Can Doan provide Alina with the Embry study? was Can Kane provide Jerry with the Embry study?

Doan wrote:
Empty Kane is making noises agian! Hihihi!

Doan

r r rr....RRRRR....run little screeching hysterical monkeyboy.

On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
Wanna me to show you how to do a lookup? Hihihi!
I already know how.

I can produce Alina's ISP by a Whois, but not by a traffic
survey....that disappears her ISP information, but not mine, and Doan,
not even yours.

Hohoho!

Hahaha! YOUR STUPIDITY never ceases to amaze me!

Then show us that lower left block from the email traffic analysis for
magnitude website...hokay, for say you, and me, and Betty, and Ron using
our IP numbers, and then "Alina's."

Let's see if you get the same for us, and for "her."

Prove your intelligence.

0:]

If I explain it to you in plain English, will you publicly admit that I am
right and that YOU ARE A STUPID IDIOT? Your call, Kane.

Doan

On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
Hihih! Alina is me is your claim, STUPID!
Claim?

No, it's my speculation that I share with others.

Hahaha! So now it's no longer your claim?

I see you can't answer the question about Alina's missing ISP though.

What missing ISP? You are exposing your STUPIDITY again. Hihihi!
The empty block of fields identifying a poster's IP provider from the
magnitude survey service for e-mail, Doan.

Then you are IGNORANTLY STUPID!
I would be if I bought that dodge. I asked you to explain, if you could
(you can always say, "I don't know"...but your ego is bound up in this
pretty tightly....rrr r r r r ) why no one but Alina lacks data in the
lower left block...the one that gives ALL of us, Me, Ron, Betty, and ISP
who assigned our IP number.

MEXICO! You, Ron, Betty... are in MEXICO?
Oh don't be so stupid. You aren't fooling anyone but yourself.

The STUPID one is YOU! Lookup ARIN vs. LACNIC.
American Registry for Internet Numbers
Latin American and Caribbean Internet Addresses Registry

As I said, they will all give us a listing of an ISP because they
recognize the ISP recognition portion of the IP number.

You obviously don't know what you are talking about. They know because
they are the REGISTRIES!


Tell me you are just "pretending to be STUPID" please! ;-)

The source I provided you does NOT work on a fictitious IP number (an
anonymizing service product) because if the full IP number does not fall
within the range of numbers assigned to that ISP it will reject it.

NO ISP will be listed.

You don't know you are talking about! The source you provided has little
to do with anonymizers, STUPID!

That's why all of us, you include, who do not anonymize, show our ISPs
and Alina's does NOT produce an ISP reference on that website I provided
you. A fictitious IP number....common to anon subscription services.

You keep trying to run around this.

Why, Doan?

Because I am having fun laughing at your STUPIDITY! ;-)


Doan


Kind of stupid of you to keep dodging so obviously.

You are the one that is EXPOSING your STUPIDITY to the public.

Hihihi!

0:]

If an Empty Kane makes noises in the forrest... ;-)

Doan

On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
Empty Kane is making noises agian! Hihihi!

Translation: 'He caught me and I've nothing left but the usual ad hom
dodge." Signed, Doan the Monkeyboy.

R R R R RRR R R R R R



Doan

On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
Hihihi! Kane still EXPOSING his STUPIDITY.
Just explain, please. And thanks.


0;-]


% Joint Whois - whois.lacnic.net
% This server accepts single ASN, IPv4 or IPv6 queries
Yes, but where email traffic magnitude is being tracked the RANGE of IP
numbers is surveyed. If the specific IP number is outside the assigned
range, it is fictitious.

Anyone, Doan, can get a hit off an individual IP number by doing a
general lookup.

I already proved that myself...to you.

That's why I picked the specific source I did...because I know they
don't get a hit, a return of data, on a fictitious IP. Every other
source does, because it's reading only the first two sets of the IP
number between points.

Stop trying to snow those folks that don't know what you and I do.



