Roy Culley is an identity thief - Linux

This is a discussion on Roy Culley is an identity thief - Linux ; On Mon, 6 Oct 2008 20:56:44 -0500, Sinister Midget wrote: > On 2008-10-06, Erik Funkenbusch claimed: >> On Mon, 6 Oct 2008 17:51:11 -0500, Sinister Midget wrote: >> >>>> Now why would Roy Culley register a gmail address in my ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 61

Thread: Roy Culley is an identity thief

  1. Re: Roy Culley is an identity thief

    On Mon, 6 Oct 2008 20:56:44 -0500, Sinister Midget wrote:

    > On 2008-10-06, Erik Funkenbusch claimed:
    >> On Mon, 6 Oct 2008 17:51:11 -0500, Sinister Midget wrote:
    >>
    >>>> Now why would Roy Culley register a gmail address in my name?
    >>>
    >>> I don't know. Why would the many trolls register names in places like
    >>> gmail and yahoo in order to antagonise?

    >>
    >> So you're calling Roy a troll?

    >
    > Wrong inference. What you should have brought from that is: Why haven't
    > _you_ been concerned when your fellow travellers did the same things to
    > others who post here?


    If you're talking about Schestowitz, he gets what he deserves.
    He has pissed off people by posting stuff that is completely without merit
    and they are retaliating against him.

    If he would stick to facts, verifiable facts, he would probably be ignored.
    He doesn't.
    He makes himself a lightening rod and expects to not have strikes?

    That is like a 10 year old calling the town bully fat and not expecting to
    get a beating.

    >>>> What else has he been doing in my name?
    >>>
    >>> Possibly nothing. Have you checked?

    >>
    >> How would I check? Any suggestions?

    >
    > Does your name appear on search engines relating to things you haven't
    > had anything to do with? Have you been receiving email, threats,
    > subscriptions or anything else you shouldn't? Have your credit cards
    > been billed for things you didn't order or get? Does your free annual
    > credit report show accounts that you never established?


    I get threats, I get signed up for all kinds of really weird stuff.
    Nothing more though.


    >>> Maybe he uses it on a joke forum. I've seen Sarah-Palin and
    >>> B-Hussein-Obama on Craig's List (showing up as registered) a few times.
    >>> I've seen my own name used on a mailing list I used to subscribe to (I
    >>> was using a made-up name, but my real one was known).

    >>
    >> Using someone elses name without their permission is identity theft. At
    >> least in the case of high profile celebrities, one can make the case that
    >> nobody would believe it was really that person, but using a normal persons
    >> identity is pretty serious.

    >
    > So everybody on the planet with my name is stealing my identity? My
    > using a name not my own is "stealing" if another person exists that has
    > that name?


    The person doesn't even have to exist.
    Check the TOS for any of the email providers.
    They never explicitly demand you use your real name.

    Also, in the case of well known posters to blogs, Usenet etc, it really
    falls under the celebrity clause.
    Yes, Roy (and to a lesser degree all of us) are considered *celebrities*.

    IOW we by our own volition put our names into the public domain and choose
    to engage in controversial topics that will anger some people.


    > If someone takes your name and uses it to defraud either you or others
    > by stealing things from you, getting things for themselves that they
    > pretended were going to you, worked to get you in hot water in some
    > fashion by pretending to be you, or acted in any other similar ways, I
    > would agree that's identity theft.


    Agreed.
    If any financial gain, or attempt at financial gain is proved, the person
    is in serious trouble.



    > I still haven't been convinced that
    > this is more than the use of a name that you don't own by virtue of the
    > fact that anyone on the planet named Funkenbusch is entitled to name a
    > child Erik, or go to court and have their name changed to that no
    > matter what surname they were born into.



    It doesn't really matter.
    See above.


    > For all you know the name was registered to keep you from getting it
    > yourself. You weren't deprived because you didn't already have it. The
    > fact you came along later trying to get it doesn't automatically
    > entitle you to it.


    True.

    >>> I didn't know you owned that name in all circumstances. I don't think I
    >>> own my name just because it happens to be the one I was given. When I
    >>> wanted to make sure I owned my name somewhere I bought a domain.

    >>
    >> There's a difference between a psuedonym and a real name.

