Re: Challenges from challenge-response systems qualify as unsolicited

From: Nick Landsberg (hukolau_at_NOSPAM.att.net)
Date: 04/07/04 

Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2004 03:26:39 GMT

Alan Connor wrote:

> On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 02:10:07 GMT, Robert Melson <melsonr@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>On Tuesday 06 April 2004 18:53, Alan Connor wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On 6 Apr 2004 20:33:55 -0400, Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Alan Connor <xxxx@yyy.zzz> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Modern C/R systems use filters like SpamAssassin and send almost all of
>>>>>the spam directly to /dev/null. No response of any kind is sent out.
>>>>>
>>>>>Why do you criticize programs you obviously know nothing about?
>>>>
>>>>Because I keep getting all of these misdirected challenges.
>>>>If I wasn't getting the stuff, I would not be complaining.
>>>>
>>>>If the filters were indeed effective, then C/R systems wouldn't produce
>>>>all of this misdirected junk. But, if the filters were effective, then
>>>>you wouldn't actually need any C/R systems at all.
>>>>
>>>>You can't have it both ways. Either the filters work or they don't.
>>>>--scott
>>>
>>>Let's see some of these 'mis-directed challenges'.
>>>
>>>And DO include *all* the headers.
>>>
>>>I think you are a liar.
>>>
>>>
>>>AC
>>
>>I've just been reading the thread and have this to say to you, Alan: you
>>diminish, if not completely destroy, your credibility by your name calling
>>("I think you are a liar.") and hostile attitude. It may well be true that
>>you have a successful system combining pass lists, block lists/filters and
>>challenge/response -- I can't dispute that because I'm not using it or
>>anything like it. At this stage, however, I wouldn't go around the block
>>to get one at your recommendation. Whether you're right or wrong makes
>>absolutely no difference at this point because you've poisoned the well
>>through your own poor behavior. Pity.
>>
>>Bob Melson
>>
>
>
>
> Well, Miz Manners Melson, I guess you haven't noticed that the man has failed
> to produce evidence for his claims.
>
> And he has been asked to TWICE since then.
>
> He WAS a liar.
>
> So you aren't going to investigate a tool that could possibly help you out
> a great deal because I called a liar a "liar"?
>
> Brilliant.
>
> AC
>

I know I came in late into this discussion, but I've
just about had it with the name-calling.

Listen, dipstick. You have consistently engaged in name
calling and baiting of others. You have consistently required
so-called evidence from others to prove their so-called
claims when they were nothing more than questions about
details of how and why your unsupported assertions would
solve the problem at hand. Time for you to put up or shut
up. Prove, rigorously, why we should believe YOU!

You have all the social graces of the "Tasmanian Devil"
in the Bugs Bunny cartoons, and probably the same
degree of intelligence.

You've called almost everyone else a liar. Please note
that the first recourse of an incompetent is to call everyone
else the same. Similarly for the first recourse of a liar.
Prove you are not. Chapter and verse! Statistics
and percentages based on something more than
a universe of a single user (you). State the published articles
with appropriate statistical anlyses
which we may refer to to validate your claims
of effectiveness. State the control conditions for
the experiment, if there was an experiment.
If there wasn't an experiment with a universe
greater than 1, state why not. What you've got
right now is a load of theory and hot-air. Other
posters have tried to point out possible holes,
to which you have responded with personal attacks
upon the posters.

Not a very good way to win friends and influence
people. As Mr. Melson said, after reading YOUR posts
I wouldn't even consider a C/R system at all,
just because your firetrucking attitude towards
everyone else has turned me completely off
from C/R.

Then again, you could be a spammer who is
trying reverse psychology by getting us to
believe that all proponents of C/R are a**holes,
but that's probably above your level of awareness.

(Pour le bon chat, let bon rat, eh?) 

-- 
"It is impossible to make anything foolproof
because fools are so ingenious"
  - A. Bloch

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The Dr. K Book
    ... Amatus Cremona wrote: ... >> You are calling me a liar. ... Severely mis-guided, poorly read, and ignorant of ALL research on ...
    (sci.med.dentistry)
  • Re: The Dr. K Book
    ... > You are calling me a liar. ... >> Amatus Cremona wrote: ... The results of that anger are reflected in your posts. ...
    (sci.med.dentistry)
  • Re: Cooper wrong again
    ... examples of someone ELSE calling him a liar, ... is wriggling out a window of humor. ... selection of bird shows from 1995, one of which was "Parrots: ...
    (alt.usage.english)
  • Re: RICO, RICO, RICO........ !!!
    ... The complaint is filed, the evidence is ... all over the known universe, ... calling me a liar, she is just looking ...
    (sci.med.diseases.lyme)