O/T: Should pri_dk/harvey/gogogosandiego be banned?

Submitted by CA renter on April 20, 2018 - 2:57am
Yes, ban him.
47% (9 votes)
No, don't ban him.
47% (9 votes)
Don't ban him, but give him a warning.
0% (0 votes)
Other, please explain.
5% (1 vote)
Total votes: 19
Submitted by CA renter on April 20, 2018 - 3:16am.

Harvey has been posting here for some time, and in that time, he has intentionally and maliciously misquoted other posters in an attempt to frame them in a negative light. He's been trolling this site, and his actions have caused the level of discourse here to severely degrade to the point that we have lost some valuable contributors to this forum. He prevents posters from being able to have intelligent, informed discussions about a wide variety of issues because he regularly forces threads to devolve into long strings of false accusations and personal attacks.

I have never asked for a person to be banned on any forum in my 20+ years on the internet (to the contrary, I've often supported those who were threatened with banning because I dislike echo chambers and think that we need access to multiple perspectives), but Pri has, once again, intentionally and maliciously attempted to make it look like I said something, via the quote feature, that was never stated. He's done this on numberous occassions, not only to me, but to other posters as well.

This is his most recent attempt at the bottom of the first page:

https://piggington.com/why_are_states_so...

I also suspect him of being responsible for the attempts to access my computer's microphone and camera through Piggington, as shown on page 5 of this thread:

https://piggington.com/ot_countering_dis...

Is anyone else sick of his trolling and making personal attacks?

Submitted by harvey on April 20, 2018 - 6:50am.

He also turned you into a newt!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rf71YotfykQ

Submitted by gogogosandiego on April 20, 2018 - 9:13am.

I'm not "Harvey" or any other handle / poster here. Leave me out of this. This is your one and only warning.

Submitted by ucodegen on April 20, 2018 - 10:55am.

I would go for ban if it turns out they are the same individual shilling as separate posters. There is a way to tell - I can show Rich T. (outside of word structure, use of words etc - analysis). It is done at the web server, does not use cookies and does not rely on IP addr. The signal/noise ratio has been very low from these posters. I don't like the idea of a ban, but shilling as different individuals corrupts the structure of discourse by creating the ability to 'snowjob' another poster by creating what looks like posts supportive of a position from different posters - who in actuality are the same poster.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on April 20, 2018 - 1:41pm.

ucodegen wrote:
I would go for ban if it turns out they are the same individual shilling as separate posters. There is a way to tell - I can show Rich T. (outside of word structure, use of words etc - analysis). It is done at the web server, does not use cookies and does not rely on IP addr. The signal/noise ratio has been very low from these posters. I don't like the idea of a ban, but shilling as different individuals corrupts the structure of discourse by creating the ability to 'snowjob' another poster by creating what looks like posts supportive of a position from different posters - who in actuality are the same poster.

That would be like creating a fictitious identity to represent oneself as one’s own agent and/or supporter. To make believe that there is a third party giving an objective viewpoint. Yeah, a person like that is definitely a slime ball.

Submitted by harvey on April 20, 2018 - 2:25pm.

Uh, you guys do know that gogo has posted a total of five times, ever? (Including the response to this thread.)

And I'd love to hear how I hacked into someone's webcam through a real estate blog. I'll need someone with some tech skills to explain how I pulled off that trick.

(BTW, does accusing another poster of a serious crime without a shred of evidence "corrupt the structure of discourse"?)

But let the accuser explain how she is so sure of her claims.

Be a good Pigg, and bring some data.

Submitted by ucodegen on April 20, 2018 - 6:50pm.

harvey wrote:

And I'd love to hear how I hacked into someone's webcam through a real estate blog. I'll need someone with some tech skills to explain how I pulled off that trick.

Harvey, you may have skipped a dose on your meds. CA renter never said that 'you' hacked their Email. CA renter said 'someone'. proof:
CA renter wrote:
(And it might just be a coincidence, but someone has tried to access my computer's microphone and camera through Piggington. I do *not* believe that it is Rich.)

Comment number 280690 on the 'Countering Disinformation And Propagation Act' thread - bottom of their comment. The direct links to comments don't work, however it would be the 3rd comment down on the 5th page.

I was aware of that same problem and had tracked it down to Google's advertisement services and 'Search', which can include voice activated/controlled search. If you look through the HTML for the pages, you will see the call to googlesyndication.com (for advertisement) and google.com (for search function). I didn't say anything at the time because Rich T. had it handled before I had time to construct a reply.

