Slashdot Mirror
New York's Oldest ISP Gets Domain-Jacked
Howard Roark writes "Panix, the oldest commercial Internet provider in New York, had its domain name 'panix.com' hijacked by persons unknown. The main effect on users is that mail sent to panix's customers is being routed to a bogus mail server run by the hijackers."
First Post!
GNAA declares boycott of all foods that make sperm taste bad
Washington, District of Columbia (USNS) - Gathered on the steps of the Justice Department, gay niggers worldwide announced their most ambitious ploy for political power to date, a boycott of all foods that make semen taste awful. GNAA president timecop led the rally with a pink megaphone, shouting over the noise of riot cops assembling in case the peaceful assembly turned violent.
"My friends," he lisped at the top of his lungs. "As America's - no, the world's - foremost consumers of sperm and without a doubt its greatest enjoyers and advocates, we plead - no, we demand - that these prostate poisons be eliminated from the modern diet." Around him, a surging throng of foamy devotees showed their approval with a shower of bodily fluids.
According to timecop, numerous studies prove that gay volunteers not only found that tobacco left a lingering moldy taste in semen, but that such commonplace items as coffee and multivitamin pills could make semen taste muddy and like insecticide, respectively. "These are intolerant, I mean, intolerable substances," timecop spluttered.
GNAA member DiKKy, on loan from NATO class dunce Norway, as if on cue dumped a 55 gallon drum of whipped semen into the Justice Department's Martin Luther King, Jr. meditative koi pond. As carp drowned in the sticky mucosal fluid, DiKKy took the microphone from a timecop overcome by emotion at the sacrifice of so much precious gay nigger seed. "Gummy bears make it taste like rubber cement - no, that's not a pun. And salmon, of course," said DiKKy, "which makes it taste oily. Oh, and here's a big no-no: asparagus. Yucky."
United Asparagus Growers President Ralph Gruntligel was interviewed by CBS' "60 Minutes," which, in trying to downplay its recent scandal over forging records to replace the lost forged records of a famous politician, has changed focus to such cutting edge topics as sitting room makeovers and loose candle wax.
"While we support every group who wishes to consume asparagus, and do not discriminate on the basis of age, sex, race, gender, sexual orientation, bondage role, condom use, ethnicity or major league baseball fan identification," Gruntligel said from a leather sofa in his Greenwich Village headquarters, "to indict a source of income for roughly one in 65,536 Americans that is ranked fifty-fourth among the world's most valuable vegetables, is not only a crime against asparagus, but a terrorist action against one of nature's most perfect foods and an important source of revenue for government and industry."
Back at the rally, timecop sniffed in response. "Like his ugly fat bitch of a wife will ever give him this kind of head," he said, demonstrating on Morgan Freeman, who happened to be passing on his way to testify before a Senate committee on racial discrimination in the color of fingernail clippers. "Desist -- cease, I say!" began Freeman, but then, in his characteristic basso profundo, began moaning rhythmically to the motion of gay nigger tongues.
Semen, the technical name for the fluid of male sexual emission which occurs at ejaculation, has a generally salty or sweet taste, depending on what the person responsible has consumed since his last ejaculation, said Dr. Ben Rodriguez-Silverstein. "It's entirely possible that these foods make semen taste disgusting," he said. "But unfortunately, most of them are necessary for survival."
He was immediately mobbed by gay niggers wielding placards reading "READ MY LIPS: NO RANCID SEMEN."
Contacted via phone, Robert Liebovitz, lead counsel for the Association of Confection Producers, said, "Can I get AIDS from this?"
Rodriguez-Silverstein, who was later spotted receiving $250,000 in small denomination bills smeared with a sticky, mushroom-smelling substance, announced that his lab was conducting independent tests using AOL Afghanistan employees to sample semen from every ethnic, racial, social and animal family group. "We will get to the bottom of
www.gnaa.us
the admins were sleeping in their glories instead of paying for the domain, you know what they say finders keepers.
You just got owned.
Panix panics?
