Re: [Vo]:Wikipedia blacklists LENR-CANR.org
Delivered-To: hohlr...@gmail.com Received: by 10.65.110.6 with SMTP id n6cs72790qbm; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 19:41:39 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.214.149.6 with SMTP id w6mr4418384qad.4.1232163698035; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 19:41:38 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: vortex-l-requ...@eskimo.com Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (ultra6.eskimo.com [204.122.16.69]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 6si1242912yxg.53.2009.01.16.19.41.31; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 19:41:37 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of vortex-l-requ...@eskimo.com designates 204.122.16.69 as permitted sender) client-ip=204.122.16.69; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of vortex-l-requ...@eskimo.com designates 204.122.16.69 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=vortex-l-requ...@eskimo.com Received: from ultra6.eskimo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.14.2/8.14.0) with ESMTP id n0H3ecNN015222; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 19:40:38 -0800 Received: (from smart...@localhost) by ultra6.eskimo.com (8.14.2/8.12.10/Submit) id n0H3ebgE015212; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 19:40:37 -0800 Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 19:40:37 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: ultra6.eskimo.com: smartlst set sender to vortex-l-requ...@eskimo.com using -f X-EN-OrigOutIP: 10.20.18.7 X-EN-IMPSID: 4PRP1b00G099BUA000 Message-Id: 6.2.0.14.2.20090116194149.02a0b...@pop.startlogic.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 19:42:29 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Steven Krivit stev...@newenergytimes.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Wikipedia blacklists LENR-CANR.org In-Reply-To: f7eeb3430901150742n75cd3178n413dc0b443ca3...@mail.gmail.co m References: 7.0.1.0.2.20090114181346.03751...@gmail.com 7.0.1.0.2.20090114180724.038f7...@gmail.com em5tm4t5bqp8jtj4h2dr8ci5jrukcjr...@4ax.com b0537390901141930wcfc354fnd52653d3a015e...@mail.gmail.com f7eeb3430901150742n75cd3178n413dc0b443ca3...@mail.gmail.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed X-EN-UserInfo: 4d46dffb46d35ca0477a7a4b0e393b1c:6d0147d8b722e29a5aac1adb2c76f343 X-EN-AuthUser: stev...@newenergytimes.com Sender: Steven Krivit stev...@newenergytimes.com X-EN-OrigIP: 76.126.194.190 X-EN-OrigHost: c-76-126-194-190.hsd1.ca.comcast.net Resent-Message-ID: kqdj0b.a.itd.1mv...@ultra6.eskimo.com Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: vortex-l@eskimo.com archive/latest/83648 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Post: mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com List-Help: mailto:vortex-l-requ...@eskimo.com?subject=help List-Subscribe: mailto:vortex-l-requ...@eskimo.com?subject=subscribe List-Unsubscribe: mailto:vortex-l-requ...@eskimo.com?subject=unsubscribe Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-requ...@eskimo.com unless, as I've heard you used Gmail which does not include originating IP in the headers. can anybody confirm/disconfirm? end :-) Click on the little arrow in the upper right corner of the message pane and show original. Terry
Re: [Vo]:Wikipedia blacklists LENR-CANR.org and NET too
Steven Krivit wrote: I suppose it would be fair to inform you that I have been aware for a few weeks that user JxG, (Guy Chapman from the U.K.) blacklisted both of our sites on Dec. 18. Is that so? It is unimportant. Yours, I think, was upgraded (by JzG's encouragement) to an international Wikimedia meta blacklist. People in Italy are suffering from the consequences of blacklisted access to lenr-canr.org. What does this mean? I hope you mean that people using the Italian version of Wikipedia are blocked from LENR-CANR.org. Not that anyone in Italy is having problems. The block only works within Wikipedia, right? Wikipedia is hopeless in any case. The message I posted in the Wikipedia talk section, Surrealistic discussion of LENR-CANR.org and Jed Rothwell garnered a couple of responses, but then everything was erased this morning, not surprisingly. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Wikipedia blacklists LENR-CANR.org
Terry, Which one is your ip? Steve At 06:55 AM 1/17/2009, you wrote: Delivered-To: hohlr...@gmail.com Received: by 10.65.110.6 with SMTP id n6cs72790qbm; [snip]
Re: [Vo]:Wikipedia blacklists LENR-CANR.org
My machine address would not show on a webap mailer; however, Google can verify a valid recipient of a message. Terry On 1/17/09, Steven Krivit stev...@newenergytimes.com wrote: Terry, Which one is your ip? Steve At 06:55 AM 1/17/2009, you wrote: Delivered-To: hohlr...@gmail.com Received: by 10.65.110.6 with SMTP id n6cs72790qbm; [snip]
Re: [Vo]:Wikipedia blacklists LENR-CANR.org
Piki? On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 10:55 PM, R C Macaulay walha...@cvtv.net wrote: Howdy Jed, At some point in time an awareness arrives that Wiki is a closed society website disguised as an open forum and posting information source. Like the joke about inspectors.. one can argue with an inspector.. but like wrestling with a pig in the mud.. sooner or later.. it dawns on you.. the pig loves it. Or debating the merits of the stock market swings. One's gambling blood screams the market is ripe for recovery and get rich profits... while .. one's intuition screams the market is made for television. Perhaps the huge rush across the world to put loads of cash into T bills that pay zero interest is talking the loudest and screaming the Dow will drop to 2000. If this scope of drop happens, I can take a page outa my grandma's book, when she papered her bathroom wall with GM stock in 1919 and steamed it off in 1944. Speaking of pigs, the Dime Box Saloon downright absurd and drunken ideas society is thinking of starting a website to compete with Wiki but we haven't come up with a name for it. Any chance you have an insider at Wiki that could help us ? Richard