Submitted by harvey on April 20, 2018 - 7:02pm.

ucodegen wrote:

Harvey, you may have skipped a dose on your meds. CA renter never said that 'you' hacked their Email. CA renter said 'someone'. proof:
CA renter wrote:
(And it might just be a coincidence, but someone has tried to access my computer's microphone and camera through Piggington. I do *not* believe that it is Rich.)

Comment number 280690 on the 'Countering Disinformation And Propagation Act' thread - bottom of their comment. The direct links to comments don't work, however it would be the 3rd comment down on the 5th page.

Comment #1.

This thread.

CA renter wrote:

I also suspect him of being responsible for the attempts to access my computer's microphone and camera through Piggington, as shown on page 5 of this thread:

Submitted by harvey on April 20, 2018 - 6:57pm.

dup

Submitted by phaster on April 20, 2018 - 8:08pm.

huh,... FWIW

sdgrrl wrote:

August 11, 2016 - 10:25pm

...I think a majority of members on Rick's site think they are more intelligent than most of the population, sophisticated with money and knowledgeable about political and global issues.

This often creates a clash of egos, and alpha personalities start coming out.

Good show.

https://piggington.com/ot_bearishgurl_sh...

but the clashing "personality types" AND "drama" distraction(s)

CA renter wrote:

April 20, 2018 - 3:16am

...Pri has, once again, intentionally and maliciously attempted to make it look like I said something, via the quote feature, that was never stated.

...I also suspect him of being responsible for the attempts to access my computer's microphone and camera through Piggington

does nothing to change the basic fact,

FlyerInHi wrote:

CArenter likes to mention the intricacies of municipal finances when convenient. However, according to her, if we just get rid of Prop 13 and Mexican kids, the money will somehow flow directly to pension funds.

Of course, it's all about protecting the benefits of retirees,...

https://piggington.com/why_are_states_so...

PROOF!?

phaster wrote:
FlyerInHi wrote:
CA renter wrote:
For the record, California's high income tax rate, high fees, etc. are the result of Prop 13. The state lost billions in revenues when Prop 13 passed, so they had to make it up elsewhere.

And since you're so concerned about taxpayers and the health of state/county/city finances, have you paid back your unearned tax subsidies, yet?

You just obviated any argument to repeal prop 13. If the lost billions have been made up, a repeal of prop 13 would amount to a huge tax increase. No way Jose.

sigh,... let's all take another walk down memory lane

CA renter wrote:

September 4, 2014 - 6:04pm

I don't get distracted by non-economic issues where politics are concerned. That's not to say that these issues are unimportant, but that they pale in comparison to economics.

CA renter wrote:

October 1, 2014 - 9:23pm

Yes, I've been following the pension issue for many, many years (far, far, far longer than you have), and I have also worked with negotiating committees and have done research for public employee unions.

https://piggington.com/how_will_unfunded...

CA phaster wrote:

October 22, 2016 - 8:30am

CA renter wrote:

October 9, 2016 - 1:07am

BTW, you're not educating or informing anyone of anything. The pension issue was beaten to death LONG before you ever came into the picture.

really???

https://piggington.com/how_will_unfunded...

https://piggington.com/how_will_unfunded...

for the record, have to say the inability to recognize basic middle school math concepts and their importance as it relates to managing money, sadly isn't an isolated case,... seems there is a pandemic of being morally and intellectually bankrupt (i.e. dishonest and dumb) WRT basic finance,... perhaps the root cause is some kind of political self interest???

having said my piece, now let's go back and review (yet again) the basic math concepts which are key to understanding the local pension portfolio "mismanagement"

for three decades plus, the local public pension portfolio custodians (i.e. politicians) have allowed giving away a 13th pension payment (off balance sheet),... basically this is akin to a 13th mortgage payment on a property (which shortens the pay off period and decreases the over-all interest paid), BUT in this case things work in reverse,... in other words the pension debt obligation will increase over time

www.TinyURL.com/SanDiegoSpikingPension

compounding this basic middle school math "error" is public employ leadership (i.e. public pension recipients) who see no problem w/ not requiring fully funding the portfolio,... this action basically is akin to only paying a "minimum credit card payment" but its important to note that things here are happening on a SUPER SIZED scale!!!

www.TinyURL.com/PensionRebuttal

AND let's not forget we are where we are because those responsible for causing this money management mess are basically morally and intellectually challenged (i.e. dishonest and dumb)

bottom line,... given the "California rule" which implies the tax payers are the designated financial backstop for this whole mess,... means eventually there are some serious consequences for local residents AND if the problem(s) is widespread perhaps it might have serious consequences for civilization as a whole,...

www.TinyURL.com/DifferentDay

PS one last general observation,... the background knowledge needed to model something as complex/chaotic as climate change or the economy, requires deep knowledge of various fields of study along w/ a basic understanding of how things interact,... what I find ironic is more often than not is politicians and various activists who claim leadership roles,... have in fact the least background knowledge that is required to understand the big picture

www.npr.org/sections/money/2018/04/13/60...

www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2...

