pcbutts!

[Leythos]

In article <5niq39Ficri3U2@mid.individual.net>, rhondalea@gmail.com
says...
> John is logical. That gets big points from me.
>
> He's also evenhanded, and he's willing to examine a different point of
> view and he doesn't evade direct response to a statement or question.
>
> I enjoy John. I'm not enjoying this.

I've thought he did a great job, could have removed more posts as far as
I'm concerned (like Kurt's)....

If you don't ask a question of a question or one that is leading into
what you really wanted to ask, I'll answer them too.

So, it comes down to someone must have pissed on your TOS and go you
upset about it because you seem to think that violating a TOS has
nothing to do with Ethics, if I understand you correctly. Fact is that
ethics, like honor, would mean that you don't violate the TOS without
violating ethics/honor.

--
Leythos - spam999free@rrohio.com (remove 999 to email me)

Fight exposing kids to porn, complain about sites like PCBUTTS1.COM that
create filth and put it on the web for any kid to see: Just take a look
at some of the FILTH he's created and put on his website:
http://forums.speedguide.net/archive.../t-223485.html all exposed
to children (the link I've include does not directly display his filth).
You can find the same information by googling for 'PCBUTTS1' and
'exposed to kids'.

[Rhonda Lea Kirk]

Dustin Cook wrote:
> "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhondalea@gmail.com> wrote in news:5nfplrFi3v3oU1
> @mid.individual.net:
>
>> 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
>
> He can talk his bull**** because Databasix is a home for trolls and
> spammers. As long as they don't piss Gary off, you meant to say.

Y'know, Dustin, he voted for me. But I have still have an account.

If DataBasix subscribers follow Databasix' rules, Gary's personal
feelings don't come into it.

He doesn't tolerate spam, however, so you are in error when you say that
DataBasix is a home for spammers. Spamming would be a sure-fire way to
lose one's account with DataBasix.

The AUP is here:

https://secure0.netbasix.net/signup/aup/?NEQ1597

The AUP is enforced in accordance with its terms, no matter how much
Gary likes or dislikes someone.

>> 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
>
> What horse****. If someone or a group wanted databasix that bad, they
> could take it.

I disagree with your statement, but it has nothing to do with what I
wrote, so it's irrelevant.

> The real point is, nobody cares enough to bother to
> dedicate the resources it would take anymore. What's the point? adding
> databasix to your killfilter ensures very low troll/spam posts.

You almost had the point, but then you veered. The focus is not
DataBasix, but pcbutts.

--
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

[Rhonda Lea Kirk]

pcbutts1 wrote:
> RLK used to be on DataBasix so he must have pissed him off.

Send an email to <nimue at databasix dot com> and I'll reply to it.
Afterword, though, I'll expect you to retract your statement that I
"used to be on DataBasix."


> "Dustin Cook" <bughunter.dustin@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns99CBCA01CE26CHHI2948AJD832@69.28.186.121.. .
>> "Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhondalea@gmail.com> wrote in news:5nfplrFi3v3oU1
>> @mid.individual.net:
>>
>>> 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
>>
>> He can talk his bull**** because Databasix is a home for trolls and
>> spammers. As long as they don't piss Gary off, you meant to say.
>>
>>> 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
>>
>> What horse****. If someone or a group wanted databasix that bad, they
>> could take it. The real point is, nobody cares enough to bother to
>> dedicate the resources it would take anymore. What's the point?
>> adding databasix to your killfilter ensures very low troll/spam
>> posts. --
>> Dustin Cook, Author of BugHunter - MalWare Removal Tool - v2.2d
>> Email.: bughunter.dustin@gmail.com
>> Web...: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk
>> Pad...: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk/pad.xml
>> PGP...: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk/bughunter.dustin.txt

--
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

[Rhonda Lea Kirk]

Leythos wrote:
> In article <5niq30Ficri3U1@mid.individual.net>, rhondalea@gmail.com
> says...
>> Leythos, that's the issue that ethics addresses. It's the difference
>> between what one can do and what one should do. Just because one has
>> a legal right doesn't mean one has a moral or ethical right.
>
> I agree, legal and ethical are not always in sync with each other.
>
>> The argument you're now making has extremely dire consequences, and
>> it's also contradictory to the some of the arguments you'd like to
>> make against Butts.
>
> Nope, not at all - Butts's pages are hosted on a site he doesn't own,
> it's a business that owns the servers and connection - he leases space
> from them and has to abide by their rules. He also has to abide by the
> law.

