CSB Reboot

[The Hen]

I can't beleive that you think I have access to the CSB database Lo.

Since when would I have access to any of that information? I don't even have access to the admin fields on THIS Board.

In anycase, Lo you do know that a person can switch their IPs don't you?

I am sure even the G-Man knows people can switch their IPs.

I know Steve knows this can be done and HOW to do it.

You can keep your bleating up all you like, but if the only evidence that the G has for Jasonxyz not being Steve is the IP address, I am afraid that is not actually proof.

<= Have a lovely smile and calm down.

[Sean]

She turned me into a newt!

[The Hen]

You got better.

[Sean]

I got b... dammit!

[loCAtek]

Check Reboot then, I've posted my research...

[quaddriver]

Anyone can change IP addresses.

http://anonymouse.org/

http://www.anonymizer.com/

http://www.vectroproxy.com/

Piece of piss....

based on the responses Im betting no one has actually gone to one of these sites, or know what it does and how?

Steve, is not Jxyz.

[The Hen]

Check Reboot then, I've posted my research...

Jolly good for you Lo.

I am sure you feel far better for that and I am so glad it was posted over there. Why?

Because Steve is not a member of Plan B. Jasonxyz is not a member of Plan B.

Now would you like to leave this issue alone over here?

Many thanks in advance.

[loCAtek]

Sure, I didn't bring it here...

[The Hen]

True. But I am REALLY surprised that you want to keep it going over at the New CSB. I thought you were a friend of Gar's and were trying to stop that kind of shit?

Go figure, eh? You just want it to keep going really.

You keep posting it, over there then Lo. I am sure he will thank you for it ... eventually.

[loCAtek]

Good thing I did, it's not fair to malign folks unjustly;

Quaddriver said:

Lord Jim said:

LoCa, the IP issue was addressed thoroughly at Plan B.

Actually, no it was not. For reasons I suspect no more sinister than no one at plan B knows how IP communications work.



Readers digest version: both Gar and Gob would have access to any IPs. If either has half a brain, they can find out using tools no more complex than what are in the DOS window to discover what the IP resolves to. I suspect Gar, who has access to the IP for Steve and Jxyz has done this task.



If someone is using one of the listed (or any of the not-listed) proxy services, it would be apparent and it could then be noted as curious evidence. Gar however indicated that he was sure it was not, meaning, the IPs resolved to various ISPs, who, identify the pool addresses for strict regions of the county/nation/world. Steve lives in BFV. IT is likely he has but few providers there. If he had another, it would most likely be dialup and the dialup numbers tend to be LATA defined or toll free for a state. He has at first glance, comcast (strict pooling), time warner (strict pooling) verizon (strict pooling) and wild blue. (satellite) (im leaving off all discussion of 'ghost ordering of pizza' simply because I do not think either of the websites support post without get. there are ways around that as well, but no one reading this has the software or hardware to accomplish.)



for example, this civilian machine is behind a router with NAT. a quick query says I am:

Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : zoominternet.net
Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Intel(R) PRO/100 VE
on
Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-17-31-9D-B5-7F
Dhcp Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes
Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes
IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.101
Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1
DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1
DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 24.154.1.8
24.154.1.6
Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : Saturday, February
PM
Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : Sunday, February 27

problem is, everyone else with a router at home is likely the same.



so how do I order pizza?



my ISP presents me to the world as:

What Is My IP Address - WhatIsMyIP.com
Your IP Address Is: 72.23.51.254


Read more: http://www.whatismyip.com/#ixzz1F91PUcVr

who dat? if you say 'aha! I gotcha' I say "really?"

C:>tracert 72.23.51.254

Tracing route to dynamic-acs-72-23-51-254.zoominternet.net [72.23.51.254]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms dynamic-acs-72-23-51-254.zoominternet.net [72.23
.51.254]

Trace complete.

That didnt getcha very far without a badge.....



suppose you went after my ISP:

C:>tracert zoominternet.net

Tracing route to zoominternet.net [24.154.5.181]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.1.1
2 * * * Request timed out.
3 * * * Request timed out.
4 * * * Request timed out.
5 ^C

Think what that told you, we know the IP of my ISP, but it is unreachable from my gateway, likewise, my gateway is unreachable from the outside. the other IP address you saw at the website 73.23.wahtever is my proxy. Fake out the proxy all you want, but you will never 'get the pizza'. you may try this at home.