% Copyright LACNIC lacnic.net
% The data below is provided for information purposes
% and to assist persons in obtaining information about or
% related to AS and IP numbers registrations
% By submitting a whois query, you agree to use this data
% only for lawful purposes.
% 2007-03-01 18:56:55 (BRT -03:00)

inetnum: 148.233/16
status: reallocated
owner: Uninet S.A. de C.V.
ownerid: MX-USCV4-LACNIC
responsible: Gestin de cambios y configuraciones
address: Periferico Sur, 3190,
address: 01900 - Ciudad de Mxico - DF
country: MX
phone: +52 55 56244400 []
owner-c: DCA
tech-c: DCA
inetrev: 148.233/16
nserver: DNS.UNINET.NET.MX
nsstat: 20070227 AA
nslastaa: 20070227
nserver: NSGDL1.UNINET.NET.MX
nsstat: 20070227 AA
nslastaa: 20070227
created: 19980620
changed: 20040203
inetnum-up: 148.224/12

nic-hdl: DCA
person: GESTION DE CAMBIOS
e-mail:
address: PERIFERICO SUR, 3190, ALVARO OBREG
address: 01900 - MEXICO DF - DF
country: MX
phone: +52 5 556244400 []
created: 20021210
changed: 20060704

% whois.lacnic.net accepts only direct match queries.
% Types of queries a POCs, ownerid, CIDR blocks, IP
% and AS numbers.

Remember, unlike YOU, Kane, I don't call people STUPID or a LIAR without
proof!

Wanna know about email traffic monitoring, STUPID Kane?
I already do know. I know that you got a hit on the first part of the IP
addy that identifies the ISP.

I also know that MY source won't get a hit unless the last identifying
part of the IP number is real. It just returns null.

That's why there was none for Alina's IP on that particular lookup
source...that tracks MAGNITUDE of traffic, and there WAS for the rest of
us. WE aren't using, nor are you, fictitious IP numbers for internal
traffic at the anonymizing service.

Ours are real, Alina's fictitious.

What were you saying about proof?

Hell, I provided a productive hit by staying way from the source I used,
THEN I USED THAT TRAFFIC MEASURING SOURCE because it produces precisely
what I told you it did.....NO HIT because of the fictitious nature of
the IP number.

0:]



Doan

On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

0:- wrote:

Where's your explanation for why all of us show an ISP who supplied our
real IP numbers, and NONE where Alina's IP number is run, which of
course means a fictitious IP number was issued for that account by an
anonymizing service.

Who did you subscribe with, Doan?

On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
Forrest Gump is smarter than you, Kane. Or should I say EMPTY KANE!
Hihihi!

Can't answer the question concerning OUR ISPs appearing on that lookup
for e-mail magnitude analysis, but Alina's does not, can you?

R R R R R .... so you resort to your usual dodges.

I already did but you are TOO STUPID to see it!

Doan


Doan


On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
Hihih! Alina is me is your claim, STUPID!
Claim?

No, it's my speculation that I share with others.

Hahaha! So now it's no longer your claim?

I see you can't answer the question about Alina's missing ISP though.

What missing ISP? You are exposing your STUPIDITY again. Hihihi!
The empty block of fields identifying a poster's IP provider from the
magnitude survey service for e-mail, Doan.

Then you are IGNORANTLY STUPID!
I would be if I bought that dodge. I asked you to explain, if you could
(you can always say, "I don't know"...but your ego is bound up in this
pretty tightly....rrr r r r r ) why no one but Alina lacks data in the
lower left block...the one that gives ALL of us, Me, Ron, Betty, and ISP
who assigned our IP number.

MEXICO! You, Ron, Betty... are in MEXICO?

Doan

Doan wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
Wanna me to show you how to do a lookup? Hihihi!
I already know how.

I can produce Alina's ISP by a Whois, but not by a traffic
survey....that disappears her ISP information, but not mine, and Doan,
not even yours.

Hohoho!

Hahaha! YOUR STUPIDITY never ceases to amaze me!
Then show us that lower left block from the email traffic analysis for
magnitude website...hokay, for say you, and me, and Betty, and Ron using
our IP numbers, and then "Alina's."

Let's see if you get the same for us, and for "her."

Prove your intelligence.

0:]

If I explain it to you in plain English, will you publicly admit that I am
right and that YOU ARE A STUPID IDIOT? Your call, Kane.

You can do what ever you want. You don't need any agreement one way or
the other for me.

So, if you can explain why my IP, and Ron's, and Betty's all produced,
in the ISP information block fields at
http://www.senderbase.org/search?sea...48.233.119.168

..... and Alina's did not, you feel free to do so.

But simply providing another source that does produce the ISP isn't the
answer.

I can do the same thing.

But YOU cannot explain why Sender Base E-mail magnitude tracking fails
to produce an ISP for Alina, but does for us.

I KNOW why, and have explained it, in plain english. And YOU have dodged
answering me every single time so far, mostly with ad hom dodges.

Explain THAT, Doan, not some other bull**** that anyone can produce over
and over again.