PS remember "tomorrow" is when we **cough** commercially celebrate earth day

http://www.earthdayweb.org/EarthFair.html

which should be a reminder to avoid stuff like,...

Submitted by zk on April 20, 2018 - 10:59pm.

.

Submitted by svelte on April 21, 2018 - 1:14am.

You all do realize this is an insignificant thread in a back alley cob-webbed corner of the internet.

Right?

Submitted by CA renter on April 21, 2018 - 1:55am.

gogogosandiego wrote:
I'm not "Harvey" or any other handle / poster here. Leave me out of this. This is your one and only warning.

Your posting style, tone, and trolling tactics belie your claim. People are welcome to review your posts to ascertain for themselves who you are.

Submitted by CA renter on April 21, 2018 - 2:06am.

harvey wrote:
ucodegen wrote:

Harvey, you may have skipped a dose on your meds. CA renter never said that 'you' hacked their Email. CA renter said 'someone'. proof:
CA renter wrote:
(And it might just be a coincidence, but someone has tried to access my computer's microphone and camera through Piggington. I do *not* believe that it is Rich.)

Comment number 280690 on the 'Countering Disinformation And Propagation Act' thread - bottom of their comment. The direct links to comments don't work, however it would be the 3rd comment down on the 5th page.

Comment #1.

This thread.

CA renter wrote:

I also suspect him of being responsible for the attempts to access my computer's microphone and camera through Piggington, as shown on page 5 of this thread:

It's true, I do suspect you, Pri. Your response to my claim about the camera/mic access was odd, to say the least (see page 5, here).

https://piggington.com/ot_countering_dis...

You've been intentionally and maliciously trolling this forum for a long time. Your ad hominem attacks and claims that people have said things that they've never said (and using the quote feature to fill in your own words under other posters' names to make it look like they had made these statements) are totally unacceptable. For that reason alone, you should be banned.

Submitted by harvey on April 21, 2018 - 6:24am.

CA renter wrote:

It's true, I do suspect you, Pri. Your response to my claim about the camera/mic access was odd, to say the least (see page 5, here).

https://piggington.com/ot_countering_disinformation_and_propaganda_act_thoughts?page=4

That photo comes from one of your "sources"

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/f...

Lol, zerohedge.

Hold on ... I need to turn down the volume on the microphone feed ... the whooshing sound of all of this going over your head is deafening.

It's cute that you whine about "ad hominem" attacks in the same post that you make unfounded accusations of actual crimes.

Submitted by flu on April 21, 2018 - 6:55am.

With this much drama, I had to check I wasn't visiting miataturbo.net!

Submitted by harvey on April 21, 2018 - 7:00am.

Yes, we serve popcorn at piggington webcam cinemas!

Submitted by flu on April 21, 2018 - 7:03am.

FlyerInHi wrote:

That would be like creating a fictitious identity to represent oneself as one’s own agent and/or supporter. To make believe that there is a third party giving an objective viewpoint. Yeah, a person like that is definitely a slime ball.

Yeah, like creating a brand new handle so one can continue to post on piggington, after being banned by Rich with one's first handle...right Briansd?

rotflol

Submitted by harvey on April 21, 2018 - 7:04am.

flu wrote:
FlyerInHi wrote:

That would be like creating a fictitious identity to represent oneself as one’s own agent and/or supporter. To make believe that there is a third party giving an objective viewpoint. Yeah, a person like that is definitely a slime ball.

Yeah, like creating a brand new handle so one can continue to post on piggington, after being banned by Rich with one's first handle...right Briansd?

rotflol

Whatever happened to Fat Lazy Union?

That guy was a hoot!

Submitted by flu on April 21, 2018 - 7:11am.

I am sorry Harvey, are you saying something?

It seems I only see your handle, but can't see any text underneath it.

Was it about engineering minimum wage?

no wait..... pensions, must be about pensions....

no wait..... Donald Trump?????

no wait....I know i know ALT right religious right...

no wait, about progressives are so much more
enlightened and refined....oh sorry, that's Brian....

lololol

Submitted by flu on April 21, 2018 - 7:23am.

I don't know why people talk about banning on this website.

First, most people have already left.
Second, there is an ignore button.

