From: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 06:11:15 -0700 (PDT)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Abusive crossposting by anonymous remailer user (Was: Gary Lee Burnore is a Convicted Sex Offender in Raleigh, NC)
In-Reply-To: <3555FA78.7795@pageplanet.com>
Message-ID: <199805131311.PAA05504@basement.replay.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


eridani@databasix.com (Belinda Bryan) wrote:

> And there we have it, folks.  The anonymous stalker who's spent the past
> year following Gary Burnore around Usenet found a post in
> triangle.general that mentioned him, added a propaganda-filled follow up
> to it, and posted it to 9 newsgroups--many of whom have repeatedly
> requested that this crap be kept out of said groups.

"Anonymous stalker"?  For merely posting a reply to a public post on
Usenet?  What state or country has a statute against that, and what makes
you think the poster falls under its jurisdiction if it does exist?  As for
whether a certain post is "propaganda", that is for the reader to decide,
especially when of the content is independently verifiable.  The
"propaganda" you refer to was apparently intended to refute the fallacious
assertion that since Gary Lee Burnore's entry in the North Carolina
official database of registered sex offenders had apparently been removed,
then the underlying crime for which he was convicted and required to
register somehow automagically never happened.  To make such an assertion
is to invite rebuttal.

The thread you're whining about involved Steve Crisp <crisp@pageplanet.com>
threatening an anonymous poster with "beating the living fuck out of you"
if his/her identity could be determined, a second anonymous poster
challenging the propriety of such a threat, and yet another DataBasix
groupie, William McClatchie <wmcclatc@primenet.com>, calling the second
anonymous poster a "remailer abuser" for daring to make such a challenge.
So rather than denouncing the threat itself, you choose to call the person
challenging it an "anonymous stalker"?  If you feel no need to "hide"
anything, please feel free to post your street address and home phone
number.  But I imagine that many people with small children would not want
their names, from which their street address can be derived by someone with
the resources available to you and Gary Burnore, to fall into the hands of
a convicted child molester with a history of abusive retaliation.

Being threatened with physical violence for making an unpopular post is
one of the best arguments available as to why anonymity is necessary when
people like Steve Crisp and convicted child molester Gary Lee Burnore are
running around loose making those threats.

> Oh and lookee what else:  it was mailed to cypherpunks@toad.com,
> presumably for archival on the cypherpunks mailing list, where it will
> be picked up by WWW search engines.  Since those folks don't seem to
> mind having their archives used in personal grudge matches, I'll just
> start cc'ing my responses there as well.  I'm sure, as champions of free
> speech, they can understand the necessity of making sure both sides of
> the story get equal time.
 
This, of course, comes from the same Belinda Bryan who impersonated a
lawyer for DataBasix to demand the disclosure of (fortunately non-existant)
user logs from the Huge Cajones remailer in a failed Scientology-esque
attempt to embarass its users.  And that attack, BTW, started because Gary
Burnore was pissed that an anonymous whistle blower used a remailer to tip
of his victim's mother to the molestation.  As is typical of his style,
Burnore denounced that legitimate use of anonymity as "harassment" and
"abuse".  

It was also Burnore who chose to make PUBLIC what had previously been a
private e-mail, thus inviting his critics to factually evaluate the claims.
One of them apparently did so and discovered Gary Burnore's name and mug
shot were published on an official PUBLIC website of registered sex
offenders maintained by the state of North Carolina where Burnore moved
after leaving San Francisco.  Perhaps he should have learned a lesson from
Gary Hart and not have taunted the wrong people to find evidence of his
wrongdoing.

Will the continual harangue against privacy and anonymity by Gary Lee
Burnore, Belinda Bryan, Billy McClatchie, and other staffers and sock
puppets of the DataBasix wrecking crew never end?

BTW, Belinda, cross-posting your whining drivel in the fashion you're
threatening negates your lame attempts to achieve deniability by using the
infamous X-No-Archive header that has become the trademark of DataBasix'
denizens.  IOW, you won't be able to retroactively claim that an
embarassing post from you was "forged" because it's not archived at an
unbiased, third party site.  Can you say "oops"?