Why doesn't Alina's ISP not show in THAT particular lookup...and don't
try the bull**** again just tried in another post...that the information
is not guaranteed.....R R R RR

I know, and I know YOU know why it doesn't show there. They don't track
fictitious IP numbers related to E-mail.

Doan

So tell us, why did you once MORE try to play the little dodge game of
ME having to produce some promise to YOU before you'd produce what you
claim you can?

Just couldn't do it on your own....R R R R R R R

Wanted to build in that escape hatch to dive out of when I refused you,
as you knew I would?

Like your dodge on the Embry study for a year while you waited for USC
to get you a copy of his study?

What a puckering liar and unethical little twit you are.

R ... R ... R ...

Kane

Doan wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
Hihih! Alina is me is your claim, STUPID!
Claim?

No, it's my speculation that I share with others.

Hahaha! So now it's no longer your claim?

I see you can't answer the question about Alina's missing ISP though.

What missing ISP? You are exposing your STUPIDITY again. Hihihi!
The empty block of fields identifying a poster's IP provider from the
magnitude survey service for e-mail, Doan.

Then you are IGNORANTLY STUPID!
I would be if I bought that dodge. I asked you to explain, if you could
(you can always say, "I don't know"...but your ego is bound up in this
pretty tightly....rrr r r r r ) why no one but Alina lacks data in the
lower left block...the one that gives ALL of us, Me, Ron, Betty, and ISP
who assigned our IP number.

MEXICO! You, Ron, Betty... are in MEXICO?
Oh don't be so stupid. You aren't fooling anyone but yourself.

The STUPID one is YOU! Lookup ARIN vs. LACNIC.
American Registry for Internet Numbers
Latin American and Caribbean Internet Addresses Registry
As I said, they will all give us a listing of an ISP because they
recognize the ISP recognition portion of the IP number.

You obviously don't know what you are talking about.

Doan't you wish.

They know because
they are the REGISTRIES!

The first two number sets. The last are NOT in any registry. The mail
moves to the first two (the ISP server location) for distribution in
house to whoever is identified by the last or the last two sets.

The ISP is assigned a range of numbers that are given out to NON
anonymous subscribers.

An anonymous subscriber gets a fictitious one...NOT in the assigned
range. Outside the range. It happens that that particular service
rejects any unassigned number as fictitious, hence it does NOT return an
ISP.

It happens that Whois and other lookups just look at the ISP identity part.

You will note they do NOT identify the actual holder of the FULL IP number.

Ron's name, for instance, is NOT on any look up. Right, smart ass?

Nor is mine. Just my ISP.

Because I am not anonymous.

If I were, I would get the same results on SenderWatch Alina got...no
ISP info.

Explain.



Tell me you are just "pretending to be STUPID" please! ;-)
The source I provided you does NOT work on a fictitious IP number (an
anonymizing service product) because if the full IP number does not fall
within the range of numbers assigned to that ISP it will reject it.

NO ISP will be listed.

You don't know you are talking about! The source you provided has little
to do with anonymizers, STUPID!

Of course not, other than to reject any number that is not from an
assigned range of numbers. Anonymized numbers are outside of the
assigned range.

That's why all of us, you include, who do not anonymize, show our ISPs
and Alina's does NOT produce an ISP reference on that website I provided
you. A fictitious IP number....common to anon subscription services.

You keep trying to run around this.

Why, Doan?

Because I am having fun laughing at your STUPIDITY! ;-)

It could be that you didn't know about SenderWatch, Doan and are
discovering YOU are ignorant about some things from your own field of
expertise.

Embarrassing, isn't it.

Doan

Kind of stupid of you to keep dodging so obviously.

You are the one that is EXPOSING your STUPIDITY to the public.

Well, not only have YOU not proven by explaining how WE could show up
with ISPs identified, and Alina NOT, on SenderWatch, but YOU exposed
yourself again as a manipulative lying little snot by demanding I meet
some criteria of yours...and admission...before you'd produce.

YOUR dodges are well known to anyone that follows your bull**** in asp.

This is a common one for you.


Hihihi!

Yep, just as I suspected. You are sweating again.

Because YOU can't debate, or argue honestly and are trapped by yourself
and your rotten flaccid sick ego.

Try being honest and straight sometime, Doan. It won't kill you.



0:]

Doan wrote:

If an Empty Kane makes noises in the forrest... ;-)

It signifies that Doan can't answer the question.


Doan

On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
Empty Kane is making noises agian! Hihihi!
Translation: 'He caught me and I've nothing left but the usual ad hom
dodge." Signed, Doan the Monkeyboy.