And fwiw you missed the largest logic hole in LJs rant, he admitted that Steve can write 'well' if he takes time as evidence by previous posts. However, at full throttle, Jxyz was producing MORE than Steve ever could with no signal degradation.



that element alone carries the greatest weight and makes the theory fail.

Myths should not remain unbusted.

[The Hen]

I'm certainly not interested in your cut an paste posts, Lo.

I really don't know why you are continuing with this.

Do you actually WANT to be placed on ignore?

Tell me why?

Why do you want people to turn away from you?

What has happened in the past for you to want to have that reaction constantly?

[Lord Jim]

Oh fercrissakes...

I really wanted us to just get to "agree to disagree on this" and move on LoCa, but since you insist on pursuing this, two more points need to made:

1.That copy and paste from Quad's post, (I don't know where you got it from. I have him on "ignore" here, I "bury" his posts unread on Re-boot, and I try to scroll past them on the old CSB) proves absolutely nothing about whether or not Steve used a proxy IP. (BTW, Gar has been contradictory on this, not categorical... he said he was "sure" it wasn't Steve, "at this point"...which was fairly early on... and he also said "reasonably sure"...which is something less than "certain"... and he never addressed the question of proxy IP's...)

2. I had hoped to avoid pointing this out, (but your relentless pursuit of this makes it unavoidable) but the fact of the matter is that Gar has a very good and understandable reason for why he would want to aim speculation away from Jason being Steve.

Gar wants to reduce the "drama factor" at the CSB. Obviously, the drama factor surrounding "Jason" is considerably less if he's some new whack job who just happened by, then if he is the site's foremost resident long time whack job trying to run some sort of game. (Unfortunately for Gar, Steve himself made this impossible, when on top of all the other wildly implausible coincidences one would have to accept in order to believe it wasn't Steve, Steve outed himself)

But even so, the drama factor would have been considerably less if there wasn't a poster who seems hell bent for leather to keep this alive come hell or high water despite every polite effort by others to bring the discussion to an amicable close....

I can assure you, you are doing Gar absolutely no favors by insisting on keeping this discussion alive.

[Timster]

Ha! ~ Give peace a chance Jim....


. . . .

[The Hen]

More than willing too myself.

Who'll join me for an all round "shake and make up"?

[The Hen]

I'll go first!

[Timster]

I will not say "I told you so"... dang, I just did.

I really did. And Cali? Why won't you just take your own advice? Why do you insist on being a big poopy head (AKA TROLL) ?

Seriously, I am beginning to wonder. "Debunking" is not exactly covering all your posting activity of late.

WTF is the deal?

No. I do not want any more rationalisation or justifications.

Do what you will is the whole of the Law.

Just remember not to whine when people of discerning taste (read: a working memory of the facts.) take YOU to task for being obviously obtuse and contrary just so you can score some points in an invisible game that only you know the rules for.

Not impressed.

[@meric@nwom@n]

Non Reinforcement

Non reinforcement occurs when the target behavior is exhibited and there is noresponse from the environement. These acts produce neutral results and bringneither rewards nor punishment. However, if an act has been consistentlyfollowed by a reward in the past, but fails to elicit the expected reward,frustration occurs. If many repetitions of the act fail to result in theexpected reward, the act will grow less and less frequent and will eventually,become extinguished.

Examples

The rat touches the bar and nothing happens.

A child will stop sticking out their tongue if you act like you did not seeit.

Thus ignore is the best policy and in the spirit of non reinforcement that is all I will say.

[Timster]

So. It's my fault now for facilitating the fallacy? ...

Interesting... the same theory applies to shooting Ptarmigan. But they are just stupid birds working on instinct...

And there can be no analogy...

--------------------------------------------------------


PS :Oh, A@W thanks for not placing me on ignore . . . .yet.

[@meric@nwom@n]

PS :Oh, A@W thanks for not placing me on ignore . . . .yet.

I am not root beer. @w. Goof.

[Timster]

LOL! K. The point remains.