The sort of vitriolic posts is exactly the sort of forum that probably the remaining majority of frequent posters want.

But here these days, at least, it's cheaper than picking up a copy of the National Enquirer and it's an abridged version of the Jerry Springer show.

Miss you AN, sdrealtor, SD Realtor, cdmaengineer, etc etc etc.

I guess all good things eventually come to an end... kinda like both Audi and Porsche pulling out of the 24 hours of LeMans.

Submitted by harvey on April 21, 2018 - 7:24am.

Submitted by flu on April 21, 2018 - 7:30am.

Sorry Harvey, you are going to have to speak looooouder and sloooooweer....
I still can't hear you....must be my old age .....

What's that about Donald Trump?????

Submitted by harvey on April 21, 2018 - 7:35am.

No, I just post every hour the stock market is down.

We should be happy right?

Submitted by FlyerInHi on April 21, 2018 - 8:36am.

harvey wrote:
CA renter wrote:

It's true, I do suspect you, Pri. Your response to my claim about the camera/mic access was odd, to say the least (see page 5, here).

https://piggington.com/ot_countering_dis...

That photo comes from one of your "sources"

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/f...

Lol, zerohedge.

Hold on ... I need to turn down the volume on the microphone feed ... the whooshing sound of all of this going over your head is deafening.

It's cute that you whine about "ad hominem" attacks in the same post that you make unfounded accusations of actual crimes.

And yet, Russia was a hoax. She said something like that.... not going to look it up. Maybe she will look it up for me.

Submitted by ucodegen on April 21, 2018 - 12:04pm.

harvey wrote:

Comment #1.

This thread.

CA renter wrote:

I also suspect him of being responsible for the attempts to access my computer's microphone and camera through Piggington, as shown on page 5 of this thread:

Noted, sorry. an interesting pivot from the person's earlier general statement. <snark>I presume you are a DoD hacker or some sort of expert black hat?</snark>

The way Piggington is set up, you can't put in 'active' links that bring in cross site scripting elements nor external javascript - though I have really not tried to crack Piggington myself, nor won't (I don't defecate in the place one regularly visit, nor don't pee in the water one drinks from).

Submitted by ucodegen on April 21, 2018 - 12:33pm.

CA renter wrote:

It's true, I do suspect you, Pri. Your response to my claim about the camera/mic access was odd, to say the least (see page 5, here).

https://piggington.com/ot_countering_dis...


That response (pri's) almost looks like pure snark. Note the computer - looks like it is might be running win95, maybe w2k. It is an old CRT, best resolution is probably 1024x780. The computer is almost pre internet.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on April 21, 2018 - 6:06pm.

harvey wrote:

It's cute that you whine about "ad hominem" attacks in the same post that you make unfounded accusations of actual crimes.

Trolling, mocking comments, even misquoting for parody are free speech. Accusing someone of illegal activity is defamation.

Submitted by ucodegen on April 21, 2018 - 7:07pm.

FlyerInHi wrote:
harvey wrote:

It's cute that you whine about "ad hominem" attacks in the same post that you make unfounded accusations of actual crimes.

Trolling, mocking comments, even misquoting for parody are free speech. Accusing someone of illegal activity is defamation.

First point: misquoting for parody w/out making it clear that it is parody, is actually defamation/libel. See libel involving an altered quotes. Being 'implied' in your point of view or view of the person does not qualify. It must be whether anyone else would mistake the misquote as being actual. Parody is a very fine line, and the way it was done actually crosses the line to libel. Now you understand why I tend to use the 'snark' markings.

Second point: Trolling, mocking comments - if malicious can be considered harassment from a legal point of view, particularly if targeted to a specific individual, group, minorities or disadvantaged.
Don't believe me, here:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/sep/...
http://www.slate.com/articles/technology...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberbullying
https://www.shouselaw.com/is-internet-tr...
http://harvardjol.com/wp-content/uploads...

Some of these are British, but much of the same legislation is coming over here to the U.S. Some of it already here. The issues are how much, how often, how persistent. Don't assume automatic Freedom of Speech.. because there are actually limits to Freedom of Speech.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on April 21, 2018 - 7:54pm.

The parody is very much on point and quite funny.

I’ll let others decide for themselves but my takeaway from CARenter’s posts is that she blames Mexican kids, Prop 13, etc.. for pension shortfalls.

The real reasons for underfunded pensions are pension spending and promises. Change the laws to take back benefits and you solve the problems. As easy as that.

When convenient, CAr mentions funds and laws. But then she wants to take education funds to pay for municipal pensions.

