Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site dartvax.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!decvax!dartvax!markv From: markv@dartvax.UUCP (Mark F. Vita) Newsgroups: net.music,net.rumor Subject: Re: Attention, Responsible Net Users! (And K-Mart Shoppers!) Message-ID: <3347@dartvax.UUCP> Date: Sat, 13-Jul-85 16:17:50 EDT Article-I.D.: dartvax.3347 Posted: Sat Jul 13 16:17:50 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 17-Jul-85 04:14:55 EDT References: <4669@mit-eddie.UUCP> Distribution: net.music,net.rumor Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH Lines: 82 Xref: watmath net.music:8287 net.rumor:996 > ["Let me see: four times five is twelve, and four times six is thirteen, > and four times seven is -- oh dear! I shall never go to twenty at > that rate!"] > > > From: Judd Rogers> > > Since no-one else seems to see these aleged forgeries why don't you ignore > > them? > > > In anycase, don't tell us at net.rumor since it is not a rumor (a > > halucination but not a rumor) > > It's kind of interesting that you should say that when the posting that > you are responding to is indeed a forgery! > > Mit-Eddie doesn't receive these forgeries, so I may not have seen them > all. I received the following posting via personal mail from my bestest > friend in the whole universe. I did not post this -- it is the second > forgery that I know of: > > > From nessus@mit-eddie.UUCP > > > I hope none of you seriously believe that I would entertain such > > frivolous discussions on the merit of J.S. Bach's music. I have > > admired many of JSB's works, and although you all know how I feel about > > Kate Bush's music, even to talk of such a comparison is obscene. > > Clearly I don't really believe that such a comparison is obscene, for no > forger would flame as long as I have on the subject. > > > Once again, it looks like this is the work of the fun-people > > eunuch-wizards. It was slightly amusing the first time they forged > > news article by me but I am beginning to get annoyed. > > Yup! > > > I have attempted to contact David Dobkin, the site > > administrator-administrator at Princeton, in order to straighten > > things out. > > I have no idea who David Dobkin is. > > > Is there anyone out there that is as upset as I am? If > > this keeps up the net will be in peril of losing its credibility. > > Did it ever have any? > > In the future, people might want to use this algorithm to determine if a > message is really from me: If you say to yourself "My goodness that was > a wonderful posting. Doug Alan must be a real genius!" then assume it > is really from me. If you say to yourself "My God what a stupid > article! Doug Alan is a real asshole!" then assume it is a forgery. > This may not give you an accurate picture of the truth, but I don't > mind.... > > What does 'I' mean? > > Doug Alan > nessus@mit-eddie.UUCP (or ARPA) All right. I give up. What assurance do we netters have that this last message is not also a forgery? Will the real Doug Alan please stand up? A more critical issue is: how is it possible for someone to post a forged message? This would seem to be a MAJOR, serious problem with the posting software, if it indeed allows this to happen. Anybody could go around posting malicious articles and putting other people's names on them. Maybe a report to net.unix-wizards or some such is in order? I just hope this isn't some sort of extremely bizzarre joke being played out by Mr. Alan... -- Mark Vita Dartmouth College USENET: {decvax,cornell,linus,astrovax}!dartvax!markv ARPA: markv%dartmouth@csnet-relay CSNET: markv@dartmouth