Make even shorter URLs - 8LN.org
The biggest perk of being a servant of the devil is you can have sex with goats.
Freely
-tb
The Russian Mafia is already encrypting their email anyway.
Seastead this.
He's the only domain hijacker I know of.
[Below is the message which kicked-off the "hostage crisis" of censorware.org. Yes, Michael Sims really did throw a temper-tantrum over email criticism, and shut down the censorware.org website in retaliation. See also Jonathan Wallace account , Bennett Haselton account ]
[This came up on a freedom of expression mailing list. Jonathan Wallace commented as follows (used with permission - from Jonathan Wallace)]
From: Jonathan Wallace
To: [a freedom of expression mailing list]
Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2001 9:34 AM
Mike characterizes his shut-down of www.censorware.org as choosing to stop doing volunteer work. He was free to stop volunteering but not to destroy the site.
Below is the mail Mike Sims sent when he first pulled the plug on www.censorware.org. Note the unilateral "The Censorware Project is now closed." Note also, "If I am to be continuously accused of evil deeds, I might as well do them" and the reference to "settling old debts with violence while the opportunity existed." Then ask yourself whether your webmaster has the right to shut down your site because he's angry.
Below that is one of several messages I sent Mike asking him to relinquish the domain and the content to the group, or, failing that, to remove my name from it.
As I wrote in private to a couple of you, this is not a "moral equivalency" or "cultural relativism" situation. Mike was in a position of trust which he violated by taking down the web site of an active group and bouncing its mail.
[Note - this is the full Michael Sims message, from another copy]
From: "Michael Sims"
To: cwp@censorware.org
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 17:04:42 -0400
Subject: Re: The CWP Unperson
Included below is the response that I started writing, and choked down, a few weeks ago. I think I had the thought that I ought not to escalate, perhaps Jim would come to his senses and realize how utterly and totally offensive it was to be compared to Big Brother. I suppose I could achieve the same response by comparing Jim or Jamie or Jonathan to Adolf Hitler, or Goebbels, or Mengele. I don't know what might achieve the same reaction from Bennett - perhaps comparing him to Brian Milburn? Those depths are too low for me to plumb, however.
In any case, since Jim has so kindly provided Seth with the cruelest criticism I've ever received, I shall never hear the end of it. Thanks, Jim. You're a real friend.
The Censorware Project is now closed.
Good luck, Bennett. You've taken the wisest course. I don't know whether it was true wisdom or merely luck... Jonathan, I don't know what you're up to, really, but I hope you will continue to make (it will have to be made, you can't simply wait for opportunities) time to write. Jamie I will continue to see since we work for the same company - I hope introducing Jamie to Andover is not a decision I shall also regret.
Jim, you and Seth can go fuck yourselves. I wouldn't treat a dog the way you've treated me. Hell, I wouldn't treat Seth the way you've treated me.
------- Forwarded message follows -------
Date sent: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 07:44:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Sims
To: jellicle@inch.com
Subject: Re: The CWP Unperson
On Fri, 4 Aug 2000, James S. Tyre wrote:
> You and he have become enemies, and there is nothing which I can do about
> that, apparently.
I don't think you should confuse an unwillingness to become involved with impossibility.
> But you can not deny the contributions he made, that CWP likely never
> would have existed but for him.
>
> He had been listed as a former member, though I do not recall the exact
> language. Unpersoning him is just wrong.
>
> Please reconsider.
Seth's attacks have far outweighed any work he's ever done. At this point, I can say with some assurance that the Project would have been more successful in the long run had Seth never been a part of it.
I decided that I might as well fulfill
[Below is the message which kicked-off the "hostage crisis" of censorware.org. Yes, Michael Sims really did throw a temper-tantrum over email criticism, and shut down the censorware.org website in retaliation. See also Jonathan Wallace account , Bennett Haselton account ]
[This came up on a freedom of expression mailing list. Jonathan Wallace commented as follows (used with permission - from Jonathan Wallace)]
From: Jonathan Wallace
To: [a freedom of expression mailing list]
Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2001 9:34 AM
Mike characterizes his shut-down of www.censorware.org as choosing to stop doing volunteer work. He was free to stop volunteering but not to destroy the site.