Submitted by harvey on April 22, 2018 - 6:31am.

ucodegen wrote:

CA renter wrote:

I also suspect him of being responsible for the attempts to access my computer's microphone and camera through Piggington, as shown on page 5 of this thread:

Noted, sorry. an interesting pivot from the person's earlier general statement. <snark>I presume you are a DoD hacker or some sort of expert black hat?</snark>

The way Piggington is set up, you can't put in 'active' links that bring in cross site scripting elements nor external javascript - though I have really not tried to crack Piggington myself, nor won't (I don't defecate in the place one regularly visit, nor don't pee in the water one drinks from).

You seem to have a good understanding about how websites work.

CAR is claiming that I hacked into piggington specifically to access her webcam. It's a pretty serious claim, as she's accusing someone of a crime (probably a felony.)

But she hasn't provided anything to support her claim that I am the culprit.

What would she need to show as evidence? Some kind of log? Would it have my name in it?

We know that CAR doesn't make claims without supporting evidence. She certainly is not unhinged or paranoid. So she must have some pretty convincing evidence if she were going to make such a serious claim.

What do you think, ucodegen?

Submitted by phaster on April 22, 2018 - 7:46am.

interesting vote result(s),... anyone else note this kinda mirrors the political divide of the nation

vote results mirror nationvote results mirror nation

since I have not voted, have to ask what is a vote worth?

figure this is an opportunity to conduct an economic experiment of sorts (based on something flu posted awhile ago,...) AND raise money for charity

flu wrote:

July 17, 2016 - 10:14pm

Man, remind me never to hang out with folks like you. It's not that I don't value actual insight, positive or negative. I do. It's just I don't understand some of you that are so fixated with your beliefs that you can't really think objectively in the only thing that matters.... "How can I make money?"

https://piggington.com/investing_municip...

the charity part comes into in that the proceeds of winning bid goes to charity of chose of the winning bidder

as they say,... money talks, bull$hit walks

PS if you think I pulled this idea out of thin air, actually this idea is kinda based on PBS videos

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWh3Y5OyN34

http://video.mpt.tv/video/2365353075/

Submitted by FlyerInHi on April 22, 2018 - 8:32am.

phaster wrote:

flu wrote:

July 17, 2016 - 10:14pm

Man, remind me never to hang out with folks like you. It's not that I don't value actual insight, positive or negative. I do. It's just I don't understand some of you that are so fixated with your beliefs that you can't really think objectively in the only thing that matters.... "How can I make money?"

https://piggington.com/investing_municip...

The quote above just shows how narrow minded some people are. Making money has nothing to do with beliefs. The owner of occidental pretroleum was a communist who later supported republicans. You don't need to give up your money to believe in social equity. In fact, we all need to make money. The more money we have the better we can advance our goals whatever they may be.

People who say "give up your money if you believe in higher taxes" are just intellectually challenged.

Submitted by flu on April 22, 2018 - 11:05am.

.

Submitted by PCinSD on April 22, 2018 - 2:46pm.

If you want to sue for defamation, by all means, feel free to:

1) Spend your money on a lawyer to get a court order to compel Google and Microsoft to reveal the IP address. You will need to deal with the Google and Microsoft lawyers.

Even if you get a court order, you will need to pay Google and Microsoft's cost to provide the information that you seek. I hear that software engineers can afford to buy nice houses in Silicon Valley, Seattle and also San Diego. So it will cost a pretty penny to send them on a fishing expedition.

2) Spend more money to compel the ISP to match the IP address to the account owner.

3) Spend yet more money to identify me. BTW, many people use an open WiFi connection.

4) Then spend more money to initiate the lawsuit.

I'm sure that you have enough money to feed the lawyers. Plus you'll be stimulating the economy.

Submitted by ucodegen on April 22, 2018 - 5:00pm.

harvey wrote:

You seem to have a good understanding about how websites work.

CAR is claiming that I hacked into piggington specifically to access her webcam. It's a pretty serious claim, as she's accusing someone of a crime (probably a felony.)


It is a serious claim, but whether it raises to the level of a felony is a different matter. It could be considered misdemeanor vandalism or stalking.
harvey wrote:

But she hasn't provided anything to support her claim that I am the culprit.

What would she need to show as evidence? Some kind of log? Would it have my name in it?

