FUT: alt.security

"Shiver Me Timbers" wrote in message
...
wrote:

Neb,

This is the second time that you have posted under a fake name
pretending to be somebody else.

Your really this stupid.

I am telling you that if you do it again, compaints will be
filed against you.

Go right ahead.


ME........ IP addy - 161.184.141.129
Edmonton Alberta Canada
the home of tasty Alberta beef
and a Province that is debt free.

NEB........ posting from Ohio State University as far as I can tell.

AND YOU DENNIS ARE DUMBER THAN A STUMP.

Sounds like I should continue to digitally sign all of my posts to this
group to eliminate the confusion in the future.

I can see how someone with a non-S/MIME capable client might interpret the
cleartext signature as "binary".

The issue with binaries though is their massive size and S/MIME signatures
are smaller than the average post from "The OTHER Kevin in San Diego" which
I do enjoy reading.

Considering the small size, it shouldn't pose a measurable problem -
especially since I mostly lurk here - unless I'm trying to ask helicopter
pilots how to deal with the FAA when I video tape a crash or something.

And I'd also like to point out that NNTP "abuse" complaints for every ISP
I've ever seen require that the newsgroup charter specifically prohibit the
behavior that is considered abuse.

There is no "rec.aviation.binaries" newsgroup that I am aware of - and in
this case it is customary (in the case of large files such as images) to
warn folks and ask if they mind in advance.

S/MIME signed emails should not evoke fears of some slippery slope where
people will start posting images, flight simulator add-ons, and DVD rips to
the newsgroups.

People should really be able to deal with digital signatures by now. They
are nothing new to Usenet since over 2.5 million posts have been digitally
signed to date.

I've posted hundreds myself over the past few years with only a handful of
objections - largely from people who simply didn't understand and like to
"mother hen" everyone.