    >
    > So what? I get to sue everybody in the world who has the same name as
    > me? I could sue any living writers of the Dick Van Dyke Show because
    > they used my name as one of the characters? I'm automatically entitled
    > to relief just because someone used my name on a mailing list that I
    > didn't join, didn't receive anything from, didn't participate in,
    > didn't have any damage done to me because of it, but only because my
    > name was used?


    See the escape clause at the end of every single movie, TV show, play etc.

    Iow "The characters in this show are fictional, yada, yada, yada.....

    > I'd love to watch that 10 minutes in court before it was dismissed.


    It would never get to court because no lawyer in their right mind would
    take the case.

    Consider that it is almost impossible to prosecute REAL identity theft and
    you can see where this kind of stuff will go.


    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
    Please Visit www.linsux.org

  2. Re: Roy Culley is an identity thief

    Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

    > Oh, please. This is not some innocent usage of another persons name. This
    > is a deliberate attempt to misrepresent.


    Is your last name Queeg also?
    --
    Regards,
    [tv]

    ....Explosion at the Mint. Change in staff.

  3. Re: Roy Culley is an identity thief

    Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:

    > I get threats, I get signed up for all kinds of really weird stuff.
    > Nothing more though.


    Too bad.
    --
    Regards,
    [tv]

    ....Objects in taglines are closer than they appear.

  4. Re: Roy Culley is an identity thief

    In article ,
    Andrew Halliwell wrote:
    > News to me.
    > You truly are pathetic if you think erik's gmail and roy's spoofing are even
    > remotely similar.


    So when someone puts up a website attacking someone (Roy Culley has done
    this with Erik) and also registers a gmail address in the attacked
    person's name, you'll let that slide because he hasn't used the email
    address (yet) for anything bad?


    --
    --Tim Smith

  5. Re: Roy Culley is an identity thief

    Tim Smith writes:

    > In article ,
    > Andrew Halliwell wrote:
    >> News to me.
    >> You truly are pathetic if you think erik's gmail and roy's spoofing are even
    >> remotely similar.

    >
    > So when someone puts up a website attacking someone (Roy Culley has done
    > this with Erik) and also registers a gmail address in the attacked
    > person's name, you'll let that slide because he hasn't used the email
    > address (yet) for anything bad?


    It would appear that Halliwell is in competition with Liarmutt for the
    warm place on Roy's lap.

    Astonishing double standards.

    I had to blink when I saw Andrew effectively defending Culley's use of a
    gmail account in Erik's name.


  6. Re: Roy Culley is an identity thief

    Erik Funkenbusch espoused:
    > Hey everyone, long time... been busy on a new project, but something
    > interesting happened today that I thought I would share with the COLA
    > crowd.
    >
    > Check this out.
    >
    > I decided to create a gmail account, erik.funkenbusch@gmail.com, lo and
    > behold it was taken. So I thought, maybe I had created it earlier. Well,
    > I went into the password reset and the question was not a question I would
    > have chosen, so I tried to have it send me an email at the registered
    > alternate address. It said it sent an email to me at mrloy.com. That was
    > even more odd.
    >
    > A whois lookup on mrloy.com shows it's registered to one Roy Culley
    >
    > http://www.who.is/whois-com/ip-address/mrloy.com/
    >
    > Now why would Roy Culley register a gmail address in my name?
    >
    > What else has he been doing in my name?
    >
    > Waiting to see how you guys try to justify this dispicable behavior.


    I can't, but then, I can't justify yours either. You shouldn't even
    /be/ in this group. Read the charter, read the FAQ, and then go to the
    right group, because this isn't it.

    I'm afraid that whatever Roy might have done pales into a ghostly shadow
    compared with your own years and years of abuse of this group, the
    personal attacks on the regulars and more.

    --
    | mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | Open platforms prevent vendor lock-in. Own your Own services! |


  7. Re: Roy Culley is an identity thief

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    ____/ Mark Kent on Tuesday 07 October 2008 06:43 : \____

    > Erik Funkenbusch espoused:
    >> Hey everyone, long time... been busy on a new project, but something
    >> interesting happened today that I thought I would share with the COLA
    >> crowd.
    >>
    >> Check this out.
    >>
    >> I decided to create a gmail account, erik.funkenbusch@gmail.com, lo and
    >> behold it was taken. So I thought, maybe I had created it earlier. Well,
    >> I went into the password reset and the question was not a question I would
    >> have chosen, so I tried to have it send me an email at the registered
    >> alternate address. It said it sent an email to me at mrloy.com. That was
    >> even more odd.
    >>
    >> A whois lookup on mrloy.com shows it's registered to one Roy Culley
    >>
    >> http://www.who.is/whois-com/ip-address/mrloy.com/
    >>
    >> Now why would Roy Culley register a gmail address in my name?
    >>
    >> What else has he been doing in my name?
    >>
    >> Waiting to see how you guys try to justify this dispicable behavior.

