Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

On Oct 16, 2016 6:30 AM, "Cari Machet" wrote: > > We have male and female aspects of our own selves and also in there in our psyche and spirit Dear Cari, Sorry for the bad joke/confession, but in the beginning, I thought it was very ridiculous when someone mentioned that I could be a "man" usi

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

My lovely Cari, Hope you and all your loved ones be blessed in this lovely day. Thanks a lot for your sincere kindness! <3 I am not Muslim, but I live next to a Mosque and already studied and worked with Muslims. All I had seem in all these years is respect, honor and tolerance. I respect the

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

So its not muslims that treat women like crap really so much its more everyone ... men women children ... infants ... thats the culture all around and this list isnt living in a bubble We have male and female aspects of our own selves and also in there in our psyche and spirit we treat the female

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

Hi sea sea honey.- Muslim's are know to treat their women like shit - please run away to America the land of the free. Original Message On Oct 14, 2016, 9:40 AM, Cecilia Tanaka wrote: On Fri, 14 Oct 2016 20:46:51 -0400 John Newman wrote: > > > On Oct 14, 2016, at 7:23 PM, j

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

On Oct 14, 2016 4:22 PM, "Razer" wrote: > > Someone sending me "I want to bury my face in your lap and smell your aroma or I'll commit suicide" Hahaha!!! Sorry, the idea is pretty fun. "Or you let me bury my face in your lap, or I'll commit suicide!" Hahaha!!! It's a direct threat much bette

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

On 10/14/2016 12:00 PM, Mirimir wrote: > On 10/14/2016 12:13 PM, Razer wrote: > > > >> I've violated NO ONE'S privacy. > > You've done what you've done. Others will act accordingly. > > > Stupidly ambivalent. Explain how posting an UNWANTED AND UNSOLICITED EMAIL violates the right to pri

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

On 10/14/2016 12:13 PM, Razer wrote: > I've violated NO ONE'S privacy. You've done what you've done. Others will act accordingly.

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

On 10/14/2016 11:51 AM, Shawn K. Quinn wrote: > On Fri, 2016-10-14 at 11:46 -0600, Mirimir wrote: >> On 10/14/2016 11:09 AM, Shawn K. Quinn wrote: >>> No moderator worth his/her salt would ever have approved your posting. >>> Something to think about. >>> >>> Reposting email clearly intended to be

Re: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

> On Oct 14, 2016, at 2:13 PM, Razer wrote: > > > >> On 10/14/2016 10:09 AM, Shawn K. Quinn wrote: >> Reposting email clearly intended to be private > > > Spam mail is intended to be private too. So I shouldn't pass that info > on to a sysadmin or other person who might be spammed due to, l

Re: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

On Fri, 14 Oct 2016 13:02:04 -0500 "Shawn K. Quinn" wrote: > On Fri, 2016-10-14 at 15:07 -0300, juan wrote: > > On Fri, 14 Oct 2016 12:51:00 -0500 > > "Shawn K. Quinn" wrote: > > > > > > > Can we agree that there's crap that never should make it on to the > > > list to begin with, > > > > >

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

On 10/14/2016 10:09 AM, Shawn K. Quinn wrote: > Reposting email clearly intended to be private Spam mail is intended to be private too. So I shouldn't pass that info on to a sysadmin or other person who might be spammed due to, let's say, hijacked address book? IOW You ARE NOT MAKING A VALID P

Re: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

hi hi jaun ;- Original Message On Oct 14, 2016, 10:59 AM, juan wrote: On Fri, 14 Oct 2016 12:51:00 -0500 "Shawn K. Quinn" wrote: > Can we agree that there's crap that never should make it on to the > list to begin with, Like your constant calls for censorship and your

Re: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

On Fri, 2016-10-14 at 15:07 -0300, juan wrote: > On Fri, 14 Oct 2016 12:51:00 -0500 > "Shawn K. Quinn" wrote: > > > > Can we agree that there's crap that never should make it on to the > > list to begin with, > > > Like your constant calls for censorship and your sick #$%&#$%&# >

Re: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

On Fri, 14 Oct 2016 12:51:00 -0500 "Shawn K. Quinn" wrote: > Can we agree that there's crap that never should make it on to the > list to begin with, Like your constant calls for censorship and your sick americunt propaganda, for instance. > such as the explicit garbage cle

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

On Fri, 2016-10-14 at 11:46 -0600, Mirimir wrote: > On 10/14/2016 11:09 AM, Shawn K. Quinn wrote: > > No moderator worth his/her salt would ever have approved your posting. > > Something to think about. > > > > Reposting email clearly intended to be private is often in poor taste, > > even if tech

