not that I think Butts' has an ethical compass--given
> some of his antics, it's a pretty obvious he does not.)

Hmmmm. To establish? No. To provide a bit of evidence, yes.

It's like picking an MVP. A large number of posts is not sufficient
evidence to establish that someone should be an MVP. But it's a
clue. It should be enough to make someone think 'Why is this? Why
should that have happened? Perhaps I should investigate this more...'

> >> I reported the Sharon Franks ID the first time I saw it (June 2006,
> >> when he posted one of his infamous links), but nothing was done then
> >> and nothing has been done since.
>
> > That was after my time, so I can't speak about that.
>
> "After your time" was the "dubious history" to which I was specifically
> referring above. If it will make you more comfortable, I'll say "dubious
> recent history."

I've been sad about what's become of the server. Some of the
newsgroups that have been rubber stamped for creation have left me
ill.

> > You can feel free to believe I'm not really the John Eddy who was in
> > charge of the servers.
>
> I well know how irritating it can be to be told one is not who or what
> one is, so I'll take your word that you are who you say you are.

I could be a dog =)

I hear collies have exceptional typing skills.

> > You can feel free to believe whatPCButts1has said about his
> > interactions with me, none of which have been true.
>
> You can rest assured that if Butts says it, I will assume it's untrue
> until I'm provided with incontrovertible evidence to the contrary.

Unfortunately, he's managed to besmirch my name by implying that he
got me fired. And since I don't avoid having my name out there (if I
could remember how to get Google Groups to put my name on the From
line, I'd go fix it), but he does, it's sort of a one way street.
C'est la vie. I stand by everything I've ever done.

> > ....
> > And, since it is now stuck in my head, let me get it stuck in yours
> > too....
> > You can dance if you want to.
> > You can leave your friends behind....
>
> Foolproof get rich quick scheme: Invent a firewall to block the dreaded
> earworm trojan.

Frontal Lobotomy. =)

[jaydeflix@gmail.com]

On Oct 14, 10:39 am, "pcbutts1" <pcbut...@leythosthestalker.com>
wrote:
> >> >> You can't find it becausePcbutts1is not my real name. I use my
> >> >> real name in the MS groups complete with my MVP sig.
>
> >> > And yet all of your posts asPCBUTTS1were banned because of your
> >> > unethical actions.
>
> >> IIRC, he was banned because he refused to comply with the Microsoft TOS,
> >> not because of "unethical actions." The only server from which his posts
> >> are filtered are the Microsoft server. If he posts using a different
> >> NNTP provider (as I do), those posts will be available on all usenet
> >> servers but the Microsoft server.
>
> > You are correct. I never cared about his ethics. I had complaints
> > about the content of his posts, I investigated the situation, I
> > explained them to him, he refused to follow the rules, and I blocked
> > him *solely* from Microsoft's servers. I wanted to make sure that
> > when we canceled a message, we did not ship that cancel message off to
> > USENET as a whole. We (well, Microsoft.. I'm putting my MS hat back
> > on) don't own USENET. We own our servers, and we had full right to
> > remove what we wanted from our own servers. I'm not doing it anymore,
> > my Newsgroup Admin role ended back in 2005 and I am not currently
> > employed by Microsoft.
>
> >> Microsoft has a dubious history when it comes to banning and censorship,
> >> so if I were you, I would not use butts' banning from its server as a
> >> data point in support of the case against him.
>
> > You are more than welcome to question me with regards to anything
> > regarding the newsgroup servers between, roughly, 2003 and 2005. That
> > was my job and I took pride in ensuring that *only* ToS violators and
> > true USENET spammers were banned.
>
> >> I reported the Sharon Franks ID the first time I saw it (June 2006, when
> >> he posted one of his infamous links), but nothing was done then and
> >> nothing has been done since.
>
> > That was after my time, so I can't speak about that.
>
> > You can feel free to believe I'm not really the John Eddy who was in
> > charge of the servers.
> > You can feel free to believe whatPCButts1has said about his
> > interactions with me, none of which have been true.
>
> > ....
> > And, since it is now stuck in my head, let me get it stuck in yours
> > too....
> > You can dance if you want to.
> > You can leave your friends behind....
>
> C'mon now tell the truth. I had a few posts cancelled strictly because I
> encouraged the posting of HJT logs.