    >
    > I can't, but then, I can't justify yours either. You shouldn't even
    > /be/ in this group. Read the charter, read the FAQ, and then go to the
    > right group, because this isn't it.
    >
    > I'm afraid that whatever Roy might have done pales into a ghostly shadow
    > compared with your own years and years of abuse of this group, the
    > personal attacks on the regulars and more.


    Bruce Perens (days ago):

    "[J]ust about every PR firm offers to help "manage the perception of your
    company in online communities" these days. What do you think that means?
    Astroturfing Slashdot, Youtube, etc. In my various manangement positions it's
    been offered to me. Indeed, some of the companies offer to create negative
    publicity for your competition that way - HP had a publicity firm for its
    Linux activities that told us it would do that when we wanted. I never asked
    them to do so and hope nobody else did either.

    "This stuff is just standard these days. You've got to expect it."

    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=985543&cid=25267133

    "I think mostly they'd like to dilute "Open Source" to mean any code with
    source code. This is important to them because it's the rights connected to
    Open Source that scare Microsoft (and others). If you can call it Open Source
    when there isn't even the right to compile the code, or to use the information
    you get from reading it, customers don't have a reason to ask for it any
    longer.

    "Their publicity agencies are here on Slashdot pumping that angle every day."

    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=985543&cid=25256649

    - --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | Citrix: device for turning XenSource into XenSoft
    http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    Mem: 2075800k total, 1546928k used, 528872k free, 64200k buffers
    http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

    iEYEARECAAYFAkjrD4gACgkQU4xAY3RXLo64FQCgicPBoE52Vo rHkbi2FEqMJlt2
    lxwAn0+YsHYBXJXQ+Mayf1mAHfghzKpq
    =aLYP
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  8. Flatfish is an identity thief

    Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

    < snip >

    > Now why would Roy Culley register a gmail address in my name?
    >
    > What else has he been doing in my name?
    >
    > Waiting to see how you guys try to justify this dispicable behavior.


    I will not (and can't) justify any such behaviour.

    And *you* have absolutely no grounds to complain *here*

    When faltfish posted with my name, *you* said nothing.
    When other windows using filth posted with my name, *you* said nothing.
    When windows using filth posted with the name of other linux users, *you*
    said nothing
    When flatfish planted "evidence" about Roy, posting with Roys name, *you*
    said nothing.

    In short: You are a hypocrite. You feel hurt now, and you attack linux users
    in this roup for behaviour *you* yourself have exhibited dundreds of times.

    You are filth, Erik. You are not a tiny little bit better than flatfish with
    his character assassination attemps. Because in all those cases *you* said
    nothing

    --
    Support your local Search and Rescue unit -- get lost.


  9. Re: Roy Culley is an identity thief

    Tim Smith wrote:
    > In article ,
    > Andrew Halliwell wrote:
    >> News to me.
    >> You truly are pathetic if you think erik's gmail and roy's spoofing are even
    >> remotely similar.

    >
    > So when someone puts up a website attacking someone (Roy Culley has done
    > this with Erik) and also registers a gmail address in the attacked
    > person's name, you'll let that slide because he hasn't used the email
    > address (yet) for anything bad?


    Did I "let it slide"?
    Read my other posts on the subject, Timbo.
    I said it was wrong and childish, but the comparison of registering a gmail
    account and not using it (in any way visible to people here) and doing what
    was done to roy are completely different. They're on completely different
    levels of gittishness.
    --
    | |What to do if you find yourself stuck in a crack|
    | spike1@freenet.co.uk |in the ground beneath a giant boulder, which you|
    | |can't move, with no hope of rescue. |
    | Andrew Halliwell BSc |Consider how lucky you are that life has been |
    | in |good to you so far... |
    | Computer Science | -The BOOK, Hitch-hiker's guide to the galaxy.|

  10. Re: Roy Culley is an identity thief

    On 2008-10-07, Andrew Halliwell wrote:
    > Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> I had to blink when I saw Andrew effectively defending Culley's use of a
    >> gmail account in Erik's name.