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

On 10/14/2016 11:09 AM, Shawn K. Quinn wrote: > On Fri, 2016-10-14 at 06:34 -0700, Razer wrote: >> Anyone wanna 'grab a digital #$%&#'? >> >> Some people like 'em nuts. >> >> >> I'm not interested. > > No moderator worth his/her salt would ever have approved your posting. > Something to think abou

Re: Jake and Tor article

On 10/14/2016 11:11 AM, Razer wrote: > > > On 10/14/2016 09:45 AM, Mirimir wrote: >> On 10/14/2016 09:57 AM, Cecilia Tanaka wrote: >>> On Oct 14, 2016 10:28 AM, "Razer" wrote: Sound like information suppression to me... Jacob Appelbaum is a 'public >>> person' and subject to conversati

Re: Jake and Tor article

On 10/14/2016 09:45 AM, Mirimir wrote: > On 10/14/2016 09:57 AM, Cecilia Tanaka wrote: >> On Oct 14, 2016 10:28 AM, "Razer" wrote: >>> >>> Sound like information suppression to me... Jacob Appelbaum is a 'public >> person' and subject to conversation, and he expects it. Don't like it? >>> Don't

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

On Fri, 2016-10-14 at 06:34 -0700, Razer wrote: > Anyone wanna 'grab a digital #$%&#'? > > Some people like 'em nuts. > > > I'm not interested. No moderator worth his/her salt would ever have approved your posting. Something to think about. Reposting email clearly intended to be private is oft

Re: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

On Fri, 14 Oct 2016 12:34:59 -0400 John Newman wrote: > > An informal group dedicated to public education and dissemination of > encryption (also known as cryptography, the science and art of secret > writing). I originally hosted the mailing list (cypherpu...@toad.com) > and provided space for

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

> It's a waste of time and bandwidth responding to ... Lulz > Or the psychological stalking by Translation: When you call him on lies and bullshit, it's 'psychological stalking' ..thats so full of win, I'm going to start using that. Outright lie, and when called on it 'Hey, don't psychologicall

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

Whoops! Sorry, just read it now. On Oct 14, 2016 1:30 PM, "Razer" wrote: > > Women are perfectly capable of defending their own honor. Agreed. Razer is correct. I am completely able of defending my honor by myself. I didn't ask for any help or sympathy. Now, let's talking about cryptography

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

On 10/14/2016 10:22 AM, xorc...@sigaint.org wrote: >> >> Fishing for an age... Wrong. Don't bother trying again. >> > > Not two minutes before you sent the above quoted message, you posted a > message saying your reply would be the last in thread. Obviously not. > > But whatever. Uhm -- No, not f

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

On 10/14/2016 09:34 AM, John Newman responded to a troll responding to a troll: > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 05:52:50PM +0200, aestetix wrote: >> Make Cypherpunks Great Again. >> > > Lulz! I find it interesting that on John Gilmore's home page, under > accomplishments, he says the following about

Re: Jake and Tor article

On 10/14/2016 09:57 AM, Cecilia Tanaka wrote: > On Oct 14, 2016 10:28 AM, "Razer" wrote: >> >> Sound like information suppression to me... Jacob Appelbaum is a 'public > person' and subject to conversation, and he expects it. Don't like it? >> Don't read it. > > Razer, I love Jake and he knows it

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

Sorry, I've sent this message in private and forgot Razer likes only public messages. I will give a time and become a lurker again. No time and patience to waste with childish discussions. I apologize for the last threads, full of bullshit. Thank you for everything and, again, pardon for all th

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 05:52:50PM +0200, aestetix wrote: > Make Cypherpunks Great Again. > Lulz! I find it interesting that on John Gilmore's home page, under accomplishments, he says the following about the cypherpunks list: "The Cypherpunks (with Eric Hughes and Tim May) An informal group

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

On 10/14/2016 09:22 AM, xorc...@sigaint.org wrote: > Maybe you are a senile 1-yro after all? Because your memory is obviously > garbage But... umn, whatever you want to believe troll. Yeah, I said that was my last post in the thread. I misspoke. That's my last post addressing 'aff... CeCe' or

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

> > Fishing for an age... Wrong. Don't bother trying again. > Not two minutes before you sent the above quoted message, you posted a message saying your reply would be the last in thread. Obviously not. But whatever. Uhm -- No, not fishing at all. Maybe you are a senile 71-yro after all? Because

