ELAN.NET = Spam House in Disguise

2003-11-02 Thread Booth, Michael (ENG)
That post was rejected because of the words porn site. This was quite clear from the type of filtering message. I'm sure this post will generate exactly the same reply back to me... I'm not sure about that. I spoke with several large ISP abuse desks that have you blackholed, for wasting

Re: ELAN.NET = Spam House in Disguise

2003-11-02 Thread Booth, Michael (ENG)
And how about this one William? http://216.239.39.104/search?q=cache:Q7SpB-SrrT8J:www.collectibles-auctions-online.com/download_game_warez.html+%22216.151.192.0%22hl=enie=UTF-8 Google cache doesn't lie.

Re: Harassment (was Re: ELAN.NET ...)

2003-11-02 Thread Booth, Michael (ENG)
OK, enough is enough. We've all had a spammer or spam site sign up, and we've all (presumably) kicked them off. Why are you referencing data from some spam posting over 4 years old? Because, as I showed you, Elan is still hosting their domains. If William would take some action and clean

Re: abuse from a user of this list

2003-10-13 Thread Booth, Michael (ENG)
Based on the web pages at http://2mbit.com/ and http://www.sosdg.org/, I see an effort to improve the community not found at either http://www.poptix.net nor http://techmonkeys.org/. I didn't draw that conclusion at all. Much the opposite, judging from their photo gallery, they seem like

Re: abuse from a user of this list

2003-10-13 Thread Booth, Michael (ENG)
Now, I _do_ take offense to being called a script kiddie. I've been doing development for more then 7 years in various projects under various aliases. What aliases? Unless the aliases you've used include vixie and rbush, I think this is testament to your being a script kiddie, concealing

Re: Internet privacy

2003-10-03 Thread Booth, Michael (ENG)
What valid reason would you have for getting in contact with a domain owner, if they've unlisted themselves and don't want to be contacted? What valid reason is there for allowing a domain owner to be unlisted and uncontactable. If you want to remain anonymous, then you don't need a

Re: Edge 1 Networks/Williams Communications Group

2003-08-04 Thread Booth, Michael (ENG)
After several run-ins with Edge 1 Networks [69.44.28.0/22] having their machines hijack victim machines on our networks infected with Jeem, and then making their spam runs, I've had it. I have reported both to Edge 1 and their parent Williams Communications Group [AS7911] with no result