Sure, I'll tell the truth:
You had more than a few posts canceled and they were never canceled
because you encouraged the posting of HJT logs.

> The was not and there still are no rules
> against posting of logs in any MS group.

You are correct. And, like I said, that's not why your posts were
ever removed.

> I never violated anything.

> You and
> JE were gung ho and biased in your removal of my posts and it cost him his
> position as admin and probably your job I don't know, I don't know you.

I am John Eddy. You didn't cost me my job. Removing your posts
didn't cost me my job. You had nothing to do with why I am not the
Newsgroups Admin anymore. If you want to believe you were, feel free,
but, frankly, you had nothing to do with it. My team was outsourced.
The *entire* team.

> Removing posts is way different from being banned. You didn't even bother to
> check the headers. Get your facts straight.

Check the headers of what? My facts are extremely straight, thank you
very much.

> That case went way beyond you
> and JE. If you want to blame somebody for that then blame the big headed
> MVP's who thought they owned the MS newsgroups.

Blame someone for what? And considering you're taking credit for
having me removed as Newsgroups Administrator, it sounds like *you*
are the one who thinks he owns the MS Newsgroups.

> That's why they don't like
> me because they could not stop me.
>

No, sir, they don't like you because you're a total ass.

[pcbutts1]

Does the name PA Bear sound familiar? he pissed me off, his actions was the
cost of your job. He tried to use his status as an MVP to ruin me, and my
job and in the long run all he did was costs others theirs and really pissed
off Chris Butts. I saw all his emails. This goes way beyond you. He thought
I was some smuck loser with too much time on my hands. You can rest assured
he won't mess with me again or NASA.

--

Newsgroup Trolls. Read about mine here http://www.pcbutts1.com/downloads
The list grows. Leythos the stalker http://www.leythosthestalker.com, David
H. Lipman, Max M Wachtell III aka What's in a Name?, Fitz,
Rhonda Lea Kirk, Meat Plow, F Kwatu F, George Orwell