R R R R RRR R R R R R


Doan

On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
Hihihi! Kane still EXPOSING his STUPIDITY.
Just explain, please. And thanks.


0;-]


% Joint Whois - whois.lacnic.net
% This server accepts single ASN, IPv4 or IPv6 queries
Yes, but where email traffic magnitude is being tracked the RANGE of IP
numbers is surveyed. If the specific IP number is outside the assigned
range, it is fictitious.

Anyone, Doan, can get a hit off an individual IP number by doing a
general lookup.

I already proved that myself...to you.

That's why I picked the specific source I did...because I know they
don't get a hit, a return of data, on a fictitious IP. Every other
source does, because it's reading only the first two sets of the IP
number between points.

Stop trying to snow those folks that don't know what you and I do.


% Copyright LACNIC lacnic.net
% The data below is provided for information purposes
% and to assist persons in obtaining information about or
% related to AS and IP numbers registrations
% By submitting a whois query, you agree to use this data
% only for lawful purposes.
% 2007-03-01 18:56:55 (BRT -03:00)

inetnum: 148.233/16
status: reallocated
owner: Uninet S.A. de C.V.
ownerid: MX-USCV4-LACNIC
responsible: Gestin de cambios y configuraciones
address: Periferico Sur, 3190,
address: 01900 - Ciudad de Mxico - DF
country: MX
phone: +52 55 56244400 []
owner-c: DCA
tech-c: DCA
inetrev: 148.233/16
nserver: DNS.UNINET.NET.MX
nsstat: 20070227 AA
nslastaa: 20070227
nserver: NSGDL1.UNINET.NET.MX
nsstat: 20070227 AA
nslastaa: 20070227
created: 19980620
changed: 20040203
inetnum-up: 148.224/12

nic-hdl: DCA
person: GESTION DE CAMBIOS
e-mail:
address: PERIFERICO SUR, 3190, ALVARO OBREG
address: 01900 - MEXICO DF - DF
country: MX
phone: +52 5 556244400 []
created: 20021210
changed: 20060704

% whois.lacnic.net accepts only direct match queries.
% Types of queries a POCs, ownerid, CIDR blocks, IP
% and AS numbers.

Remember, unlike YOU, Kane, I don't call people STUPID or a LIAR without
proof!

Wanna know about email traffic monitoring, STUPID Kane?
I already do know. I know that you got a hit on the first part of the IP
addy that identifies the ISP.

I also know that MY source won't get a hit unless the last identifying
part of the IP number is real. It just returns null.

That's why there was none for Alina's IP on that particular lookup
source...that tracks MAGNITUDE of traffic, and there WAS for the rest of
us. WE aren't using, nor are you, fictitious IP numbers for internal
traffic at the anonymizing service.

Ours are real, Alina's fictitious.

What were you saying about proof?

Hell, I provided a productive hit by staying way from the source I used,
THEN I USED THAT TRAFFIC MEASURING SOURCE because it produces precisely
what I told you it did.....NO HIT because of the fictitious nature of
the IP number.

0:]


Doan

On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

0:- wrote:

Where's your explanation for why all of us show an ISP who supplied our
real IP numbers, and NONE where Alina's IP number is run, which of
course means a fictitious IP number was issued for that account by an
anonymizing service.

Who did you subscribe with, Doan?

Doan wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
Forrest Gump is smarter than you, Kane. Or should I say EMPTY KANE!
Hihihi!
Can't answer the question concerning OUR ISPs appearing on that lookup
for e-mail magnitude analysis, but Alina's does not, can you?

R R R R R .... so you resort to your usual dodges.

I already did but you are TOO STUPID to see it!

Of course you did. I said you would. Just dodges.

The "Straus" argument ploy, Doan.

"You are too stupid to understand."

You use that one to lie lie lie.

When YOU can't support your claim.

You didn't explain a damn thing, Doan. You simply dodged.

I didn't ask you what you might find somewhere else. I asked you to
explain the presence of ISP information for everyone but Alina's ISP.

And you still can't.

Why not give them an official call at Senderwatch. I DID.

How do you think I know they existed and kick out fictitious IP numbers?

Your such a little blowhard, monkeyboy.

R R R RRR R


Doan

Doan


On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
Hihih! Alina is me is your claim, STUPID!
Claim?

No, it's my speculation that I share with others.

Hahaha! So now it's no longer your claim?

I see you can't answer the question about Alina's missing ISP though.