Below is the mail Mike Sims sent when he first pulled the plug on www.censorware.org. Note the unilateral "The Censorware Project is now closed." Note also, "If I am to be continuously accused of evil deeds, I might as well do them" and the reference to "settling old debts with violence while the opportunity existed." Then ask yourself whether your webmaster has the right to shut down your site because he's angry.
Below that is one of several messages I sent Mike asking him to relinquish the domain and the content to the group, or, failing that, to remove my name from it.
As I wrote in private to a couple of you, this is not a "moral equivalency" or "cultural relativism" situation. Mike was in a position of trust which he violated by taking down the web site of an active group and bouncing its mail.
[Note - this is the full Michael Sims message, from another copy]
From: "Michael Sims"
To: cwp@censorware.org
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 17:04:42 -0400
Subject: Re: The CWP Unperson
Included below is the response that I started writing, and choked down, a few weeks ago. I think I had the thought that I ought not to escalate, perhaps Jim would come to his senses and realize how utterly and totally offensive it was to be compared to Big Brother. I suppose I could achieve the same response by comparing Jim or Jamie or Jonathan to Adolf Hitler, or Goebbels, or Mengele. I don't know what might achieve the same reaction from Bennett - perhaps comparing him to Brian Milburn? Those depths are too low for me to plumb, however.
In any case, since Jim has so kindly provided Seth with the cruelest criticism I've ever received, I shall never hear the end of it. Thanks, Jim. You're a real friend.
The Censorware Project is now closed.
Good luck, Bennett. You've taken the wisest course. I don't know whether it was true wisdom or merely luck... Jonathan, I don't know what you're up to, really, but I hope you will continue to make (it will have to be made, you can't simply wait for opportunities) time to write. Jamie I will continue to see since we work for the same company - I hope introducing Jamie to Andover is not a decision I shall also regret.
Jim, you and Seth can go fuck yourselves. I wouldn't treat a dog the way you've treated me. Hell, I wouldn't treat Seth the way you've treated me.
------- Forwarded message follows -------
Date sent: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 07:44:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Sims
To: jellicle@inch.com
Subject: Re: The CWP Unperson
On Fri, 4 Aug 2000, James S. Tyre wrote:
> You and he have become enemies, and there is nothing which I can do about
> that, apparently.
I don't think you should confuse an unwillingness to become involved with impossibility.
> But you can not deny the contributions he made, that CWP likely never
> would have existed but for him.
>
> He had been listed as a former member, though I do not recall the exact
> language. Unpersoning him is just wrong.
>
> Please reconsider.
Seth's attacks have far outweighed any work he's ever done. At this point, I can say with some assurance that the Project would have been more successful in the long run had Seth never been a part of it.
I decided that I might as well fulfill
Jonathan Wallace's account of Michael Sims' destruction of censorware.org
[From a public mailing-list posting ] Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 16:49:46 -0500
From: Jonathan Wallace
Subject: The Censorware Project
To: CYBERIA-L[at-sign]LISTSERV.AOL.COM
I've been trying hard to avoid washing dirty laundry in public, but a couple of recent posts have raised the issue and I'd like to give an account of what happened to the Censorware Project (the site at http://censorware.org is now offline). What we have here is the spectacle of a group member who volunteered to act as webmaster effectively closing a group which wants to continue, because the domain happened to be registered in his name.
The Censorware Project was originally an informal collective of six people who collaborated online to fight censorware: Seth Finkelstein, Bennett Haselton, Jamie McCarthy, Mike Sims, Jim Tyre and myself. After Seth left the group, the remaining five continued. Several of us had never met or even spoken on the phone, yet for some time--around two years as I recall--we had a remarkably easy collaboration. There was no funding, no hierarchy, no titles, not even project managers. Someone would suggest a project and take the responsibility for a part of it, others would sign up for other elements, and proceeding this way we got a remarkable amount of work done, including reports on X-Stop, Cyberpatrol, Bess and other products.