Evidence is tricky. If she was running a system that monitors all packets coming through her router - it would be a strong start. They would show IP addresses that could be tracked back to the source account. If you are running a router, it will not be the IP address on your computer, but will likely be the address from your modem. She probably would not be able to id the person behind that IP address, but the packet capture record would be enough to force a warrant to go to that ISP to reveal the owner of that account. Most IP addresses on Cable and DSL modems are fairly static, and the ISP knows what the mapping is between the Modem's MAC address and account at all times (so they can meter the data rate based on paid level of service and verify that the modem actually belongs to their customer). This is somewhat similar to how the police have dealt with pedophilic peeping toms - who manage to remotely turn on some young girl's computer's camera to watch.

harvey wrote:
We know that CAR doesn't make claims without supporting evidence. She certainly is not unhinged or paranoid. So she must have some pretty convincing evidence if she were going to make such a serious claim.

What do you think, ucodegen?

All I can say, is that I am not a psychiatrist. That was not my field of study.

Since you are moving sort of in the direction of liability, the statements also hinge on believablity on the part of the author. To that we can go to your past statements, as well as others as to whether such a statement might be believable and as to what the belief of yours and others on the voracity of this persons statements (on multiple subjects). Since you, FlyerInHi, etc do not hold CA renter's statements with much regard (actually in some fact, with some contempt), it reduces any potential for claim of injury. Add to that, the fact that this person has been admittedly 'Trolled' by one that might claim injury, it might eliminate any potential claim.

It works similar to how the justice handles someone going up to a big guy and punching them. That person can not claim 'assault' if that big guy then turns around after the individual him them and ends up knocking out the person with one hit. - could also be seen as a legal variant of 'unclean hands'.

Another aspect of liability due to statements is whether the person making the statement is considered an expert in the field they are making a claim about. I don't think CA renter is a computer expert, forensic or otherwise. This provides a great deal of immunity to their statements.

Submitted by harvey on April 22, 2018 - 5:21pm.

ucodegen wrote:
Evidence is tricky. If she was running a system that monitors all packets coming through her router - it would be a strong start. They would show IP addresses that could be tracked back to the source account. If you are running a router, it will not be the IP address on your computer, but will likely be the address from your modem. She probably would not be able to id the person behind that IP address, but the packet capture record would be enough to force a warrant to go to that ISP to reveal the owner of that account.

Thanks for the detailed explanation.

I get what you are saying: Even if someone was hacked, there is no way anyone could know the person on the other end. Only the ISP would know, and they would not even investigate without a warrant.

In other words, CAR has no evidence whatsoever.

If she had evidence, she could call the cops instead of posting a butthurt survey on an obscure real-estate website.

Quote:
All I can say, is that I am not a psychiatrist.

That's unfortunate, because CAR really needs one.

Submitted by flu on April 22, 2018 - 10:54pm.

This thread.....

Submitted by CA renter on April 23, 2018 - 3:24am.

ucodegen wrote:
harvey wrote:

You seem to have a good understanding about how websites work.

CAR is claiming that I hacked into piggington specifically to access her webcam. It's a pretty serious claim, as she's accusing someone of a crime (probably a felony.)


It is a serious claim, but whether it raises to the level of a felony is a different matter. It could be considered misdemeanor vandalism or stalking.
harvey wrote:

But she hasn't provided anything to support her claim that I am the culprit.

What would she need to show as evidence? Some kind of log? Would it have my name in it?

Evidence is tricky. If she was running a system that monitors all packets coming through her router - it would be a strong start. They would show IP addresses that could be tracked back to the source account. If you are running a router, it will not be the IP address on your computer, but will likely be the address from your modem. She probably would not be able to id the person behind that IP address, but the packet capture record would be enough to force a warrant to go to that ISP to reveal the owner of that account. Most IP addresses on Cable and DSL modems are fairly static, and the ISP knows what the mapping is between the Modem's MAC address and account at all times (so they can meter the data rate based on paid level of service and verify that the modem actually belongs to their customer). This is somewhat similar to how the police have dealt with pedophilic peeping toms - who manage to remotely turn on some young girl's computer's camera to watch.

harvey wrote:
We know that CAR doesn't make claims without supporting evidence. She certainly is not unhinged or paranoid. So she must have some pretty convincing evidence if she were going to make such a serious claim.

What do you think, ucodegen?

All I can say, is that I am not a psychiatrist. That was not my field of study.

Since you are moving sort of in the direction of liability, the statements also hinge on believablity on the part of the author. To that we can go to your past statements, as well as others as to whether such a statement might be believable and as to what the belief of yours and others on the voracity of this persons statements (on multiple subjects). Since you, FlyerInHi, etc do not hold CA renter's statements with much regard (actually in some fact, with some contempt), it reduces any potential for claim of injury. Add to that, the fact that this person has been admittedly 'Trolled' by one that might claim injury, it might eliminate any potential claim.