What missing ISP? You are exposing your STUPIDITY again. Hihihi!
The empty block of fields identifying a poster's IP provider from the
magnitude survey service for e-mail, Doan.

Then you are IGNORANTLY STUPID!
I would be if I bought that dodge. I asked you to explain, if you could
(you can always say, "I don't know"...but your ego is bound up in this
pretty tightly....rrr r r r r ) why no one but Alina lacks data in the
lower left block...the one that gives ALL of us, Me, Ron, Betty, and ISP
who assigned our IP number.

MEXICO! You, Ron, Betty... are in MEXICO?

Doan

On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
Hihih! Alina is me is your claim, STUPID!
Claim?

No, it's my speculation that I share with others.

Hahaha! So now it's no longer your claim?

I see you can't answer the question about Alina's missing ISP though.

What missing ISP? You are exposing your STUPIDITY again. Hihihi!
The empty block of fields identifying a poster's IP provider from the
magnitude survey service for e-mail, Doan.

Then you are IGNORANTLY STUPID!
I would be if I bought that dodge. I asked you to explain, if you could
(you can always say, "I don't know"...but your ego is bound up in this
pretty tightly....rrr r r r r ) why no one but Alina lacks data in the
lower left block...the one that gives ALL of us, Me, Ron, Betty, and ISP
who assigned our IP number.

MEXICO! You, Ron, Betty... are in MEXICO?
Oh don't be so stupid. You aren't fooling anyone but yourself.

The STUPID one is YOU! Lookup ARIN vs. LACNIC.
American Registry for Internet Numbers
Latin American and Caribbean Internet Addresses Registry
As I said, they will all give us a listing of an ISP because they
recognize the ISP recognition portion of the IP number.

You obviously don't know what you are talking about.

Doan't you wish.

I don't have to. The reality is that YOU ARE STUPID yet you keep on
making a full of yourself!

They know because
they are the REGISTRIES!

The first two number sets. The last are NOT in any registry. The mail
moves to the first two (the ISP server location) for distribution in
house to whoever is identified by the last or the last two sets.

What the **** are you talking about?

The ISP is assigned a range of numbers that are given out to NON
anonymous subscribers.

An anonymous subscriber gets a fictitious one...NOT in the assigned
range. Outside the range. It happens that that particular service
rejects any unassigned number as fictitious, hence it does NOT return an
ISP.

Huh? What range are you talking about?

It happens that Whois and other lookups just look at the ISP identity part.

You will note they do NOT identify the actual holder of the FULL IP number.

Ron's name, for instance, is NOT on any look up. Right, smart ass?

Nor is mine. Just my ISP.

Because I am not anonymous.

If I were, I would get the same results on SenderWatch Alina got...no
ISP info.

Explain.

Because that is not how it works, STUPID!



Tell me you are just "pretending to be STUPID" please! ;-)
The source I provided you does NOT work on a fictitious IP number (an
anonymizing service product) because if the full IP number does not fall
within the range of numbers assigned to that ISP it will reject it.

NO ISP will be listed.

You don't know you are talking about! The source you provided has little
to do with anonymizers, STUPID!

Of course not, other than to reject any number that is not from an
assigned range of numbers. Anonymized numbers are outside of the
assigned range.

Huh? Where do you get this bogus information?

That's why all of us, you include, who do not anonymize, show our ISPs
and Alina's does NOT produce an ISP reference on that website I provided
you. A fictitious IP number....common to anon subscription services.

You keep trying to run around this.

Why, Doan?

Because I am having fun laughing at your STUPIDITY! ;-)

It could be that you didn't know about SenderWatch, Doan and are
discovering YOU are ignorant about some things from your own field of
expertise.

Unlike you, Kane, I don't claim any "expertise". But I can spot a
"published researcher" by the "****" that spewed out of that person's
mouth

Embarrassing, isn't it.

Hihihi! Only if you know.

Doan



Doan

Kind of stupid of you to keep dodging so obviously.

You are the one that is EXPOSING your STUPIDITY to the public.

Well, not only have YOU not proven by explaining how WE could show up
with ISPs identified, and Alina NOT, on SenderWatch, but YOU exposed
yourself again as a manipulative lying little snot by demanding I meet
some criteria of yours...and admission...before you'd produce.

YOUR dodges are well known to anyone that follows your bull**** in asp.

This is a common one for you.


Hihihi!

Yep, just as I suspected. You are sweating again.

Because YOU can't debate, or argue honestly and are trapped by yourself
and your rotten flaccid sick ego.

Try being honest and straight sometime, Doan. It won't kill you.



0:]