Mike Duffy
Tue, 18 Apr 2017
16:39:22 GMT in alt.comp.freeware, wrote:

On Tue, 18 Apr 2017 07:54:33 +0100, David B. wrote:

(redacted) doesn't need sympathy, Mike.

So why did you say 2 posts upstream: "Perhaps they may now be more
sympathetic". As he pointed out in a parallel thread, he never
asked for sympathy. It looks more like you David are just trying
to make yourself look more empathic than your heart makes you
feel. Why is that?

He's continuing to try and stalk. And, he's only writing all this
**** about me to see if he's actually been filtered or not. He has
been, and, it's ****ing him off.


Are you aware that (redacted) had suicidal tendencies

I am aware that you keep saying so. Was this a private message you
should not have shared, a forged message, or one where you have
distorted the context? Even if it were truly something he said
publicly, it still amounts to personal feelings that a normal
person would not keep repeating.

Multiple answers. He's making assumptions, and distorting what was
actually written, to boot.

See here for a nice example. Yes, he totally ignored what you wrote,
point by point, and took it upon himself to not only discredit his
previous claim about a wasting away disease, but to slap you in the
face as well.


distorted the context, of course. As he did he
Message-ID:

I'd credit the individual who emailed the post to me, but, I don't
want David trying to stalk them or use them to send messages to me.
As I told him, I got tired of his bull**** and I added him to
filtering; ie: ****canned him. According to that post, the 'wasting
away disease' is complete and utter BULL**** created by David Brooks
in an effort to slime.

1) Respect his privacy. Part of this is following his request not
to use his real name here, despite that fact that everyone knows
it already. I even bothered to redact it in my inclusions above
because it seems that this is too complicated for you to
understand.

He does that for google search efforts. Only an idiot wouldn't see
that. His idea of payback for getting himself dox'd in a grand way;
..nfo file release contents. Had he not created a gsv of what he
thought was my house; duplicated into multiple newsgroups as a new
post (not cross posted) he wouldn't have had his own ass dox'd as a
result. He paid another poster he met in person lip service when that
poster explained why his actions ****ed me off. And, his claim that
he was just testing to see if he could create a gsv of an address was
a damn lie, too. There was no need to 'test' it multiple times in
multiple newsgroups. He did that because I essentially got tired of
his bull**** email correspondence and told him to pound sand.
Paraphrased.

He didn't realize my email client keeps all correspondence and allows
for easy play by play reconstruction of all emails related to the
subject. Everything he sent me, as well as my replies, in the order
they were sent.

http://bughunter.it-mate.co.uk/bdemail1.zip

He didn't think I had those emails, OR, would go ahead and publish
our entire conversation; which clearly indicates he had alterior
motives for contacting me from the get go. He was looking to get some
dirty **** done to another System administrator for banning him. It's
because I refused that he created the gsv (trying to intimidate me).
The gsv routine is what got him dox'd via .nfo files and usenet. He's
been looking for payback ever since.

2) Freely give tech tips if I know answers offhand, instead of
making him jump through hoops.

Yep.

3) Don't respond to posts forged in his name or posted by the
anonymous coward.

Not only does he respond, he happily quotes them verbatim before
doing so. It's all about trying to **** me over. And only an idiot
wouldn't see it for what it is. Desperation from an old man who isn't
tech savvy out to punish someone who did nothing more initially than
refuse to help him gain unauthorized access to systems he wasn't
welcome on. He was banned from them for violating their policies
multiple times. He still thinks it's perfectly okay to create new
accounts and/or use other means to evade the bans already set. He has
no concept of other peoples property.

4) Don't go on about stuff he did during the previous millenium
that he has apologized for several times.

He'll never stop doing that. As I've written, multiple times, it's
always been about trying to **** me over because I refused to help
him **** someone else over. Everytime he takes a shot at me and
misses, and I return fire and score a direct hit, it ****es him off
that much more. He stupidly thought he could 'force my hand' with his
bull**** gsv routines. It only backfired and got him in a world of
****. As a result of his actions, I learned he has a serious drinking
problem, he's abusive, and doesn't respect anyone or their stuff.

He copies my stuff without permission, uploads it elsewhere, and
provides urls to it. he also bragged multiple times, after
threatening to do it, posting the short video that no longer has an
audio track to youtube. He tried to solicit help to restore the
missing audio track because he thought I had a speech issue; which is
a lie, and he knows it too. He just wanted to have a viable copy of
the video to try and **** me over with it. As he does other things.

When I did eventually provide a functional copy of the video
(granted, I did encrypt the zip file, so he can't just unzip and
abuse it) he proceeded to solicit the help of others to gain access
to it's contents for him.

In the process, he exposed the incompetence of the lead researcher
for Malwarebytes. When I laughingly pointed that out, he quickly
generated a bull**** story about lengthy discussions between him and
the incompetent one claiming they discussed all sorts of shenanigans
I supposedly did. I did NOTHING OF THE SORT and the incompetent
researcher had no right to try and get him access to my zip file.

It wasn't malware, AND, I'm a former employee of the same company.
The entire shenanigans claim is the direct result of her
demonstrating serious incompetence of the matter. Not only did she
expose her own ignorance, she exposed that of others as David was
only too happy to say she asked others to help her, and they all
FAILED to gain entry into that zip file.

I'm sure he forwarded carefully taken snippits of usenet posts to the
individual in an effort to rile them up, so, that's when he came up
with the shenanigans nonsense; which is exactly! what that was, too.

I didn't make trouble/cause problems for any of my coworkers. Not one
single time. I got along fine with ALL of them, even when I was told
not to worry about any of the bugs/security vulnerabilities I found
on my own, years! prior to any of them becoming public thanks to
project zero. I was told years prior that it wasn't any of my
concern, nothing to worry about, they had it under control. They
never did. They just didn't expect anyone to discover them outside
the company.



--
I would like to apologize for not having offended you yet.
Please be patient. I will get to you shortly.