    >
    > Quote please. I'd love to see where I "defended" him.


    Don't expect the lying, trolling cunt to reply. It's the troll's modus
    operandi.

    --
    Regards,

    Gregory.
    Gentoo Linux - Penguin Power

  11. Re: Roy Culley is an identity thief

    Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

    >Waiting to see how you guys try to justify this dispicable behavior.


    Poor Erik. You're an immoral fsck, I can't say I'm sorry for you.
    Without being able to reach through the Ethernet and slap your face,
    maybe someone thought this was the next best thing.

    --
    '"more choice to the user" - what a crock of ****.' - "True Linux
    advocate" Hadron Quark

  12. Re: Roy Culley is an identity thief

    Andrew Halliwell wrote:

    > Hadrone quacked:
    >>
    >> Astonishing double standards.

    >
    >What double standards would they be?


    Apparently, to a fsckwit troll, doing something and not doing
    something are equivalent.


  13. Re: Roy Culley is an identity thief


    >
    > Waiting to see how you guys try to justify this dispicable behavior.


    Have you tried this?

    Dear Roy (Culley),

    I know we've had our differences, but I'd like to ask you to cancel
    your gmail account in my name. In return, I promise not to misuse
    your name or personal data, and to disagree with you, when necessary,
    only courteously. I would also like to apologize if I have crossed
    this line with you in the past.

    Sincerely,
    Erik Funkenbusch

  14. Re: Roy Culley is an identity thief

    Hadron wrote:
    >> What double standards would they be?

    >
    > You do not know?? Amazing.


    It is, isn't it? Amazing you think I have double standards.
    So, as I appear to have absolutely no idea what these double standards might
    be, you'll only be too glad to enlighten me, won't you.

    Otherwise, it's just another insult with no grounds in truth.
    Which is all you've ever been capable of.

    >>
    >>> I had to blink when I saw Andrew effectively defending Culley's use of a
    >>> gmail account in Erik's name.

    >>
    >> Quote please. I'd love to see where I "defended" him.

    >
    > "You truly are pathetic if you think erik's gmail and roy's spoofing are even
    > remotely similar."


    That was defending him?!
    does the world exist in a totally monochrome black and white colour scheme
    to you? It must if you think those two wrongs are even remotely equivalent.
    --
    | spike1@freenet.co,uk | "Are you pondering what I'm pondering Pinky?" |
    | Andrew Halliwell BSc | |
    | in | "I think so brain, but this time, you control |
    | Computer Science | the Encounter suit, and I'll do the voice..." |

  15. Re: Roy Culley is an identity thief

    On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 16:43:36 +0100, Andrew Halliwell wrote:

    > Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >> On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 10:16:52 +0100, Andrew Halliwell wrote:
    >>
    >>> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>>> If you're talking about Schestowitz, he gets what he deserves.
    >>>
    >>> Typical childish answer.
    >>> No, he doesn't.
    >>> He could post a million messages a day and wouldn't deserve that.

    >>
    >> If he posted a million messages per day backed up by facts, you know the
    >> parts you snipped, nobody would care.
    >>
    >> He is on some crusade to harm, and has harmed in fact certain companies and
    >> their reputations.

    >
    > Then that is THEIR business and the correct way to deal with it is to sue.
    > It is none of YOUR business and posting scurrilous sexual falsehoods is not
    > justified no matter how many times a person has lied about some company.


    You're wrongfully assuming I posted that stuff.
    And as usual you have not a shred of evidence to substantiate your claims.

    > you REALLY don't get it, do you?


    Actually I do get it.
    You're the one who is off in lalalala land.

    > Have you never heard the term "two wrongs don't make a right"?


    In real life that may be a valid behavior.

    In COLA it's a war and unless both sides agree to cease and desist it will
    remain a war.

    > I still suspect you of being the one who started those posts you keep
    > repeating in the first place, btw. No matter how many attempts you make to
    > deny it.


    Key word suspect.
    You couldn't possibly know, because it's not true.


    >> The people who work for those companies don't like Roy and are fighting
    >> back.