<jaydeflix@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1192393743.162757.164660@z24g2000prh.googlegr oups.com...
> On Oct 14, 10:39 am, "pcbutts1" <pcbut...@leythosthestalker.com>
> wrote:
>> >> >> You can't find it becausePcbutts1is not my real name. I use my
>> >> >> real name in the MS groups complete with my MVP sig.
>>
>> >> > And yet all of your posts asPCBUTTS1were banned because of your
>> >> > unethical actions.
>>
>> >> IIRC, he was banned because he refused to comply with the Microsoft
>> >> TOS,
>> >> not because of "unethical actions." The only server from which his
>> >> posts
>> >> are filtered are the Microsoft server. If he posts using a different
>> >> NNTP provider (as I do), those posts will be available on all usenet
>> >> servers but the Microsoft server.
>>
>> > You are correct. I never cared about his ethics. I had complaints
>> > about the content of his posts, I investigated the situation, I
>> > explained them to him, he refused to follow the rules, and I blocked
>> > him *solely* from Microsoft's servers. I wanted to make sure that
>> > when we canceled a message, we did not ship that cancel message off to
>> > USENET as a whole. We (well, Microsoft.. I'm putting my MS hat back
>> > on) don't own USENET. We own our servers, and we had full right to
>> > remove what we wanted from our own servers. I'm not doing it anymore,
>> > my Newsgroup Admin role ended back in 2005 and I am not currently
>> > employed by Microsoft.
>>
>> >> Microsoft has a dubious history when it comes to banning and
>> >> censorship,
>> >> so if I were you, I would not use butts' banning from its server as a
>> >> data point in support of the case against him.
>>
>> > You are more than welcome to question me with regards to anything
>> > regarding the newsgroup servers between, roughly, 2003 and 2005. That
>> > was my job and I took pride in ensuring that *only* ToS violators and
>> > true USENET spammers were banned.
>>
>> >> I reported the Sharon Franks ID the first time I saw it (June 2006,
>> >> when
>> >> he posted one of his infamous links), but nothing was done then and
>> >> nothing has been done since.
>>
>> > That was after my time, so I can't speak about that.
>>
>> > You can feel free to believe I'm not really the John Eddy who was in
>> > charge of the servers.
>> > You can feel free to believe whatPCButts1has said about his
>> > interactions with me, none of which have been true.
>>
>> > ....
>> > And, since it is now stuck in my head, let me get it stuck in yours
>> > too....
>> > You can dance if you want to.
>> > You can leave your friends behind....
>>
>> C'mon now tell the truth. I had a few posts cancelled strictly because I
>> encouraged the posting of HJT logs.
>
> Sure, I'll tell the truth:
> You had more than a few posts canceled and they were never canceled
> because you encouraged the posting of HJT logs.
>
>> The was not and there still are no rules
>> against posting of logs in any MS group.
>
> You are correct. And, like I said, that's not why your posts were
> ever removed.
>
>> I never violated anything.
>
>> You and
>> JE were gung ho and biased in your removal of my posts and it cost him
>> his
>> position as admin and probably your job I don't know, I don't know you.
>
> I am John Eddy. You didn't cost me my job. Removing your posts
> didn't cost me my job. You had nothing to do with why I am not the
> Newsgroups Admin anymore. If you want to believe you were, feel free,
> but, frankly, you had nothing to do with it. My team was outsourced.
> The *entire* team.
>
>> Removing posts is way different from being banned. You didn't even bother
>> to
>> check the headers. Get your facts straight.
>
> Check the headers of what? My facts are extremely straight, thank you
> very much.
>
>> That case went way beyond you
>> and JE. If you want to blame somebody for that then blame the big headed
>> MVP's who thought they owned the MS newsgroups.
>
> Blame someone for what? And considering you're taking credit for
> having me removed as Newsgroups Administrator, it sounds like *you*
> are the one who thinks he owns the MS Newsgroups.
>
>> That's why they don't like
>> me because they could not stop me.
>>
>
> No, sir, they don't like you because you're a total ass.
>

[kurt wismer]

pcbutts1 wrote:
> So far you are losing

so far you are still a complete tool...

--
"it's not the right time to be sober
now the idiots have taken over
spreading like a social cancer,
is there an answer?"

[jaydeflix@gmail.com]

