Do you think c4I is responsible for the problem over at TB2000 forum?

-- Sara Nealy (keithn@aloha.net), December 29, 1999

Answers

He DID say he'd be back tonite....but to answer your question, no, I don't think C4I did this. My guess would be LL or Y2KPro...

-TECH32-

-- TECH32 (TECH32@NOMAIL.COM), December 29, 1999.

who/what is c41? I have no clue

-- cin (cinlooo@aol.com), December 29, 1999.

TECH! A voice in the wilderness. Cin, that's what they call a "long story"... it was purportedly a group of think-tank Pentagon types who work on situational analysis... of Y2K and other events, etc.

Said they were a bit displeased with how the powers ythat be are handling things and came to TB2000 to give us the benefit of their wisdom. Their analysis: Y2K - a "10".

Tonight, they were exposed to be not who they claimed to be, but, it is stil;l unclear who they/he/she/it is.

-- Sara Nealy (keithn@aloha.net), December 29, 1999.

Sara,

Tonight, they were exposed to be not who they claimed to be, but, it is stil;l unclear who they/he/she/it is.

I didn't see that happen (unless I missed something). There was someone posting earlier using the C4I handle that was an imposter. The real/original came in from a military IP address the imposter did not.

-TECH32-

-- TECH32 (TECH32@NOMAIL.COM), December 29, 1999.

Evidently there is a whole list of handles c4I has used to post on Tb2000. I actually missed the thread as well; I was out prepping some more - can't stop now!

My DH filled me in over children noise at dinner. We were going to take a look together tonight.

As Diane says, *sigh*.

-- Sara Nealy (keithn@aloha.net), December 29, 1999.

hmm does the name fox ring a bell?

-- cin (cinlooo@aol.com), December 29, 1999.

fox, no, but that could've been on the list of aliases that were attributed to c4I. Why do you ask?

-- Sara Nealy (keithn@aloha.net), December 29, 1999.

nothing major. out of curiosity i ran a yahoo search on c4i and came up with, among other things, this page. i just thought the name rang a bell.

http://nhse.npac.syr.edu/roadmap/applications/entries/c4i.html

-- cin (cinlooo@aol.com), December 29, 1999.

Hello,

Not so fun when it happens to you, is it?

I think I will email Y2KPro the keys to this board, and allow HIM to determine what stays up and what gets deleted.

Seems only fair.

Jonathan

-A computer glitch will not bring about the end of civilization. It takes hordes of panicking people to do that.-

-- Jonathan Latimer (latimer@q-a.net), December 29, 1999.

Jinathan,

Excuse me, but what the hell are you talking about?

-- Sara Nealy (keithn@aloha.net), December 29, 1999.

The real/original came in from a military IP address the imposter did not.

It would not be difficult to post from a military IP address, any kid or spouse of someone in the military could use the owners email addy, or even a cook in the military could use their own. Just like college kids get the schools e-mail a hospital worker the one from the hospital. Just ask someone in the military, it is not illegal for someone in the military to post... besides, if they were in the pentigon then why not post from there?

They are suckering you people in and you suck it up, hook line and sinker. Even Ed.......

-- Cherri (sams@brigadoon.com), December 29, 1999.

Yep Cherri. Any .mil user (take your pick from a few million) could be posting as "c4i". Would military intelligence not have the means to block IP addresses from their UNIX system? Or, to be more exact, would they not know better? Would someone with genuine information need to affirm his / their legitimacy by revealing the use of a .mil account?

-- mil (millenium@yahoo.com), December 29, 1999.

C4I was a hoax from the start. I know the guy that pulled it off. (for those who care, the .mil IP was just proxied in)

He did say he got some interesting e-mail, though.......

-- (ROTF@LM.AO), April 12, 2000.