From: phelix@vallnet.com
To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM
Message Hash: 2fc4722441353ef1677454cbda5d3353b7af3846b8248876596533f42012ddb2
Message ID: <3438505d.13845235@128.2.84.191>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1997-10-03 11:46:55 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 19:46:55 +0800
From: phelix@vallnet.com
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 19:46:55 +0800
To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM
Subject: Re: Stronghold
Message-ID: <3438505d.13845235@128.2.84.191>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
>Nope. Like I said, I'm not selling Stronghold or any competing product, I
>don't lose anything when someone foolishly buys it, so why should I present
>any evidence? I (and several other people on this mailing list) were threatened
>by C2Net's lawyers; so to avoid unpleasant disputes, I told them I won't be
>publishing whatever I might know about their product.
>
So, why don't you (and several other people on this mailing list) use the
ananymous remailers to present your evidence. Others have wondered why
people would use remailers. Here's a prime example. Use the remailer (if
you have anything to say).
Return to October 1997
Return to “phelix@vallnet.com”
1997-10-03 (Fri, 3 Oct 1997 19:46:55 +0800) - Re: Stronghold - phelix@vallnet.com