Nightwatch wrote:-in the light of the past friendship (at least from my side it was so) with that individual,
-and considering thoroughly what he said in this post that he had been threatened with court actions several times before and in the light of that a banning action (which is the legally expected outcome of such a situation he has put himself in) from a website with such a reason would seriously affect his current and future situation, as the claimants or prosecution would not miss their chance of using this ban against him as a concrete collaborating evidence either in any current case or in any future conflicts if any were to arise, but also would use it to re-open those abandoned cases as he refers. I don't want to be one who kicked the chair.
Nightwatch, feel free to mention my name. Let me stand before my accusers. I don't fear lawsuits. I care about my integrity, but even if others don't believe what is true, it is not that important to me in the long run. Cf. "If" by Rudyard Kipling.
"The rich man can ransom his life, but the poor man hears no threat." -- Proverbs. Maybe they think I am rich.
Please ban me, as I can't stand this treatment from someone I still consider a friend. My only request is that you remove my avatar, as it is a picture of someone I care about.
I am frankly bewildered, as I know I've not done anything wrong here. And for you to suffer for ten days without letting me know is ... strange, especially since I first hear of it in the context of the N-S thread when I tried to help solve a problem.
It may be possible that someone has hacked my account. I don't get to post much, but I do check fairly often, and had not seen any evidence of that. (There is someone on a Russian networking site posing as me, but they don't have any passwords to my knowledge, and I choose them fairly carefully. You'd know if there were any dictionary attacks.)
I've made some Google cache snapshots of my relevant posts. I still find no "hacking codes", merely a benign speculation on what might be happening. In the other contexts, I was noting the hacking attempts made on a couple of other websites, as warnings in the public interest, and even went so far as to break up the URL as proof. The last example of this was copied verbatim in my thread in the GSC forum's General section -- and that may be my sole contribution to their General section!
My local copy of that post you reference (same timestamp: 3:10 p.m. local time) does not have the bold emphasis on the simple fact of the threats. And your remarks show me that you have taken it out of context; that context notes the threats were groundless. Threats are part and parcel of contracting. A couple of the more amusing cases:
A businessman in the days of CP/M hired me to augment a database package for his business. When the software crashed his hard drive, he threatened to sue me, claiming it was my fault. When I asked him for his backups to compare with mine, we found that he had not patched the database program with an early but critical patch, which was issued to prevent that very problem (it overwrote the directory structure on the hard drive!).
Why had he not applied the patch? Because the program was not properly registered. And why was that? Because he had stolen it.
He dropped the threat immediately.
Another time, A set of phones were installed at my business site as part of a PBX package. But the phones were an ugly sand-beige instead of the cocoa-brown ones I'd specified from the catalog. I refused to accept them, but the company rep persuaded me to use them until the ones with the right color came in. So I signed the acceptance receipt "Exception: Color of phones."
I stopped paying for the phone system because I was not satisfied and they had ignored my follow-up requests. After six months, they did answer me, saying that there weren't any cocoa-brown phones; the catalog was in error, and that I had to live with the ones I had. I was so upset that I asked them to come take back the system.
So their lawyer sent me a threatening letter, that if I didn't pay the balance due they would take me to court. I contacted a friend's lawyer, sending him a photocopies of the catalog and the receipt. He called me up laughing -- there was no way he was going to take this case as there was no money in it. He said they just wanted to scare me into paying. But he had kindly drafted a response to the phone company's lawyers, pro bono.
The phone company then called asking me to dismantle the phone system and take it in to them. Now I laughed and said, "No, you come get it." My then-landlord told me they finally came for it after I'd moved to another site.
Friendship without truth is shallow, hypocritical, and dangerous. I will take truth over such "friendship", even when it stems from misunderstanding. I greatly value honesty, and I strive so that my "yes" is "yes" and my "no", "no". That does mean that are a few "maybe" and "perhaps" qualifiers.
I'm still going to send you the miniquest update, along with the tweak to switch Kruglov/Semenov offline post psi helmet.Nightwatch wrote:I hope this individual will leave things as they are, because we would like to leave this incident behind and keep on with daily normal things. But if he wants to drag this on, he will be banned and I will have to report this to the hosting company as I have to, as in any future incident I wouldn't like to be in a situation as if withholding information relevant to the Internet Security.
I don't want to "drag this on", I want to resolve it. Since I have no evidence of what was "wrong", that may not be possible. So a ban is fine. Heh, I've been trying to get the mods at GSC to do that for a while now.
Happy belated and future birthday and holiday wishes to all. --NatVac
And thanks to everyone for the well wishes. Didn't do anything special. Just "turned" 49 is all. Next year may make a big hoop-la about it (if I'm still riding the Monster Ninja Sport Bike LMAO).
I figure, as long as my 'chemistry' isn't being done in a diaper, I'm good 
