williamk of wusik is spamming again.

[whyterabbyt]

This is exactly what you can't say, unless you have his signature, or an IP address that you can prove is from him. You can only say you suspect he is behind the e-mail, nothing else.

So you're saying that someone else, not william, is responsible for the email that came from william's website.

Do you have proof that someone has hacked william's mailing list provider and is sending promotional email on his behalf?

OTOH I may say that you are conducting a campaign to hurt him and his business. It is public you don't like him (you may have your reasons, but that's nothing to do with the current case), and the tile of the thread is an evidence of your prejudice.

So so far, you've said it didnt happen, that the other guys did it, and that even if it did happen, Im doing something bad so I either deserve it or Im not allowed to complain about it.

Well, we can see you're not prejudiced; quite willing to embrace any proposition that denies it happened.

Im certainly prejudiced against being spammed over and over again by the same person, and Im willing to admit that i'll publically try and get him to permanently stop every time he does so. Can you provide actual proof that that somehow means Im trying to cause him or his business hurt?

No you cant.

Your strongest evidence is the statement of "the folk at ruggedcircuits" (lets call him the secret testemony).

My strongest evidence that I received spam from william is that I received unsolicited email from a website run and owned by william.

What's your agenda for trying to posit every possible reason that a spade cannot be called a spade?

If that "folk" tells the truth, and wants to be taken seriously, than he has to announce that, effective immediately, he ceases all operations with Wusik and WilliamK.

That's not a logical conclusion under any circumstances.

[robogone]

I took the defnse hare because noone wasd doing it, and I was feeling bad to see this public lynching without any contradiction.

Shouldn't you rather look for defense evidence rather than doing it just because you felt bad?

He did this before (more than once I think) and if you read the thread you'll see that people remember it very well.

If this was first time I seriously doubt that the thread would have turned out this way.

[whyterabbyt]

robojam, THIS is what I call a "strong evidence".

evidently email being sent from a site william owns isnt strong enough.

Defense rests his case now.

'well okay you're honour, ive said the witness was a liar, ive said they did it themselves, i said the victim was asking for it, ive said it was someone else, ive said it never happened, and ive said that it isnt illegal in the first place.
but now my client has admiited it, defence rests his case'

But I would like to see, in the future, accusatio threads to start with evidences like this one, and not mere accusations.

In the future, you still wont be the one who decides whether or not spam counts as spam, ownership of a website counts as ownership of a website, and whether responsibility for spam which comes that website counts as responsibility for spam from that website.

So we'll stick to 'proof' as it actually is, not 'proof as not accepted by fmr who says it didnt even happen'. M'kay.

As I said, I have no relation with Wusik, and I took the defnse hare because noone wasd doing it, and I was feeling bad to see this public lynching without any contradiction.

yeah, right. 'nothing anyone says is true except that william didnt do it'.

No personal offense intended

plenty taken.

[DubFox]

/avoid wusik
/exit thread

[whyterabbyt]

/avoid wusik

if that was possibly to guarantee this thread wouldnt exist.

[whyterabbyt]

Dear Users,

Our sincerest apology for the inconvenience for the mistakenly sent emails.

We shall resolve this ASAP and will inform you within 24 hours what went wrong and what steps will be taken to prevent this from happening again.

Cheers, WilliamK and MoniKe

oh well, it was just a mistake. sorry, another mistake. crazy how often that can happen, eh.

i wonder why pwal was told differently, though.

I can't believe, this has nothing to do with me or Wusik, what a bunch of crazy people. I won't reply there, KVR policy: don't feed the trolls.

Wk

hmmm.

(of course, fmr will now argue that we cant 'prove' that william denied it to pwal... )

[Mushy Mushy]

I would have thought that if the names had been removed originally as requested, said mistake would be impossible to make...
But hey I'm just a troll

[filkertom]

... Seven pages of rant, counter-rant, claim, counter-claim, impassioned anger, vitriol, and righteous rage...

... or one click of the "Delete" button. Which is what I do when I get e-mail I don't like. Which is every day.

Choose wisely, grasshoppah. Life is short.

[robogone]

I can't believe, this has nothing to do with me or Wusik, what a bunch of crazy people. I won't reply there, KVR policy: don't feed the trolls.

Wk

hmmm.

(of course, fmr will now argue that we cant 'prove' that william denied it to pwal... )

Funny how he only admitted it once the link between the sites was publicly proven...

[JasonSpatola]

... Seven pages of rant, counter-rant, claim, counter-claim, impassioned anger, vitriol, and righteous rage...

Yeah, these threads are only really fun when gol is involved.

[whyterabbyt]

... Seven pages of rant, counter-rant, claim, counter-claim, impassioned anger, vitriol, and righteous rage...

... or one click of the "Delete" button. Which is what I do when I get e-mail I don't like. Which is every day.

Choose wisely, grasshoppah. Life is short.

Its easy enough to say 'deleting it is easy'. It pretty much misses the point that its better for everyone to try and stop it at the source.

[robogone]

... Seven pages of rant, counter-rant, claim, counter-claim, impassioned anger, vitriol, and righteous rage...

... or one click of the "Delete" button. Which is what I do when I get e-mail I don't like. Which is every day.

Choose wisely, grasshoppah. Life is short.

Its easy enough to say 'deleting it is easy'. It pretty much misses the point that its better for everyone to try and stop it at the source.

Also, how many of those junk folder emails comes from people who post at KVR and can be addressed directly?

Not sure about everyone else, but I think I would rather prevent spam from arriving in the first place rather than introduce the use of the delete button to my daily email reading routine.

[whyterabbyt]

Funny how he only admitted it once the link between the sites was publicly proven...

shouldnt we expect fmr to pop up and say "yes, but that's only proven circumstantially; maybe somebody else registered the site in william's name...?"


(*) and for the record, fmr fundamentally misrepresented 'circumstantial evidence' as intrinsically invalid instead of admitting that cumulatively, it becomes considered proof enough.

[experimental.crow]

[robogone]

Funny how he only admitted it once the link between the sites was publicly proven...

shouldnt we expect fmr to pop up and say "yes, but that's only proven circumstantially; maybe somebody else registered the site in william's name...?"

Well it is possible that I'm mistaken that John Smith is the most common name in the US and that Guilherme Kalfelz is considerably more common...