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

On 10/14/2016 09:06 AM, Александр wrote: > > 2016-10-14 18:52 GMT+03:00 Razer >: > > Is there some part of "Fuck Off" you fail to comprehend troll? > > Or are you simply looking for codependent sympathy from your next > stalking victims by posting that gi

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

On Oct 14, 2016 1:08 PM, "Александр" wrote: > > 2016-10-14 18:52 GMT+03:00 Razer : >> >> Is there some part of "Fuck Off" you fail to comprehend troll? >> >> Or are you simply looking for codependent sympathy from your next >> stalking victims by posting that gibberish? > > > Razer, i'm sure it's

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

2016-10-14 18:52 GMT+03:00 Razer : > Is there some part of "Fuck Off" you fail to comprehend troll? > > Or are you simply looking for codependent sympathy from your next > stalking victims by posting that gibberish? > Razer, i'm sure it's the second option. Mirmir is already deep inside her web..

Re: Jake and Tor article

On Oct 14, 2016 10:28 AM, "Razer" wrote: > > Sound like information suppression to me... Jacob Appelbaum is a 'public person' and subject to conversation, and he expects it. Don't like it? > Don't read it. Razer, I love Jake and he knows it very well. I was just trying to stop your creepy public

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

On 10/14/2016 08:50 AM, xorc...@sigaint.org wrote: >> Why the fuck did you forward this to the list? >> >> John > > There is indeed a certain ironic quality to a list like cypherpunks, which > is supposed to be privacy-centric, to be used for public displays of > private comms like this. > > I'

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

Make Cypherpunks Great Again. On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 03:50:01PM -, xorc...@sigaint.org wrote: Why the fuck did you forward this to the list? John There is indeed a certain ironic quality to a list like cypherpunks, which is supposed to be privacy-centric, to be used for public displays o

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

On 10/14/2016 08:29 AM, Cecilia Tanaka wrote: > On Oct 14, 2016 12:08 PM, "Razer" > wrote: >> >> I'm not some ... psychopath > > You are a hysterical, very noisy and dramatic psychopath, Razer. > > You are very sick. Please, as I said before, search for psychiatri

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

> Why the fuck did you forward this to the list? > > John There is indeed a certain ironic quality to a list like cypherpunks, which is supposed to be privacy-centric, to be used for public displays of private comms like this. I'd like to submit much of this thread as evidence for my much-debated

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

essage -------- > Subject: Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article > Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2016 02:09:30 -0300 > From: Cecilia Tanaka > > > I am really wasted, exhausted, breathing bad, but wanted to say *I do > love you* before trying to sleep.

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

On Oct 14, 2016 12:08 PM, "Razer" wrote: > > I'm not some ... psychopath You are a hysterical, very noisy and dramatic psychopath, Razer. You are very sick. Please, as I said before, search for psychiatric treatment with urgence. We both are crazy, but I only hurt myself. You hurt other peo

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

On Oct 14, 2016 11:57 AM, "Mirimir" wrote: > > On 10/14/2016 07:34 AM, Razer wrote: > > > > Anyone wanna 'grab a digital pussy'? > > > > Some people like 'em nuts. > > > > > > I'm not interested. > > > > Rr > > You really are an asshole, Razer. Total slime. Scum of the earth. Don't worry, Mirimir

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

rs granted' (as they say in the Mafia) Your troll friend just didn't seem to understand "Bug Off", so... Rr > >> Forwarded Message >> Subject: Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article >> Date:Fri, 14 Oct 2016 02:09:30 -0300

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

---- > Subject: Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article > Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2016 02:09:30 -0300 > From: Cecilia Tanaka > > > I am really wasted, exhausted, breathing bad, but wanted to say *I do > love you* before trying to sleep. Wish you l

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

Ok, I can't make anything if Razer prefers sex with little boys and to support Nambla. Sorry to everybody for this public soap opera. It's so bizarre that it becomes funny. I never will purr in laps of crazy hysterical guys like Razer again, I promise. So life goes on... :)

Re: Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

;em nuts. > > > I'm not interested. > > Rr > > Forwarded Message ---- > Subject:Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article > Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2016 02:09:30 -0300 > From: Cecilia Tanaka > > > I am really wasted, exhausted, breathing bad

Fwd: Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

Razer, hysterical as always. -- Forwarded message -- From: "Cecilia Tanaka" Date: Oct 14, 2016 12:45 AM Subject: Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article To: "Razer" On Oct 13, 2016 11:22 PM, "Razer" wrote: > > I haven't bee