And he still has an account, so what he's doing isn't illegal?

Or perhaps it's legal, but it's not especially moral?

> There is no LAW governing what MS can do on their Usenet servers.

The same laws that apply to the business hosting butts' pages apply to
Microsoft, Leythos. That doesn't have anything to do with the argument,
though. I wasn't arguing about Microsoft's legal rights.

Legal and ethical do not equate. Sometimes they coincide, but they are
not cognates. There's plenty that's legal that probably isn't ethical;
moreover, there's no shortage of that which is ethical that is either
contrary to or not addressed at all by the law.

>> Are you one of those situational ethics kind of people?
>
> Nope, I'm strictly B/W, I don't play those games - but it looks like
> you are.

I'm not playing games at all. I'm arguing--lazily--against the use of
specious logic and the lapse into fallacy. Your logic is flawed and
filled with fallacies, and you're attempting to make a special case
against butts that you probably wouldn't want made against everyone else
if you were to think it through.

There's no question that butts is a force for something akin to evil,
but when you paint with such a broad brush, you go too far.

BTW, here's the latest on porn. I found it in my mail this morning:

http://www.slate.com/id/2175730/entry/2175743/

--
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

[Rhonda Lea Kirk]

Leythos wrote:
> In article <5niq39Ficri3U2@mid.individual.net>, rhondalea@gmail.com
> says...
>> John is logical. That gets big points from me.
>>
>> He's also evenhanded, and he's willing to examine a different point
>> of view and he doesn't evade direct response to a statement or
>> question.
>>
>> I enjoy John. I'm not enjoying this.
>
> I've thought he did a great job, could have removed more posts as far
> as I'm concerned (like Kurt's)....
>
> If you don't ask a question of a question or one that is leading into
> what you really wanted to ask, I'll answer them too.
>
> So, it comes down to someone must have pissed on your TOS and go you
> upset about it

Huh? That made no sense. "Pissed on my TOS"? WTF?

> because you seem to think that violating a TOS has
> nothing to do with Ethics, if I understand you correctly. Fact is that
> ethics, like honor, would mean that you don't violate the TOS without
> violating ethics/honor.

Violating a TOS agreement is not necessarily an ethical violation.

If you equate a TOS agreement with law, then you will have to
acknowledge that just as there are immoral laws, there can been immoral
TOS agreements or TOS agreements with immoral (unethical) provisions.

If you persist in blindly defending this, both Jefferson and Franklin
are going to bleed out at your feet, Leythos, along with every other
human being who has ever protested lawful but unethical rules.

--
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

[Dustin Cook]

"pcbutts1" <pcbutts1@leythosthestalker.com> wrote in
news:ff3k39$c2d$1@blackhelicopter.databasix.com:

> I don't know why you keep insisting that you talked to me when you
> never have. You may have talked to somebody but it sure as hell was
> not me. I am not Chris Butts.

How strange. The individual I spoke with took full credit for the hosting
of your site known as pcbutts1.com; and informed me that I was calling into
a so called private number. Interestingly enough, several years? ago,
pcbutts1.com was registered under the name Christopher Butts with his/yours
work address. The most interesting thing I seem to remember however was
your tone of voice on the phone, it was a dead giveaway that I finally was
speaking to the 'man' himself, mr pcbutts. Now, you can try and deny it as
you do everything else, but, I know I talked to you.