On Oct 14, 2:04 pm, "pcbutts1" <pcbut...@leythosthestalker.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> You can't find it becausePcbutts1is not my real name. I use my
> >> >> >> real name in the MS groups complete with my MVP sig.
>
> >> >> > And yet all of your posts asPCBUTTS1were banned because of your
> >> >> > unethical actions.
>
> >> >> IIRC, he was banned because he refused to comply with the Microsoft
> >> >> TOS,
> >> >> not because of "unethical actions." The only server from which his
> >> >> posts
> >> >> are filtered are the Microsoft server. If he posts using a different
> >> >> NNTP provider (as I do), those posts will be available on all usenet
> >> >> servers but the Microsoft server.
>
> >> > You are correct. I never cared about his ethics. I had complaints
> >> > about the content of his posts, I investigated the situation, I
> >> > explained them to him, he refused to follow the rules, and I blocked
> >> > him *solely* from Microsoft's servers. I wanted to make sure that
> >> > when we canceled a message, we did not ship that cancel message off to
> >> > USENET as a whole. We (well, Microsoft.. I'm putting my MS hat back
> >> > on) don't own USENET. We own our servers, and we had full right to
> >> > remove what we wanted from our own servers. I'm not doing it anymore,
> >> > my Newsgroup Admin role ended back in 2005 and I am not currently
> >> > employed by Microsoft.
>
> >> >> Microsoft has a dubious history when it comes to banning and
> >> >> censorship,
> >> >> so if I were you, I would not use butts' banning from its server as a
> >> >> data point in support of the case against him.
>
> >> > You are more than welcome to question me with regards to anything
> >> > regarding the newsgroup servers between, roughly, 2003 and 2005. That
> >> > was my job and I took pride in ensuring that *only* ToS violators and
> >> > true USENET spammers were banned.
>
> >> >> I reported the Sharon Franks ID the first time I saw it (June 2006,
> >> >> when
> >> >> he posted one of his infamous links), but nothing was done then and
> >> >> nothing has been done since.
>
> >> > That was after my time, so I can't speak about that.
>
> >> > You can feel free to believe I'm not really the John Eddy who was in
> >> > charge of the servers.
> >> > You can feel free to believe whatPCButts1has said about his
> >> > interactions with me, none of which have been true.
>
> >> > ....
> >> > And, since it is now stuck in my head, let me get it stuck in yours
> >> > too....
> >> > You can dance if you want to.
> >> > You can leave your friends behind....
>
> >> C'mon now tell the truth. I had a few posts cancelled strictly because I
> >> encouraged the posting of HJT logs.
>
> > Sure, I'll tell the truth:
> > You had more than a few posts canceled and they were never canceled
> > because you encouraged the posting of HJT logs.
>
> >> The was not and there still are no rules
> >> against posting of logs in any MS group.
>
> > You are correct. And, like I said, that's not why your posts were
> > ever removed.
>
> >> I never violated anything.
>
> >> You and
> >> JE were gung ho and biased in your removal of my posts and it cost him
> >> his
> >> position as admin and probably your job I don't know, I don't know you.
>
> > I am John Eddy. You didn't cost me my job. Removing your posts
> > didn't cost me my job. You had nothing to do with why I am not the
> > Newsgroups Admin anymore. If you want to believe you were, feel free,
> > but, frankly, you had nothing to do with it. My team was outsourced.
> > The *entire* team.
>
> >> Removing posts is way different from being banned. You didn't even bother
> >> to
> >> check the headers. Get your facts straight.
>
> > Check the headers of what? My facts are extremely straight, thank you
> > very much.
>
> >> That case went way beyond you
> >> and JE. If you want to blame somebody for that then blame the big headed
> >> MVP's who thought they owned the MS newsgroups.
>
> > Blame someone for what? And considering you're taking credit for
> > having me removed as Newsgroups Administrator, it sounds like *you*
> > are the one who thinks he owns the MS Newsgroups.
>
> >> That's why they don't like
> >> me because they could not stop me.
>
> > No, sir, they don't like you because you're a total ass.
>
> Does the name PA Bear sound familiar?

Yes, before I was the Newsgroups Admin, I was his MVP Lead.

> he pissed me off, his actions was the
> cost of your job.

Uhhh, no. The cost of my job was outsourcing to contractors. Or do
you somehow not understand that? You want to turn me against someone,
provide verifiable evidence. Believe me, I will perform my due
diligence to verify any and all data you provide, so be sure to
include header information of any and all emails. My email should be
on this post, feel free to use it.

Otherwise, sorry, but my entire team was outsourced. All of it. All
the work me and my co-workers were doing is now being done (or
ignored) by generic contractors who are supposed to handle all the
unique jobs we were doing previously.

> He tried to use his status as an MVP to ruin me, and my
> job and in the long run all he did was costs others theirs and really pissed
> off Chris Butts. I saw all his emails.

Well, good for you. You'll excuse me if I don't believe you just
because you say so. After all, you've openly said it was *YOU* who
cost me my job and now you're changing the story.

> This goes way beyond you.

You're right. It goes to the bean counters who decided a full-time
dedicated newsgroups administrator was a waste of company resources.

> He thought
> I was some smuck loser with too much time on my hands.

I bet he spelled it correctly tho.

> You can rest assured
> he won't mess with me again or NASA.

Could care less. Really. I'm in this to correct your statements
about *me*.