Fwd: Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

Ok, tell the whole story at least. Who did contact me in private first? Do you want I send all the past messages too? -- Forwarded message -- From: "Cecilia Tanaka" Date: Oct 13, 2016 10:54 PM Subject: Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article To: "Ra

Re: Jake and Tor article

Sound like information suppression to me... Jacob Appelbaum is a 'public person' and subject to conversation, and he expects it. Don't like it? Don't read it. Rr On 10/13/2016 09:04 PM, Cecilia Tanaka wrote: > Please, guys, let's kill this thread forever. Sorry, this discussion is > _not_ health

Fwd: [unwanted offlist mail] Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article

Anyone wanna 'grab a digital pussy'? Some people like 'em nuts. I'm not interested. Rr Forwarded Message Subject:Re: It's for YOU! Fwd: Re: Jake and Tor article Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2016 02:09:30 -0300 From: Cecilia Tanaka I am

Re: Jake and Tor article

On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 6:59 AM, Henry Rivera <4chaos.onel...@gmail.com> wrote: > [regurgitation] Better articles exist... https://web.archive.org/web/20060104110330/http://crypto.nsa.org/f-21/blogger-in-the-lions-den.html

Re: Jake and Tor article

Please, guys, let's kill this thread forever. Sorry, this discussion is _not_ healthy. It was harmful to some persons, in special for me. I do love 'He-who-must-not-be-named-but-is-not-Lord-Voldermort' and it's everything ok now. No panic, no towels needed. Much love, good night kisses and swe

Re: Jake and Tor article

> CYBERSECURITY. When someone starts trolling for my psychological soft > spots under what I believe is a stolen identity, and invites a troll or > bot (rooty) posting shit like Trolling for psychological soft spots? On a list? I don't know, but I don't think that would be very effective. Maybe I'

Re: Jake and Tor article

On 10/13/2016 01:45 PM, Mirimir wrote: > On 10/13/2016 12:55 PM, Razer wrote: >> >> >> On 10/13/2016 11:13 AM, Mirimir wrote: >>> On 10/13/2016 11:27 AM, Razer wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Don't write to me off-list. >>> >>> >> >> Aww butthurt. > > No. It's very simple. You don't respect the distinct

Re: Jake and Tor article

> On Oct 13, 2016, at 10:42 AM, Razer wrote: > > Cc: cecilia.tan...@gmail.com > > I'll tell ya what Cecilia. If you don't stop setting me, and the list, > up for spam by using the spammer's handle and my handle FOR NO GOOD > REASON in the same emails ... I'm gonna start subscribing you to every

Re: Jake and Tor article

thank you me me and sea sea - rr is leaking oil badly the trick below has been dead for years and just doesnt work - . Original Message Subject: Re: Jake and Tor article Local Time: October 13, 2016 9:27 AM UTC Time: October 13, 2016 4:27 PM From: miri...@riseup.net To

Re: Jake and Tor article

On Oct 13, 2016 3:50 PM, "Razer" wrote: > > On 10/13/2016 11:30 AM, "Cecilia Tanaka" wrote garbage having nothing to do with anything: Razer, Sorry, you need psychiatric treatment with urgence. You are hysteric, very disturbed and the list certainly is loving your little show, but I am hating i

Re: Jake and Tor article

On 10/13/2016 12:55 PM, Razer wrote: > > > On 10/13/2016 11:13 AM, Mirimir wrote: >> On 10/13/2016 11:27 AM, Razer wrote: >> >> >> >> Don't write to me off-list. >> >> > > Aww butthurt. No. It's very simple. You don't respect the distinction between private and public messages. Given that, I w

Re: Jake and Tor article

On 10/13/2016 11:13 AM, Mirimir wrote: > On 10/13/2016 11:27 AM, Razer wrote: > > > > Don't write to me off-list. > > Aww butthurt. You contacted me first to dun me offlist. Don't waste my time. Rr

Re: Jake and Tor article

On 10/13/2016 11:30 AM, "Cecilia Tanaka" wrote garbage having nothing to do with anything: > Mirimir, my love, thank you very much for your kind intervention, but > please just relax and forget all this discussion. Too much ado about > nothing, dear. ;) > > I really don't care about this kind

Re: Jake and Tor article

On 10/13/2016 11:11 AM, Mirimir wrote: > On 10/13/2016 11:18 AM, Razer wrote: >> >> >> On 10/13/2016 10:06 AM, Mirimir opined: >> >> >>> It was just such a juvenile thing to say. And I don't even get what >>> you're upset about. It's just a fucking email list. >> >> >> There is no such thing as "

