From: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 1997 06:07:33 +0800
To: mail2news@basement.replay.com
Subject: Re: Burnore & Databasix
Message-ID: <199712102135.WAA26526@basement.replay.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



gburnore@netcom.com (Gary L. Burnore) wrote:
 
> :> >We'd expect no less.  I do wonder how long it will take before those who
> :> >believe remailers are a good thing start to realise this asshole has
> :> >it in for them.  Everything it posts could be used by the anti-remailer
> :> >front as a reason to shut them all down.
> :  
> :Much of this "anti-remailer front" works for DataBasix.
>  
> Another lie from the anonymous asshole.  Prove it. Of course, you can't.

You're denying that you, Belinda Bryan, and William McClatchie are staff members
of DataBasix?  Are you denying that McClatchie used unproven allegations of 
"forgery" as his excuse to campaign to get the upstream providers of Jeff 
Burchell's "Mailmasher" server to disconnect him?  Do you remember McClatchie's
post which said:

-> > I encourage anyone who is being forged due to the deliberate negligence
-> > on toxic's part to write hotwired and MCI asking that mailmasher be shut
-> > down until it can longer be used to commit forgeries.

Did you catch that -- "asking that mailmasher be shut down"?  Have your forgotten 
the time McClatchie was asked this question:

->  >>If that was done, then a complaint to the operator would have gotten
->  >>that particular pseudonym making the postings locked out.  But your
->  >>agenda seemed to be to get the entire server shut down.  Why?

To which he replied:

->  > Becuase the shithead running it pissed me off with his responce that "He
->  > had better things to do" and "Maybe i should learn mmail filtering" to
->  > avoid the abuse.

And then there's Jeff's account of what followed.  Do you remember when you 
asked him:

-> > : So are you suggesting that McClatchie did that all by himself?  Just
-> > : curious, I don't know the details.

And his response:

-> > Nope.  McClatchie posted a spammed message that was offering Pirated
-> > CD-ROMS for sale.  He just happened to send it to a number of companies
-> > that had software products included on the CD-ROM.  They in turn handed
-> > the matter over to the Software Publisher's Association, which then
-> > took their usual witchhunting activities to a new art form (including
-> > using a personal contact at Wired for professional "gain")
   
You said that it was the "anti-remailer front" that was using this alleged 
"abuse" to get remailers shut down, but McClatchie was the one named by Jeff 
of playing that very role.

I'd like to hear more about this "anti-remailer front" you speak of.  Thus far,
you've claimed that all the anonymous posts that have criticized you have all 
come from the same person.  That doesn't sound like much of a "front".  How about
some more NAMES?  Who else is involved in this "front"?
 
> : Notice the classic
> :disinformation tactics that Gary Burnore is engaging in here.
>  
> Engaging in?  You post disinformation after disinformation and post no proof
> of your aligations.

Posting REPORTS of disinformation is not disinformation.  You have posted
no proof for any of your disinformation.  For example, your unsubstantiated
claim that someone (you actually accused someone by name) of sending abusive
e-mail, via a remailer, to an unnamed "teenage girl" who supposedly had a web 
page at DataBasix.  Where is your proof of that accusation?  Saying that an
anonymous person "abused" an unnamed victim is pretty flimsy, don't you think?

Then Belinda Bryan came along and claimed that this same person had supposedly
forged posts through an anonymous remailer in the names of "every known email 
address of DataBasix staff and  customers".  Again, no evidence that it even 
occurred, nor even an explanation of how someone OUTSIDE of your company would 
get ahold of that kind of confidential information!
 
> :  But notice 
> :that Gary was part of this "anti-remailer front" that used ALLEGED forgeries
> :and "spam baiting" to get two remailers shut down.
>  
> Again. PROVE IT.  Now it's TWO remailers? Before you said it was one.  Again,
> Burchell said he shut down the remailer after hundreds of complaints.  You're
> suggesting that those hundreds came from DataBasix?  PROVE IT.

You're forgetting Mailmasher and McClatchie's hissy fit to get it shut down?
 
> : It is interesting that
> :he now attributes the activities of himself and his associates at
> :DataBasix with this unnamed "anti-remailer front".
>  
> No, it's closer to the facts than your posts.  You consistantly post harass
> from a remailer your tactics are obvious.  You won't win though. Too many
> people WANT remailers.  Your lies are not working.

Free speech is now "harassment"?  (Only in the world of DataBasix!) If you didn't 
want people talking about the things you've done, you shouldn't have done them in 
the first place. 

Exactly what "harassment" are you alleging?  You mean posting replies to you and
answering the questions you asked?  You whine for "proof" then scream "harassment"
when it is posted.  Cute.

> So what are YOU doing it for? It's obviously not a privacy thing.  You were
> attacking me long before I complained to Burchell to get my name blocked.  You
> obvously have other reasons for your attacks. 

You obviously have a short memory.  Your letter to Jeff Burchell demanded that
he turn over his logs to you identifying everyone who had sent and received
anonymous e-mail through his remailer.  This was MONTHS after you whined about
alleged "forgeries" and were told about having your name blocked upon
request.  Unless you deliberately avoided taking the advice you had been given
then blocking your address would have been a non-issue by June, since you were
whining about "forgeries" in February.

Or are you talking about your attempt to get posts that even MENTIONED your name
in the body blocked?

> :Which makes one wonder why Gary and Belinda wanted to get ahold of the logs
> :from the Huge Cajones Remailer which would have identified anyone who ever
> :sent or even received anonymous mail through that remailer.  Gary and Belinda
> :have consistently stonewalled that question.  My guess is that they were
> :counting on Jeff keeping that dirty little secret of theirs hidden.
>  
> Which makes one wonder what else your demented little mind will think up next.
> Your claims are false, NO PROOF, none.

Claims?  I asked a QUESTION. What use did you have in mind for Jeff's remailer
logs which you demanded?  Since you refuse to answer, let me repeat Jeff's
theory.  If it's incorrect, please feel free to correct it:

-> Subject: Re: DataBasix vs. the Remailers -- Gary Burnore's Dirty Tricks Exposed (was: Jeff's Side of the Story.)
-> From: toxic@hotwired.com (Jeff Burchell)
-> Date: 1997/07/02
-> Message-ID: <5pc9mb$omg$1@re.hotwired.com>
-> 
-> [...]
-> 
-> : > Mr. Burnore requested a copy of my (non-existant) logs.
-> : > I told him to get me something in writing, signed by his lawyer that
-> : > stipulated that the logs were confidential, and not to be revealed to
-> : > anyone outside of the lawyer's office.
-> :
-> : He requested the logs of the messages of *EVERYONE* using Huge
-> : Cajones?  What was his rationale for such a fishing expedition?
-> : (Cases like this are a good reason for remailers to NOT keep logs.)
->  
-> I have no idea of his rationale.  And I don't know of any remailer
-> operator who keeps logs that would identify a user.  I had my machine
-> configured to log in a fairly standard way, but I used a different  
-> sendmail configuration for the remailer, that had all logging (except
-> for certain error conditions) turned off.
->  
-> Part of me thinks he wanted the logs so he could tell if I was going
-> to be able to identify him when he started his attacks.

[...]

> Yet, according to you I got his remailer shut down.  Which is it?  You claim I
> got his remailer shut down but then you claim I didn't have the power to do
> it.  

Go back and reread the post.  It was the power to demand that Jeff turn over (non-
existent) logs to you and Belinda that you didn't have.  The rest makes no sense, 
because it's quite obvious that the remailer is SHUT DOWN.