[kurt wismer]

Heather wrote:
> "kurt wismer" <kurtw@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:ferh01$s4h$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>> pcbutts1 wrote:
>>> http://www.blogger.com/profile/16857468123137696406
>>>
>> from the site:
>> "I am part of the antivirus and spyware community. I have been for 6
>> years. "
>>
>> more accurately, you've been a complete tool for 6 years...
>>
> Perhaps the word should be 'FOOL' for all of his life. A tad more
> accurate, I would think.

oh, i don't know... i think stool is more accurate than both of them,
but i settle for calling *him* a tool...

--
"it's not the right time to be sober
now the idiots have taken over
spreading like a social cancer,
is there an answer?"

[Rhonda Lea Kirk]

jaydeflix@gmail.com wrote:
> On Oct 14, 11:29 am, "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhonda...@gmail.com> wrote:

<snipped>

>> To the best of my knowledge, there is no evidence to the contrary.
>> Moreover, it was not my intention to take a swipe at you. In
>> addition to the memory detailed above, I have another recollection
>> that you were a hands-on and responsive administrator in maintaining
>> the Microsoft groups.
>
> I tried to be. And I didn't feel swiped at personally. It's a
> generic swipe at a company without a face, something I have no
> problems with people doing. I figured if I could field any questions
> now that I'm no longer working there, I'd do it. =)

If there had been any doubt in my mind that you're John Eddy, there
would be none now.

As for taking a swipe at a company without a face, I guess that's the
same as saying I took a swipe at corporate policy. I'd like to add,
however, that I do think it is sometimes the case that individuals go
above and beyond (in a bad way), and I'm also taking a swipe at them,
whoever they might be. It just so happens that they're not you (as
evidenced by the timeline).

>> I do, however, stand by the assertion that being banned by a
>> newsgroup administrator is not sufficient evidence to establish the
>> state of one's ethical compass. (Not that I think Butts' has an
>> ethical compass--given some of his antics, it's a pretty obvious he
>> does not.)
>
> Hmmmm. To establish? No. To provide a bit of evidence, yes.

Below is a link that is NSFW (or anywhere else, for that matter). I post
it so you will have no doubt that I, personally, have all the evidence
about Butts' character that I will ever need.

http://www.pcbutts1.com/rlk/rlk.htm

My point, however, is that people get banned for a lot of different
reasons, and while it may be a data point, it's not a conclusion. For
example, I was briefly banned from the MS server over the WGA debacle
(along with several others), until someone realized that disagreement
with policy is not TOS abuse (by the terms of the TOS). I have also been
banned in other places for similar reasons. In addition, I've had
several posts to the MS server selectively censored because of naughty
word use or because I quoted a post (from a non-MS server) that
contained a naughty word.

> It's like picking an MVP. A large number of posts is not sufficient
> evidence to establish that someone should be an MVP. But it's a
> clue. It should be enough to make someone think 'Why is this? Why
> should that have happened? Perhaps I should investigate this more...'

I agree with the point you're trying to make, but I have a not-topical
issue with the example you've used to make it, so I'm not going to
address it further. (I will say that if all MVPs were Malke, it would be
a happy world.)

<snipped>

>> "After your time" was the "dubious history" to which I was
>> specifically referring above. If it will make you more comfortable,
>> I'll say "dubious recent history."
>
> I've been sad about what's become of the server. Some of the
> newsgroups that have been rubber stamped for creation have left me
> ill.

I'm sorry. But that's pretty much the story all over usenet, so most of
us who have been around for more than a few years are ill right along
with you.

<snipped>

>> I well know how irritating it can be to be told one is not who or
>> what one is, so I'll take your word that you are who you say you are.
>
> I could be a dog =)
>
> I hear collies have exceptional typing skills.

My cat will give you a run for your money.

<snipped>

>> You can rest assured that if Butts says it, I will assume it's untrue
>> until I'm provided with incontrovertible evidence to the contrary.
>
> Unfortunately, he's managed to besmirch my name by implying that he
> got me fired. And since I don't avoid having my name out there (if I
> could remember how to get Google Groups to put my name on the From
> line, I'd go fix it), but he does, it's sort of a one way street.
> C'est la vie. I stand by everything I've ever done.

No one who is not a rank newbie believes anything that Butts says.
(That's one of the reasons I wish Leythos would stop replying to him,
because it gives him unwarranted attention. The sig is a perfectly
adequate way to get the message across without addressing Butts
directly.)

