Critter Probe cracked!

I got him!

Took a little while because he uses at least 4 different posting hosts, but
I clearly have a repeated match on one of the IP's. It's pretty obvious and
I guess a lot of folks know already.

B-

"Sierraman" wrote in message ...
I got him!

Took a little while because he uses at least 4 different posting hosts, but
I clearly have a repeated match on one of the IP's. It's pretty obvious and
I guess a lot of folks know already.

B-

So why don't you tell the rest of us???

Tom

Tom Arsenault wrote:

"Sierraman" wrote in message ...

I got him!

Took a little while because he uses at least 4 different posting hosts, but
I clearly have a repeated match on one of the IP's. It's pretty obvious and
I guess a lot of folks know already.

B-


So why don't you tell the rest of us???

Tom


Cuz Lance will sue him if he reveals his secret identity!

Richard Adams wrote:


Cuz Lance will sue him if he reveals his secret identity!


It would be a fun experiment to scan posts for the past, say, two years, and
develop parameters on various posters. For example:

* mean posts per day on days posting.
* fraction of days posting.
* average length of words in post.
* average URL's per post.
* fraction of letters which are upper-case per post.
* fraction of quoted lines in posts
* time of first post, per day.
* time of last post, per day.
* fraction of weekend posts
(this could go on almost endlessly)

There's more than enough "clues" people leave, easily parsable by relatively
straightforward Perl scripts, which could draw strong correlations between
individuals. This is even independent of the tendency to use particular,
identifiable words.

Searching archives is straightforward. For example, I might use:
http://cpan.uwinnipeg.ca/dist/WWW-Google-Groups

The problem isn't drawing correlations between anonymous individuals, but assigning
identities to anonymous individuals.

Anyway, I wish I had time for such fun, but alas....

Dan

Dan Connelly wrote:
Richard Adams wrote:


Cuz Lance will sue him if he reveals his secret identity!


It would be a fun experiment to scan posts for the past, say, two
years, and
develop parameters on various posters. For example:

* mean posts per day on days posting.
* fraction of days posting.
* average length of words in post.
* average URL's per post.
* fraction of letters which are upper-case per post.
* fraction of quoted lines in posts


snip


Nerdass -

What happens when someone goes through a lifestyle change?

You may not have the time for it (the sleuthing) but Heather Halvorson
does. She told me who critpro is months ago.


K. Gringioni

"it's not what you know it's who you know"
- anonymous ignoramous

"Tom Arsenault" wrote in message
om...
"Sierraman" wrote in message
...
I got him!

Took a little while because he uses at least 4 different posting hosts,
but
I clearly have a repeated match on one of the IP's. It's pretty obvious
and
I guess a lot of folks know already.

B-

So why don't you tell the rest of us???

Tom

If Carl thinks it should be posted, then Carl can post it, since he is the
SR. Otherwise Heather knows I think, ask her. I can't do that but it's an
earth-shaker. I don't anyone can hide from Heather. I suppose if he posts
another 20 in a row, Carl might give the go ahead.

B-

Dan Connelly wrote:

There's more than enough "clues" people leave, easily parsable by
relatively
straightforward Perl scripts, which could draw strong correlations between
individuals. This is even independent of the tendency to use particular,
identifiable words.

Your data will get skewed if you try to do a location-based plot based
on patterns of follow-ups to individual posters. Too many people would
try to rig the data so that they could get next to heather.

Or on top of, however you arrange the adjacency plot...

Sierraman wrote:
Scary stuff, while I was at it I cracked another one that was a mind blower.
I couldn't resist, that stuff can become fun after a while.

I'm unsure about your objective here, unless you consider being regarded
as a tool to be a positive.

Here is the model for this sort of thing:
http://groups.google.com/groups?&sel...d.STANFORD.EDU

Really, the net is ass deep in people that aren't as smart as they are
telling everyone they are.

Bob Schwartz

"Bob Schwartz" wrote in message
...
Sierraman wrote:
Scary stuff, while I was at it I cracked another one that was a mind
blower.
I couldn't resist, that stuff can become fun after a while.

I'm unsure about your objective here, unless you consider being regarded
as a tool to be a positive.

Here is the model for this sort of thing:

http://groups.google.com/groups?&sel...d.STANFORD.EDU

Really, the net is ass deep in people that aren't as smart as they are
telling everyone they are.

Bob Schwartz


I know exactly who Critter Pro is, and yes he is a Pro.

Bob Schwartz wrote:


Really, the net is ass deep in people that aren't as smart as they are
telling everyone they are.

This makes it sounds like the net is the same as any other "place."