    >
    > Then they should be fired for misconduct.
    > It is none of their business either.
    > It is the business of the company's legal department.
    > Breaking the law to attack someone for insulting your company is still
    > breaking the law.


    Breaking the law?

    Do you realize that right now Schestowitz has *leaked* copies of unreleased
    copyrighted material on his BN website?

    He has no permission to publicly post these documents and since they are
    password protected and somehow cracked he is also potentially guilty of
    that as well.

    Do you realize that ISO could sue the pants off of him?

    So don't give me your "breaking the law" crap when defending your leader.

    Nothing more need be said.

    You're a waste of hot air.


    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
    Please Visit www.linsux.org

  16. Re: Roy Culley is an identity thief

    Andrew Halliwell wrote:

    >"no truth handler you, I deride your truth handling abilities"
    >Yes yes, sideshow bob, we've heard it allllll before.


    The truth is that flat**** is a mentally-ill, attention-starved loser.


  17. Re: Roy Culley is an identity thief

    "Moshe Goldfarb." writes:

    > On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 16:43:36 +0100, Andrew Halliwell wrote:
    >
    >> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>> On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 10:16:52 +0100, Andrew Halliwell wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>>>> If you're talking about Schestowitz, he gets what he deserves.
    >>>>
    >>>> Typical childish answer.
    >>>> No, he doesn't.
    >>>> He could post a million messages a day and wouldn't deserve that.
    >>>
    >>> If he posted a million messages per day backed up by facts, you know the
    >>> parts you snipped, nobody would care.
    >>>
    >>> He is on some crusade to harm, and has harmed in fact certain companies and
    >>> their reputations.

    >>
    >> Then that is THEIR business and the correct way to deal with it is to sue.
    >> It is none of YOUR business and posting scurrilous sexual falsehoods is not
    >> justified no matter how many times a person has lied about some company.

    >
    > You're wrongfully assuming I posted that stuff.
    > And as usual you have not a shred of evidence to substantiate your claims.
    >
    >> you REALLY don't get it, do you?

    >
    > Actually I do get it.
    > You're the one who is off in lalalala land.
    >
    >> Have you never heard the term "two wrongs don't make a right"?

    >
    > In real life that may be a valid behavior.


    Halliwell seems to be throwing his hat into the ring for this years
    "COLA Mother Theresa" award. Apparently Ray is strongly tipped for his
    work providing Linux access for the "service in the community" crowd at
    his local library.

  18. Re: Roy Culley is an identity thief

    Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >> Then they should be fired for misconduct.
    >> It is none of their business either.
    >> It is the business of the company's legal department.
    >> Breaking the law to attack someone for insulting your company is still
    >> breaking the law.

    >
    > Breaking the law?


    Come now, even YOU know about the libel and slander laws.

    > Do you realize that right now Schestowitz has *leaked* copies of unreleased
    > copyrighted material on his BN website?


    Again, irrelevant.

    > He has no permission to publicly post these documents and since they are
    > password protected and somehow cracked he is also potentially guilty of
    > that as well.


    Then it's up to them to sue him.

    > Do you realize that ISO could sue the pants off of him?


    Then why don't they?

    > So don't give me your "breaking the law" crap when defending your leader.


    Defending? Leader? **** off.

    --
    | spike1@freenet.co.uk | Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
    | | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
    | Andrew Halliwell BSc | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
    | in |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
    | Computer Science | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |

  19. Re: Roy Culley is an identity thief

    On Oct 7, 9:40*am, "ness...@wigner.berkeley.edu"
    wrote:
    > > Waiting to see how you guys try to justify this dispicable behavior.

    >
    > Have you tried this?
    >
    > Dear Roy (Culley),
    >
    > I know we've had our differences, but I'd like to ask you to cancel
    > your gmail account in my name. *In return, I promise not to misuse
    > your name or personal data, and to disagree with you, when necessary,
    > only courteously. I would also like to apologize if I have crossed
    > this line with you in the past.
    >
    > Sincerely,
    > Erik Funkenbusch


    How about this:

    Dear Roy Culley,

    You're a hypocritical moron.

    Love,
    Erik Funkenbusch

  20. Re: Roy Culley is an identity thief

    On Oct 7, 11:41*am, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >
    > Additionally, why would someone insult the pedophiles that bad?


    Uhh, ok.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast