In article Cheshire Admin wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > The Cheshire Mininym is underused; why don't you create a nym there? "...I inspect every post that goes through the remailer." -- Cheshire -- I haven't trusted this guy since he arrogantly began blocking all remailers who would not filter. (I will post these details on my Web page in a few days or so.) True, he did change his mind after the drubbing he got in the remops group. He came to realize that if he kept blocking non-filtering remailers, he'd end up with only a few left. Hardly a spot that such an ambitious jr. frog wanted to find himself in. "Remops" who practice holding and screwing around with posts entrusted to them will be the ones who will finally "crack" the system. They will not only compromise it, but exploit what they learn from their perusing the contents. The originators of the remailer system never dreamt of remops *holding* posts, much less filtering at their own convenience. Am I that much of a genius that I find rather simple to filter Frog's floods ON MY OWN? Just the fact that some remops now hold posts is damaging enough, much less publish them on a Web page - as that dangerous asshole Frog does. When the boys in black show up, the goodies will be waiting for them. Now you tell me you are going to trust this guy with your "nym?" Bluejay ===================================== -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Tue, 04 Feb 2003, Fritz Wuehler wrote: >This s.o.b. admits to rummaging around and inspecting posts which are >supposed to be anon. God knows how many other remops he has convinced >to do the same. > >Delete the asshole from our remailer list and QUIT filling this group >with whining and complaining about him. While you are at it, you better stop using the Cheshire remailer, because I inspect every post that goes through the remailer. There must be 300 filters in use, filtering on spam, specific emails, individual names, domains, and even too many capital letters. Naturally, filters are in place for references to P******n, C*******y, S****e B**r, etc. See Cheshire remailer stuff at: http://cheshire.dyndns.org/remail/index.html qj qz -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: N/A iQEVAwUBPj8CgeaRa9bv1WjxAQE/hwf9F0UCRpbgxGIuPPbIv7RZd5JmTxWmW0xb oatmQ9SLODjmfTltQPsJyhMsb9UaniLIht6SqNn2qqT/I0AVhC0/qHVoU296cACE JzKNTEKumpv8/eGNh+N4YtXZNTyx3Rg5N67UvlRI6vbcwfAZwaxlPlfYmr6rHeDv d08XCNJC0rwSalI2FJevuWcBcAUH0+u6oZVuYWQWBjNtZmqSW4fGIKp8LcjeXqIi rXuXYO5lH4WoBrtk38CJmzz8iwRC7NfoK7anzRdqNg3DPalQhBYZhhqhwjHaQerY xg0zwXt6SAylCH39ERGYdG213OyNKLLXGYQ1fnlkOQzepfdc023VZw== =H7or -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ========================================================= "I keep almost all messages that are blocked for a few hours to a day or so." - Cheshire - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Wed, 05 Feb 2003, ATRU wrote: >Cheshire Admin wrote in >news:92REJHJ237656.6194328704@anonymous.poster: > >> I agree, which is why God knows what sort of rubbish passes >> daily through the remailer. I wouldn't block it for the >> world. >> >> In fact, if SB wants to post through Cheshire, he'll have >> no problems, as long as his SB name isn't spelt out in the >> body of the message. >> >> >> >> See Cheshire remailer stuff at: >> http://cheshire.dyndns.org/remail/index.html > >Cheshire-Admin, > >I was a regular end-user of the previous incarnations >of your remailer, with no problems. I valued it as a >exit remailer for its support for "From" lines. > >However, in its current incarnation I've had a great >deal of trouble gettting messages out of it, on apas >and elsewhere. Even a nym configuration request with >Cheshire as the terminal remailer apparently hit the >bit bucket! At first I thought this might be due to >incorrect keys; however I've checked and a couple of >days ago was able to send a test message to aam with >Cheshire being the terminal remailer. So the keys aren't >the problem. > >My reply to Peter Palfrader in the thread: [A little OT] >acronyms is the most recent example. Cheshire failed >to deliver the message yesterday, I resent it with >Vayu as the last remailer today. You can read it and >see if I'm somehow triggering some of your filters. >Since I so infrequently post to apas, and since most >of my failures aren't here anyway, I have a hard time >how. > >If you'd like, I can set up a nym for this handle >and take the discussion to private e-mail. > >If, for whatever reason, you have decided to block >me by my "handle" on apas or elsewhere, you can let >me know that too. I value remailers, and even though >I may agree/disagree with a particular remop's policies, >I can and still do such remailers as middlemen. To me, >the solution is more and better remailers; if we have >that, then users will have a wider choice of remop >"philosophies" from which to choose. You should run >Cheshire as you think best; and let we users choose >from the remailer smorgasboard to taste. > >Thanks, > >ATRU No, you aren't blocked, not deliberately, anyway. I keep almost all messages that are blocked for a few hours to a day or so. Why don't you send a message through the remailer to alt.test, with ATRU in the subject line and including ATRU in the body? I'll check the bit buckets to see if they are being caught by the filters. My initial caps filter for apas would have caught ATRU as too many caps, but that's been changed to something more reasonable, and it seems your problem with Cheshire pre-dates that anyway. See Cheshire remailer stuff at: http://cheshire.dyndns.org/remail/index.html -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: N/A iQEVAwUBPkBUAeaRa9bv1WjxAQGPSAgA1D6uwzqXED8GBIIaHm49p8o6CMcw62ZA qIkQ/RqB5iI9DkihaHTUGkQGxDE27pKwBXEhWq05Ysz+8Nmp4GWYTmmWaHSNFenu DCFG5f4fBz68QtGsvFiDR3Fk+WuLrn7G9rPZyEqilXfDA4yvXkEurCi5e09OhhmR RJRDKZ0SiofvUTLZquxDvE2h58ifU34YpAYjvyFIVk1UBnfIsp1/n+HArS1bUslL 2/G3TQZ86t2lEiE1LYgJkmEKgVZatjhx9Yrw7jmyKOp7YxCTncNpZJCrTot2a4ck p3t4RgeAj+W9DTaKZmPOuDbMX0DRd5ALAKhs8gvOiBguUwbnzJC7HQ== =qd2K -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----