That tends to fracture the discussion, and is actually discouraged in the posting guidelines.

Certainly cross-forum reference posts serve useful purposes, and are recommended when applicable.

But pick a main forum for the content, and provide links to it in the auxiliary forums, maybe which some elaboration about why the cross-link is relevant.

Cry it out ladies!>

* * * * *

As always - what's your point <dice>?

Oh yeah, right, wasting <CG> bandwidth.

I still think you made or ordered the attack and it won't change my opinion.>

Allowed to fester, the wound will spread, growing larger and larger, filling up with yellow pus.

This is what <Keyster Sore> is, and if allowed to spread his lies and misinformation than <CG> only has itself to blame.

I'm hard on <Susan>, sure, but I'm fair. And time after time I tried to alert her to these infectious and corrosive members of <CG> so that the inflection could be lanced early, and the damage avoided.

If you're slow to know the score, then avoidable damage is done before you're forced to settle the score.

And <KS>'s score is less than zero. But go ahead and allow his deplorable lies and slurs to continue.

But don't say you weren't warned, again.

I still think you made or ordered the attack and it won't change my opinion.>

More proof that Kiester knows less than zero.

<GW> openly threatened <CG>, and knew enough to booster his threat with tales of using VPN's to hide originating IP's.

And you say that he's lacking programming experience? I say only a fool were make that conclusion.

* * * * *

<<KS> - For the record ...

<Z MANGEYENA>>

Again, an obvious exhibition of less-than-zero knowledge of the true score.

<KS> not only demonstrates that he's not got a clue, he also exhibits his disregard of possible damage done to innocent members of <CG> by dragging them into his personal crusade against all things Z.

What would you expect from someone who creates a blog to slander and libel another fine member of <CG>. Despicable.

<CG> should not allow such slanderous posts to be published. Daniel wouldn't. He would insist that users use email. And, in this case, he's toss the email straight into the trash.

* * * * *

For the record, as the <CG> admins posted for all to see:

<Z MANGEYENA> was actually <BP>/<GW> masquerading as a Z-alias.

<KS> demonstrated his total ignorance, and a dangerous willingness to distort facts to fit his distorted views of the situation.

Again, I call for <CG> admins to nip this outlandish slander in the bud.

Time to choose <Ms. Freeman>

How can <z> or anyone else impersonate <gw>/<bp> to hack the server - conspiracy theoriest got to explain that in terms of the proof mentioned by Steve : (i) IP address and (ii) email

That is not what conspiracy theorists have done so far - they appear to let their emotions do the talking without giving any logical refutation.

"Steve , what is the proof " , they repeatedly , vociferously demanded and would not move on .

And when Steve explained the proof , they not addressing that proof at all and giving simplistic conspiracy theories which not addressing the proof explained by Steve at all .

I remember this. It's the worst offense ever perpetrated by someone on this website. Jim's a public figure. The damage caused can't be known.

<Check it Out> it is certainly a criminal act. Not to mention an absurd and obviously gratuitous charge made by the worst troll who ever came to cg.com and we all know exactly who he is.

(So is the marrow.)

To do so in what circumstance? To impact in what way?>

From the horse's mouth:

<Aug-07-22 George Wallace: Now about sock accounts, well, they might be necessary now that tyranny and censorship is back in power here at <CG>.

I have a contractor from Bangladesh who screwed up a job I put him on. He wants to get more gigs from me, but he's in the dog house. I wouldn't even have to pay him anything, not a dime, for him to use a VPN and create 1000 accounts over the next year, every day, a few here and there. All I have to do is make it an addon to the next job and he'll do it for free.

Different IP addresses every time (down to the Class C IP), different locations, different emails - very easy.

Especially someone bent on harassing other <CG> users.

Remember when <bippy> flooded the <Bistro> with large tracts of Chaucer (I think - wasn't it the "Canterbury Tales", plus more)? This went on for, what, about a week or two?

I believe he did it as a DoS against <Hazz> in particular, and maybe others. The malicious intent being clear, as a search would reveal.

Imagine what an army of malicious socks could do?

Imagine what havoc having a 1000 socks at your beck and call could do.

In fact, I suspect I might have experienced this firsthand. And I believe <bippy> was bragging about it at the time, in oh so slightly veiled measure.

<z> I remember that, unless there was more than one "that" and I missed a few.

I recall him flooding the forum with passages from Goethe in order to enrage <Travis Bickle> or; and/or; <Hozza>.

Mephistopholes was the work in question. He posted a new passage daily which he typed out from a book. I don't think he was copy and pasting, because there were too many transcription errors.

Setting aside the presumably, well, after all, it hasn't been a year. But you and the admins both referenced this. It's okay, the underlying truth is still what it is, but you lost this point.>

Iliad

<This went on for, what, about a week or two?>

They lost the point and you won the point ?

Not so fast please . Let us see ...

The point that admins made was like : these posts of <gw>/<bp> show that he was (i) willing to cause damage to cg and (ii) capable of causing that damage.

Please explain clearly your refutation of these point points. I do not see any refutation from you of these two points

<Optimal play > on the other hand tried to refute . His refutation was like <<gw>/<bp> is stupid/fat, big mouth braggart /silly/immature but he is not evil >

That is a good defence . Kind of the defence that we see in court cases in movies and in real life too <your honour , my client is not evil , he just mentally insane and that is why he committed murder >

Except that in such cases a psychiatric evaluation is needed.

2) so , please state your refutation clearly , <ocf>.

Like <optimal play> , is your defence for <gw >/<Bp> also the same : <<gw>/<bp> is stupid/big fat mouth braggart/silly/immature but not evil > ?

If yes , then you guys need to produce evaluation from psychiatric/psychologist

3) please allow me to repeat : just move on please - it is way too embarrassing for you guys.

Please stop digging , hole you guys are in is way too deep already .