Even though two of us were attorneys--Jim and myself--we never incorporated the group or wrote a charter or any contracts among ourselves. Mike Sims was obliging enough to register the domain, just as other members paid for press releases and the other incidental expenses which came along.
Robert Frost said that "nothing gold can stay," and the Censorware Project was no exception. Over the summer, Mike Sims' reaction to a perceived slight was to take the site down for a week, exactly as Seth says in his mail. He sent us mail at the time saying something like "The Censorware Project is over." I replied to him that, given that the group was a collective and we all had an interest in its work product, the domain, and the goodwill it had achieved, the decision was not his to make. Sims did not reply.
Mike put the site back up a week later without explaining, let alone apologizing for, his actions. Given his continuing failure to answer any email from me (and I think from others) and the overall signs that Sims thought the group was exclusively his, I wrote him several emails requesting that he turn the domain over to Jamie or Bennett, as I felt we could no longer trust him to administer it. We also found out during that time that important email from people trying to contact us, including members of the press, was not being answered by Sims, nor being forwarded to other members.
I ultimately became exasperated that my name was listed as a principal on what had now become a "rogue" site I had no control over. Over about a five week period, I wrote Sims several more emails asking him to delete my name from the site if he wasn't going to transfer the domain. Again, I received no reply.
Today, Sims took the Censorware Project site offline again, with a message which says "Due to demands from some of the people who contributed, in however minor a fashion, to this site, it has been taken down." Judging from some email I received from him today, this means me.
Its a sad thing, both because we got some good work done and because some of the other members of the group were eager to continue and in fact have continued working, while deprived of the Censorware Project site, name, email aliases and public recognition. These further efforts are appearing on Bennett Haselton's Peacefire site, www.peacefire.org. (I applaud the work but take no credit as I have not been involved in some time.)
On the page currently at www.censorware.org Sims makes the following request: "If you are interested in volunteering to fight censorware, please contact me." One of the reasons I
Bennett Haselton on Michael Sims' hijacking of censorware.org
:)
[These are comments by Bennett Haselton (Peacefire ) regarding the lack of consequences for Slashdot "editor" Michael Sims' domain-hijacking of censorware.org , and how it's not a case of truth-is-in-the-middle. Used with permission.]
[This was written to someone who made a plea to resolve the conflict, but also refers to trivializing and dismissive comments made in a public interview by Michael Sims' supervisor at Slashdot ]
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 10:03:02 -0700
From: Bennett Haselton
Subject: Re: Please resolve the censorware conflict.
Any discussion of the Censorware.org controversy has to start from the fact that Michael and the rest of the former CWP are not "equal sides" in this, are not "both right and both wrong", etc.
Michael did not own the Censorware Project and did not do a majority of the work involved, he just hi-jacked the domain name and stole it from the rest of us. The fact that people look at what he did, and look at the response from the rest of the group, and call it "infighting" or "airing dirty laundry" is frankly an insult to the Censorware Project and its work. If the EFF webmaster put the eff.org domain in his own name and then hi-jacked it from the organization, he'd be branded a traitor and a pariah in the Internet community for the rest of his life, and nobody would ever forget what he did. Same if it was the CPSR.org webmaster, the EPIC.org webmaster, or whoever. But if the Censorware Project webmaster does it, we're expected to "work out our differences" with him?
There is an absolute difference between Michael and the rest of us. None of us, despite some personal animosities (not between me and anybody, but between people that I know), would ever, ever do anything like what Michael did. But Michael did it.
It doesn't matter whether or not Michael promotes anti-censorship work in his position as a Slashdot writer; he's hardly making much a difference by saying things that were going to get said anyway, and nothing he does there will ever come close to canceling out the harm he did by shutting down the one-time Censorware Project website.