It works similar to how the justice handles someone going up to a big guy and punching them. That person can not claim 'assault' if that big guy then turns around after the individual him them and ends up knocking out the person with one hit. - could also be seen as a legal variant of 'unclean hands'.

Another aspect of liability due to statements is whether the person making the statement is considered an expert in the field they are making a claim about. I don't think CA renter is a computer expert, forensic or otherwise. This provides a great deal of immunity to their statements.

Note that I said I suspected you of doing this; I did not claim as fact that you hacked my computer via Piggington.

Why did I make this statement? Because you have very intentionally and maliciously trolled me for years, and you've done so repeatedly without any provocation on my part. You have purposely used the quote feature to make it look like I've said things that were never stated by me -- you've done this numerous times, even after I repeatedly told you to stop. You've intentionally and maliciously stated or implied (without using the quote feature) that I've said things that were never stated by me -- again, you've done this numerous times. You've made extremely viscious posts in an attempt to attack and defame me without any provocation on my part. On multiple threads, you've disrupted the conversation and diverted the conversations into personal attacks against me. If anyone were to have reason to file a defamation lawsuit, it would be me.

When I commented about someone trying to access my camera and microphone via Piggington, you responded with very inappropriate and suspicous replies -- comments that would not make sense if posted by innocent or "regular" posters.

You are a literal troll and, based on your posting history, the most obvious person who would try to access my camera and microphone through this site.

It's true that I'm not a techie, but there is no doubt that someone tried to access my computer's hardware via Piggington (as shown in the screen captures in the linked thread). You are the most obvious suspect (again, I said "suspect," not that you did, in fact, hack my computer). One does not need hard evidence in order to suspect someone of committing a crime, they only need to show that there is a reason to suspect someone of committing a crime. You've provided plenty of reasons to suspect you of doing this.

Submitted by harvey on April 23, 2018 - 7:40am.

Lol, you aren't accusing me, just stridently repeating that I'm the only suspect.

Out of the zillion ways your computer could have been reached, I'm the "obvious" choice because I hurt your pride and mocked your nonsense on an internet forum.

And the only evidence required is your mental gymnastics and need for attention.

Submitted by ucodegen on April 23, 2018 - 12:05pm.

harvey wrote:

I get what you are saying: Even if someone was hacked, there is no way anyone could know the person on the other end. Only the ISP would know, and they would not even investigate without a warrant.

Actually, that is not what I said. I did not reveal all the ways to find out. I gave you 'a' way to find out that can be used by law enforcement - and preserves the evidence chain for prosecution. I also gave incomplete info of all the steps.

harvey wrote:

In other words, CAR has no evidence whatsoever.

If she had evidence, she could call the cops instead of posting a butthurt survey on an obscure real-estate website.


It is most likely true that she has no evidence, only a hunch partially brought on by being targeted by trolling as well as a sparse knowledge of how computers and the internet works.

That said, if you do have computer and network expertise and did manage to pull off something like she claims, I wouldn't rest easy. - Note: IMHO, I consider this last item a very very extreme far off possibility, partially because I saw and tracked the Google links in the Piggington web page.

Most people who have actually been hacked tend to flail around, not doing the things they should actually do. ie. use the Wayback machine to capture the image and refs in the web page in question (immediately), do a local capture of the webpage (save page as), get a person, preferably with law enforcement background to take a look ASAP.. and by all means, avoid giving a warning - let the hammer drop do the warning.

harvey wrote:

Quote:
All I can say, is that I am not a psychiatrist.

That's unfortunate, because CAR really needs one.

Is that your clinical opinion as someone with expertise of psychiatry or are you using safe harbor of no experience within the field?

Submitted by FlyerInHi on April 23, 2018 - 12:19pm.

Whatever you say.... CAr has no evidence at all. She drawing conclusions out of paranoia and emotions. It would be less funny is she didn’t claim to be be facts based.

Submitted by ucodegen on April 23, 2018 - 12:37pm.

CA renter wrote:

Why did I make this statement? Because you have very intentionally and maliciously trolled me for years, and you've done so repeatedly without any provocation on my part. You have purposely used the quote feature to make it look like I've said things that were never stated by me -- you've done this numerous times, even after I repeatedly told you to stop. You've intentionally and maliciously stated or implied (without using the quote feature) that I've said things that were never stated by me -- again, you've done this numerous times. You've made extremely viscious posts in an attempt to attack and defame me without any provocation on my part. On multiple threads, you've disrupted the conversation and diverted the conversations into personal attacks against me. If anyone were to have reason to file a defamation lawsuit, it would be me.

