Re: [PLUG] The spirit also took Scrooge

[gabriel rosenkoetter <gr@eclipsed.net>]

On Thu, Nov 08, 2001 at 11:40:08AM -0500, Charles Stack wrote:
> BTW, I was responding to a statement from whom I believe represents Netaxes
> where she said that this person is a dialup user and was questioning their
> terms of service.

Which you can read for yourself at:

  http://www.netaxs.com/policies/aup.html

It took me about ten seconds to find this. Do your own homework.

> Yes.  It is our business.  If their actions (the infected user) are in
> violation of their terms of service and it impacts me, a non-customer, then
> it is my business.

But it is not the business of PLUG. Take that issue up with
abuse@netaxs.com.

> This individual puts an infected machine on the network and then fails to
> take corrective action.  Under the new anti-terrorism laws, I believe their
> is wording that *intentional* spreading of computer viruses constitutes a
> terrorist act.

Oh, come ON. Just because the duplicitous US gov't decided to pass
bullshit legislation making something that is obviously not a crime
illegal is no reason to berate some random Netaxs employee because
she tried to provide you with a little bit of internal information
to clear up a question on a totally unrelated mailing list.

If you want to continue this argument, do it privately and be aware
that I won't be responding.

> You do not know if others have been affected by this virus yet or not.

And, what's more, I don't care. If they took sane security precautions,
they'd have had no problems, even if this were an unknown virus,
which it was not.

> Now...I will let it die.

Thanks.

I apologize that I couldn't be mature enough to let some of the
above pass. If you hadn't tried to ride on the (unconstitutional,
unnecessary) USA PATRIOT Act, I'd have said nothing more, but you
tickled one of *my* pet peeves, as this whole thing seems to have
tickled one of yours.

-- 
       ~ g r @ eclipsed.net

Attachment: pgpnzHkGBpPAt.pgp
Description: PGP signature