beastie wrote:I have a third option, one which I thought was silly when it first occurred to me, but, the more I consider it, the more feasible it seems.
The person who posts as Scratch also posts as someone else, and has for a very long time. And that second "identity" was invited to liz's site all along.
Scratch is a gifted writer, with control over his style. I can easily imagine him pulling it off.
We may never know, but I'd love to know if I'm right. It would be fascinating.
Well, Beastie, if this were the case, Liz would probably know. She can see people's IP addresses, after all.
Hiding (misdirecting) IP's is pretty easy Scratch. At the very least, it would be a simple thing to use one IP exclusively for each sock puppet.
ETA: You're also assuming liz has gone through and consolidated all the IPs ever used here into a list that shows every user name that's used them.
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
Schmo wrote:Hiding (misdirecting) IP's is pretty easy Scratch. At the very least, it would be a simple thing to use one IP exclusively for each sock puppet.
This is very true.
The thing is...I wasn't even asking who the "leak" was....if there indeed was a leak. At this point, I really don't care! All I want to know is exactly how my security was infiltrated. I think it's a fair question.
The thing is...I wasn't even asking who the "leak" was....if there indeed was a leak. At this point, I really don't care! All I want to know is exactly how my security was infiltrated. I think it's a fair question.
While it may be a fair question I would expect that however it was done may be useful in the future as well, perhaps, explain other past incidents. Withholding that information would prevent you, as well as others, from securing against that method.
I am not defending it Liz, I just don't think you can expect someone to tell you how it was done.
"Any over-ritualized religion since the dawn of time can make its priests say yes, we know, it is rotten, and hard luck, but just do as we say, keep at the ritual, stick it out, give us your money and you'll end up with the angels in heaven for evermore."
The thing is...I wasn't even asking who the "leak" was....if there indeed was a leak. At this point, I really don't care! All I want to know is exactly how my security was infiltrated. I think it's a fair question.
While it may be a fair question I would expect that however it was done may be useful in the future as well, perhaps, explain other past incidents. Withholding that information would prevent you, as well as others, from securing against that method.
I am not defending it Liz, I just don't think you can expect someone to tell you how it was done.
liz3564 wrote:The thing is...I wasn't even asking who the "leak" was....if there indeed was a leak. At this point, I really don't care! All I want to know is exactly how my security was infiltrated.
Are you kidding? Seriously?
Liz, there was someone (pick any person that you wish. Anyone) that was in your circle there (that was an invited café member) that did not like what/who was being talked about (again, I will not comment on the "report/information" being accurate or not, as it has exactly nothing to do with the reality that it was done.)
I think it's a fair question.
Perhaps it is fair, but the answer to your question (no matter how many times or different ways you ask it) is plainly clear. I simply can't imagine why you keep beating yourself up over this nor do I understand how you can miss the 800 lb. Gorilla that, in my view, is sitting directly in front of you.
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14
Sorry I am frustrating you, Ceeboo. I think, however, since Scratch has sufficiently frustrated me, I can frustrate him a little in return.
The reason I say I don't care about who the leak was, is because I will deal with that in my own way.
Scratch, however, is the one who decided to bring this all public...not whoever it was who "leaked" the information.
I think that other members here may want to be aware that if Scratch has any type of grudge against you..watch out. He will go to great lengths to dig up information about you off-board, and take great joy in destroying things you created.
Also, please remember that I attempted to handle this privately between Scratch and myself. He is the one who wouldn't hear of that, either.
Why don't you tell everyone why I won't send you PMs anymore, Liz.
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14
Also, Ceeboo, since you seem to be all-knowing regarding this situation, maybe you can answer this question.
Why didn't whoever leaked the information have the guts to come to me directly?
If they were unhappy about how I was running my board, the logical thing would have been for them to have come to me, and given me an opportunity to fix it.
If that situation happened here, on this board, I would expect members to go to Shades.
As a Moderator, when folks have filed grievances about things they dislike about the board, I ALWAYS refer them directly to Shades.