BTW harvey/pridk, if the above is true, this is where you might have real liability with respect to internet stalking and harassment. I even showed where someone was jailed for Trolling. The proof of any harassment, if it exists, is on Piggington and does not require a warrant to view. I gave links to some of what is happening in that field of internet stalking, trolling and harassment with respect to law enforcement.

I knew where you were going with some of your questions and that is why I worded my replies carefully but accurately. I got the feeling that you would try to use my statements as Trolling material against CA renter.

re: flu/this thread
It is funny unless you are a target, particularly of some forms of Trolling. CA renter has handled it incorrectly, sometimes getting a bit long winded and taking it personally instead of disengaging emotions and thinking about what is really happening when addressing statements and then taking the approach of addressing intent instead of specifics.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on April 23, 2018 - 12:43pm.

ucodegen, your long winded posts are just deflection just like CAr’s

CAr said civil defamation above and somehow you relate her post to criminal harassment.

All I see is mocking and parody.

Submitted by ucodegen on April 23, 2018 - 12:47pm.

FlyerInHi wrote:
Whatever you say.... CAr has no evidence at all. She drawing conclusions out of paranoia and emotions. It would be less funny is she didn’t claim to be be facts based.

Umm, how is this any different than what I said? I also brought up issues of targeted trolling leading to potential paranoia coupled with lack of computer expertise. I did it in a way to clarify and defuse anger/paranoia/emotions.

How is your statement additive of clarative? It is more like the actions of a punk kid that went up to someone I had pinned to the ground for mall security and kicking the guy that I pinned in the ribs for no real reason. Just want to keep stirring the pot - eh?

Submitted by ucodegen on April 23, 2018 - 12:53pm.

FlyerInHi wrote:
ucodegen, your long winded posts are just deflection just like CAr’s

CAr said civil defamation above and somehow you relate her post to criminal harassment.

All I see is mocking and parody.


I guess you have a attention span problem. Your approach is deflection - mine is directly addressing and explaining. I responded to harvey, showing how she most likely had no proof, why she had no proof, what would be needed for proof, addressed harvey's questions directly, showed where there is and isn't liability. I also showed what L.E. would see, and what harvey might want to watch out for in terms of L.E.

Submitted by njtosd on April 23, 2018 - 12:54pm.

Leaving aside the thing about the camera and the microphone - this exchange reminds me of something my mother used to say "Don't get into a shitting match with a skunk." I should do it in needlepoint on a pillow :). Harvey is a mean guy - no point in wasting your breath.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on April 23, 2018 - 1:16pm.

njtosd wrote:
Leaving aside the thing about the camera and the microphone

Can you really leave that aside? That goes to the crux of this thread, CAr’s frame of mind. Perhaps she feels targeted but it’s all mocking and parody.

If I recall, CAr has criticized monorities who get easily offended. And now she wants to carve out her own safe space.

Submitted by harvey on April 23, 2018 - 2:15pm.

njtosd wrote:
Leaving aside the thing about the camera and the microphone - this exchange reminds me of something my mother used to say "Don't get into a shitting match with a skunk." I should do it in needlepoint on a pillow :). Harvey is a mean guy - no point in wasting your breath.

Lol, "Leaving aside the absurd lies in the accusation..."

But point taken. We just need to stop being "mean" and start making bizarre unfounded accusations in order to restore the decorum.

Of course that's not how ethical behavior works. We don't get to "leave aside" the massive pile of shit in the middle of the room.

Oh, since you just called me a name - an actual ad hominem, I better check my webcam logs...

Submitted by flu on April 23, 2018 - 2:20pm.

ucodegen wrote:

re: flu/this thread
It is funny unless you are a target, particularly of some forms of Trolling. CA renter has handled it incorrectly, sometimes getting a bit long winded and taking it personally instead of disengaging emotions and thinking about what is really happening when addressing statements and then taking the approach of addressing intent instead of specifics.

I'm not laughing at the CAR.

I'm laughing at all responses blowing this way out into left field, not at anyone one specific person. The moment this thread started and about 3-4 threads into it (and the other one about pensions), how would this thread end up other than they way it did?

Many of the threads started these days is just to stir up the pot. Why out of all the forums that exist all over internet, for example, do people choose to vent about politics, public policy, etc, here? Simple. Because anywhere else, the user(s) would have been banned a long time ago and those want eyeballs. I would think if trolling politics is really your thing, go camp out on Breitbart and piss off people there.

Anyway, it's entertaining...almost as entertaining as posts on Nextdoor. miataturbo.net is not nearly as much fun to read. People get banned just for asking stupid questions, lol.