The only legitimacy that Michael has is through his position as a Slashdot writer; he has just enough writing skills to make his writings sound seductively intelligent to anybody who doesn't know the real story. The fact that Slashdot hired Michael should be deeply embarrassing to them, and is in fact eroding Slashdot's credibility according to comments made by some people who found out about the Censorware.org site. But Slashdot is apparently too deeply wedded that decision to reconsider, and comments from [Michael Sims' direct supervisor] have been more of the same along the lines of "They should work out their differences" instead of acknowledging Michael Sims's utterly disgraceful behavior as compared to the average person. You think Slashdot really believes Michael is trustworthy, after what he did? Do you think they're going to let him put the Slashdot.org domain in his name?
-Bennett
Never much cared for him, but I had no idea he got paid, aside from kickbacks for slashvertizements (speculation). Well put if all true.
Oh, I see. So because someone does something that's wrong, they can never talk about it, or post stories if someone else does the same wrong thing?
No, they can talk about it and post stories. But the fact that they cry foul about it, yet have done the same thing in the past to others, shows that they are a hypocrite.
If someone has a different view of what is acceptable for themselves and what is acceptable for others, then they are hypocrites. Whether they talk or post about it or not, does not change whether they are or are not a hypocrite or even acting like one. However the act of posting, with a history like that, merely brings the hypocrisy to the fore.
Complaining about the hypocrisy should in no way be viewed as an attempt to prevent someone from expressing an opinion that they clearly have gone against in the past.
Do you think he should be absolved from his past wrong doings? The guy is scum and is happy to tread on others in a fashion which he certainly does not like having done to himself. Fuck him.
Genesis 11 The LORD said, "If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them. 7 Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other."
8 So the LORD scattered them from there over all the earth, and they stopped building the city. 9 That is why it was called Babel [c] -because there the LORD confused the language of the whole world. From there the LORD scattered them over the face of the whole earth.
Physics is like sex: sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it.
Hey after reading all that, I don't know whether I still hate michael anymore. I'm confused :(
But all the hundreds or thousands of links Censorware Project had build-up over the years still pointed to the old site. In some cases, it was impossible to fix them, since they were from mailing-list archives,
You could script changes without too much difficulty and if the file in question is a mail from a mailing list, have the script also make a copy of the original and put a link to it (with explanation) into the amended changed mail.
A'la "This message has been modified since it was originally posted, for the purpose of updating a now incorrect URL. This modification was done by us at [insert your entity details] to retain the usefulness of the original message and this copy of the original [link] has been retained for posperity."
You could even just leave the original link text but change the link itself and then place a header on that page informing readers of this.
As far as the others go... bummer dude.
My own Ethical Spectacle [spectacle.org] site had scores of links to Censorware.org -- and every time I thought I had changed them all, I would find a few more.
.
Is this on a Unix machine? Can you otherwise copy it to one?
grep -R "incorrect link"
from the root of the web documents directory should at least alert you to the files containing the bogus links. Just put the domain to make it simple. Unless you plan to script the changes, then read up on grep and sed.
LISTSERV.AOL.COM
All involved parties just lost all credibility.
fast as fast can be. you'll never catch me.
Jesus, what a douche. Given its operators penchant for tampering, I will think twice before I consider ./ a reliable news source.
Michael has every right to complain about others stealing domain names, after he gives censorware.org back.
Great, another person who didn't bother to actually READ the post.
/. editors, being among the thousands who have submitted rejected stories only to see them posted later (sometimes much later) by others.
If I had mod points, *I* would mod the article in question down, as it has no relevance whatever to the parent.
I _certainly_ have no love of the
However - get a life. If you hate this site that much, why read it???
If you're not living on the edge, you're just taking up space!
Consider the following evidence against the infidels: anti-slash has recently compiled a library of injustices at anti-slash.org that precisely document the abuses of slashdot's editors. From the stupidity to the censorship, you can view and share the facts all recorded in one place.
I'd also like to take this opportunity to invite you to use the database tool at anti-slash.org. With this database of highly-moderated slashdot posts, you can repost and gain carma for future jihad operations, and suck up mod points and pollute the meta-moderation system. These disruptive activities help lower slashdot's already low signal-to-noise ratio and further discredit the editors.
In Sacred Jihad,
jihadi_31337