Come to think of it, when I called your home number, the person at the
other end said you weren't home at the time, but my concerns regarding that
site would be brought to your attention. That individual too confirmed you
were the sites owner.





--
Dustin Cook, Author of BugHunter - MalWare Removal Tool - v2.2d
Email.: bughunter.dustin@gmail.com
Web...: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk
Pad...: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk/pad.xml
PGP...: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk/bughunter.dustin.txt

[Dustin Cook]

"pcbutts1" <pcbutts1@leythosthestalker.com> wrote in news:ff3jvv$bqc$1
@blackhelicopter.databasix.com:

> RLK used to be on DataBasix so he must have pissed him off.

Umm, Christopher, AFAIK, She still has a valid account and posts from it...
I'm sure she will jump in if I am mistaken.




--
Dustin Cook, Author of BugHunter - MalWare Removal Tool - v2.2d
Email.: bughunter.dustin@gmail.com
Web...: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk
Pad...: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk/pad.xml
PGP...: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk/bughunter.dustin.txt

[Dustin Cook]

"Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhondalea@gmail.com> wrote in news:5nl7kjFit7hnU2
@mid.individual.net:

> pcbutts1 wrote:
>> RLK used to be on DataBasix so he must have pissed him off.
>
> Send an email to <nimue at databasix dot com> and I'll reply to it.
> Afterword, though, I'll expect you to retract your statement that I
> "used to be on DataBasix."

If he does this, it would be the first time in his history.


--
Dustin Cook, Author of BugHunter - MalWare Removal Tool - v2.2d
Email.: bughunter.dustin@gmail.com
Web...: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk
Pad...: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk/pad.xml
PGP...: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk/bughunter.dustin.txt

[Dustin Cook]

"Rhonda Lea Kirk" <rhondalea@gmail.com> wrote in news:5nl7khFit7hnU1
@mid.individual.net:

> He doesn't tolerate spam, however, so you are in error when you say

My bad. Long day. quick typing...

> The AUP is enforced in accordance with its terms, no matter how much
> Gary likes or dislikes someone.

Indeed it is, even if his server is knowingly being used to harrass or
otherwise annoy various usenet groups. Freedom of speech n all.

>>> 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
>>
>> What horse****. If someone or a group wanted databasix that bad, they
>> could take it.
>
> I disagree with your statement, but it has nothing to do with what I
> wrote, so it's irrelevant.

Your lack of network knowledge and DDoSing noted, the point really isn't
about all of that tho. No site is invicible on the internet. If
someone/group/whatever wanted to down something bad enough, it could be
done, regardless of who runs/admins it.

> You almost had the point, but then you veered. The focus is not
> DataBasix, but pcbutts.


Well, to be honest.. From what I've read of the conversation, The focus
seems to be on you trying to get leythos from posting the same old canned
responses everytime pcbutts hits post. *grin*



--
Dustin Cook, Author of BugHunter - MalWare Removal Tool - v2.2d
Email.: bughunter.dustin@gmail.com
Web...: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk
Pad...: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk/pad.xml
PGP...: http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk/bughunter.dustin.txt

[lulu]

On Oct 16, 4:34 pm, Dustin Cook <bughunter.dus...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "pcbutts1" <pcbut...@leythosthestalker.com> wrote in news:ferkmo$85$1
> @blackhelicopter.databasix.com:
>
> > If you think your lame BS attempt at getting me to ID myself is going to
> > work then you are a bigger idiot then I thought.
>
> You have already been identified Christopher, I spoke to you on the phone
> once where you work. You rudely tried to tell me I had called a private
> number. I suppose I scared you a little eh?
>
> And yet, you still play games with people.
>
> --
> Dustin Cook, Author of BugHunter - MalWare Removal Tool - v2.2d
> Email.: bughunter.dus...@gmail.com
> Web...:http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk
> Pad...:http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk/pad.xml
> PGP...:http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk/bughunter.dustin.txt

Oh he mentioned that in court, that he was getting calls. he tried to
blame me