On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 22:07:03 -0800, Mark Thorson >
wrote:

>sf wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 04:01:56 GMT, Sqwertz >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 19:53:30 -0800, sf wrote:
>> >
>> >> He didn't take into account that
>> >> there are people who spoof headers to appear as others, they would
>> >> even take on Sheldon's persona.
>> >
>> >I'm well beyond deciphering simple spoofs such as those. What I
>> >didn't take into to account is something unique to AOL that
>> >doesn't take place when using any other ISP on the face of the
>> >planet. Which is the fact that AOL uses centralized proxies to
>> >spy on (and censor) everything their users do.
>> >
>> If I remember correctly, your conclusion was "maybe". Is that
>> correct?
>
>Yes, but that Sheldon was guilty of other stuff
>equally reprehensible, hence the original punishment
>is perfectly justified without regard to the
>factual nature of any claims used in the original
>indictment. Just like the case of Saddam Hussein.

Circumstantial evidence isn't the best argument.

--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smiley face first