Re: Jake and Tor article

Mirimir, my love, thank you very much for your kind intervention, but please just relax and forget all this discussion. Too much ado about nothing, dear. ;) I really don't care about this kind of childish menace. I don't respect coward people and I don't have patience with brats, too pampered k

Re: Jake and Tor article

On 10/13/2016 11:18 AM, Razer wrote: > > > On 10/13/2016 10:06 AM, Mirimir opined: > > >> It was just such a juvenile thing to say. And I don't even get what >> you're upset about. It's just a fucking email list. > > > There is no such thing as "just a fucking email list". > > There IS such

Re: Jake and Tor article

On 10/13/2016 10:06 AM, Mirimir opined: > It was just such a juvenile thing to say. And I don't even get what > you're upset about. It's just a fucking email list. There is no such thing as "just a fucking email list". There IS such a thing as 'waste of bandwidth'. But I guess that depends

Re: Jake and Tor article

On Oct 13, 2016 11:42 AM, "Razer" wrote: > > Cc: cecilia.tan...@gmail.com > > I'll tell ya what Cecilia. If you don't stop setting me, and the list, up for spam by using the spammer's handle and my handle FOR NO GOOD REASON in the same emails ... I'm gonna start subscribing you to every White Supr

Re: Jake and Tor article

On 10/13/2016 08:42 AM, Razer wrote: > Cc: cecilia.tan...@gmail.com > > I'll tell ya what Cecilia. If you don't stop setting me, and the list, > up for spam by using the spammer's handle and my handle FOR NO GOOD > REASON in the same emails ... I'm gonna start subscribing you to every > White Supr

Re: Jake and Tor article

Cc: cecilia.tan...@gmail.com I'll tell ya what Cecilia. If you don't stop setting me, and the list, up for spam by using the spammer's handle and my handle FOR NO GOOD REASON in the same emails ... I'm gonna start subscribing you to every White Supremacist newsletter I can find. Then I'll start wo

Re: Jake and Tor article

On Oct 12, 2016 9:04 PM, "rooty" wrote: > > aff what is a Subversive Unicorn? Btw rr is NOT geOrgII for sure! > > affim not clicking the link Razer's unicorn is polite and uses the toilet seat. A subversive unicorn doesn't care about it. You don't need to click the link to imagine it.

Re: Jake and Tor article

aff what is a Subversive Unicorn? Btw rr is NOT geOrgII for sure! affim not clicking the link Original Message On Oct 12, 2016, 12:53 PM, Stephen D. Williams wrote: Thanks, cool! On 10/12/16 11:15 AM, Cecilia Tanaka wrote: On Oct 12, 2016 12:21 PM, "Razer" wrote: >

Re: Jake and Tor article

Thanks, cool! On 10/12/16 11:15 AM, Cecilia Tanaka wrote: > > On Oct 12, 2016 12:21 PM, "Razer" > wrote: > > > > HAHAHAHAHAHJHHA! ((espanol) JAJAJAJAJAJAJAJA! > > Now rooty will create a new conspiracy theory with the subject "Razer = > juan" and the dramatic advertenc

Re: Jake and Tor article

On Oct 12, 2016 12:21 PM, "Razer" wrote: > > HAHAHAHAHAHJHHA! ((espanol) JAJAJAJAJAJAJAJA! Now rooty will create a new conspiracy theory with the subject "Razer = juan" and the dramatic advertency "You have been warned", aff... :( * Bonus Hahaha!! - http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/arch

Re: Jake and Tor article

On Wed, 12 Oct 2016 08:20:22 -0700 Razer wrote: > HAHAHAHAHAHJHHA! ((espanol) JAJAJAJAJAJAJAJA! > > "Violet Blue Journalist"? > > Her last Medium post was in June and starts off waxing ecstatic about > all the publicity she was getting. > https://medium.com/@violetblue/but-he-does-good-work-671

Re: Jake and Tor article

HAHAHAHAHAHJHHA! ((espanol) JAJAJAJAJAJAJAJA! "Violet Blue Journalist"? Her last Medium post was in June and starts off waxing ecstatic about all the publicity she was getting. https://medium.com/@violetblue/but-he-does-good-work-6710df9d9029#.aui1mzcmb This Guardian article has nothing new what

Jake and Tor article

In the popular press: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/11/jacob-appelbaum-tor-project-sexual-assault-allegations