As for Google, go here:

http://groups.google.com/groups/mysubs?hl=en

>>> ....
>>> And, since it is now stuck in my head, let me get it stuck in yours
>>> too....
>>> You can dance if you want to.
>>> You can leave your friends behind....
>>
>> Foolproof get rich quick scheme: Invent a firewall to block the
>> dreaded earworm trojan.
>
> Frontal Lobotomy. =)

<takes out two virtual glasses, pours generous shot into each> Bottle in
front of me. Sláinte!

--
Rhonda Lea Kirk

AUK Galactic Killfile, 15 May 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.u...766545e259d53c
Winner, Golden Killfile, April 2007
Co-Office Holder, Ministry of Circle Jerks, April and May 2007
Member, Human O-Ring Society, March 2003
NCB#16 BJDS#2 INAC#77 PSLCK#1 SBG#1 A-29204

They must find it difficult...
Those who have taken authority as the truth,
rather than truth as the authority. Gerald Massey

[Rhonda Lea Kirk]

pcbutts1 wrote:
> Does the name PA Bear sound familiar? he pissed me off, his actions
> was the cost of your job. He tried to use his status as an MVP to
> ruin me, and my job and in the long run all he did was costs others
> theirs and really pissed off Chris Butts. I saw all his emails. This
> goes way beyond you. He thought I was some smuck loser with too much
> time on my hands. You can rest assured he won't mess with me again or
> NASA.

I do not want what I am about to write to be misconstrued, so I am going
to separate out the three issues as carefully as I can.

The first issue is that I firmly believe anyone has the *right* to say
any goddammed annoying, obnoxious, offensive thing that person feels
like saying, regardless of how goddammed annoying, obnoxious and
offensive that person and his words might happen to be. Even a
sociopath--that means you, Chris--is entitled to a voice.

If you take away the right of anyone to speak, you have endangered the
right of everyone to speak. It's that simple.

For most of my adult life, David Goldberger has been my hero, because he
understood and honored this concept even when it was personally
abhorrent to him. To me, the owner of DataBasix is the David Goldberger
of usenet, because he too understands and honors the same ideal,
regardless of his personal feelings. I subscribe to DataBasix, and so
long as it is in business, I will continue to do so, for that reason
alone.

The second issue is that just because I believe with my whole heart what
I wrote above, I also believe that there are words that should not be
spoken and that individuals have the obligation to police themselves in
this regard (as opposed to policing each other). You have a corner on
the market of such words, Chris, and I find you reprehensible.

With that said, the third and final issue, which is also the point, is
this: it's not for nothin' that you subscribe to DataBasix, Chris. As
long as you do not violate the DataBasix AUP, you know you can do
whatever the **** you feel like, and you are teflon, because Gary's
commitment to freedom of speech on usenet is unequivocal. The only
reason you're able to get away with the **** you spew is that your
provider remains true to an ideal that other providers have allowed to
erode in the name of convenience.

In other words, you can only talk your bull**** because you're protected
from the consequences (up to the point you violate the AUP, and then
you're protected from nothing), but that protection is not an
endorsement of you or your words, it's just the same generic protection
that anyone with a DataBasix account would receive. Your claims of dire
consequences to those who mess with you is nothing but lame bull****,
except to the extent that anyone who messes with you in a way that
constitutes abuse of the net will pay the price for it, because Gary
doesn't tolerate that any more than he tolerates a violation of his AUP.

--
Rhonda Lea Kirk

AUK Galactic Killfile, 15 May 2007
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.u...766545e259d53c
Winner, Golden Killfile, April 2007
Co-Office Holder, Ministry of Circle Jerks, April and May 2007
Member, Human O-Ring Society, March 2003
NCB#16 BJDS#2 INAC#77 PSLCK#1 SBG#1 A-29204

Some are tempted to think of life in cyberspace as insignificant,
as escape or meaningless diversion. It is not. Our experiences there
are serious play. We belittle them at our risk. Sherry Turkle