Re: [Vo]:Wikipedia blacklists LENR-CANR.org
Terry sez: Piki? I must confess that I use Wiki (Oink-Oink-Piki!) a lot. It's a quik invaluable informational resource for NON CONTROVERSIAL subjects. It should be obvious to anyone by now that relying on Wiki for information on issues possessing a modicum of controversy is indicative of lazy ignorance. What's the status of Knol? Last I herd it wasn't fairing too well. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Wikipedia blacklists LENR-CANR.org
unless, as I've heard you used Gmail which does not include originating IP in the headers. can anybody confirm/disconfirm? At 07:42 AM 1/15/2009, you wrote: On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 10:30 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: A link meaning what? A copy of an e-mail message? That can easily be faked. Not if you include the hidden header information. It becomes entirely traceable. Terry
Re: [Vo]:Wikipedia blacklists LENR-CANR.org and NET too
Jed, I suppose it would be fair to inform you that I have been aware for a few weeks that user JxG, (Guy Chapman from the U.K.) blacklisted both of our sites on Dec. 18. Yours, I think, was upgraded (by JzG's encouragement) to an international Wikimedia meta blacklist. People in Italy are suffering from the consequences of blacklisted access to lenr-canr.org. I have been investigating this situation somewhat, but not entirely, quietly and would like to continue in that mode until my investigation is complete. I think that is about all I want to say on this right now. The ol' man in the Dime Box Saloon is worth listening to. He says here: Speaking of pigs, the Dime Box Saloon downright absurd and drunken ideas society is thinking of starting a website to compete with Wiki but we haven't come up with a name for it. Any chance you have an insider at Wiki that could help us ? I have found that Citizendium was born as an offshoot of Wikipedia for many of the exact reasons that we are aware of, with regard to Wikipedia's faults. http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Welcome_to_Citizendium Steve
Re: [Vo]:Wikipedia blacklists LENR-CANR.org
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 10:30 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: A link meaning what? A copy of an e-mail message? That can easily be faked. Not if you include the hidden header information. It becomes entirely traceable. Terry
Re: [Vo]:Wikipedia blacklists LENR-CANR.org
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:30:07 -0500: Hi, [snip] Robin van Spaandonk wrote: The gist of the argument appears to be that you need explicit permission in each case. Since you claim to have such permission, perhaps you could include a link with each uploaded paper pointing to the explicit permission you received for that paper, or where you have received blanket permission, a link to that instead. A link meaning what? A copy of an e-mail message? That can easily be faked. Yes, it can, but anyone who thinks it's a fake can easily check the validity with the purported author, so I think such an email would go a long way toward silencing your critics. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
Re: [Vo]:Wikipedia blacklists LENR-CANR.org
Howdy Jed, At some point in time an awareness arrives that Wiki is a closed society website disguised as an open forum and posting information source. Like the joke about inspectors.. one can argue with an inspector.. but like wrestling with a pig in the mud.. sooner or later.. it dawns on you.. the pig loves it. Or debating the merits of the stock market swings. One's gambling blood screams the market is ripe for recovery and get rich profits... while .. one's intuition screams the market is made for television. Perhaps the huge rush across the world to put loads of cash into T bills that pay zero interest is talking the loudest and screaming the Dow will drop to 2000. If this scope of drop happens, I can take a page outa my grandma's book, when she papered her bathroom wall with GM stock in 1919 and steamed it off in 1944. Speaking of pigs, the Dime Box Saloon downright absurd and drunken ideas society is thinking of starting a website to compete with Wiki but we haven't come up with a name for it. Any chance you have an insider at Wiki that could help us ? Richard
Re: [Vo]:Wikipedia blacklists LENR-CANR.org
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Wed, 14 Jan 2009 18:17:11 -0500: Hi Jed, [snip] As you may have noticed, your site http://lenr-canr.org has been added to Wikipedia's blacklist of SPAM sites. I believe this is missuse of the spam blacklisting process to enforce a narrow point-of-view. Part of the related discussion is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:JzG#Again_on_Cold_Fusion [snip] The gist of the argument appears to be that you need explicit permission in each case. Since you claim to have such permission, perhaps you could include a link with each uploaded paper pointing to the explicit permission you received for that paper, or where you have received blanket permission, a link to that instead. That should take the wind out of their sails. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
Re: [Vo]:Wikipedia blacklists LENR-CANR.org
Robin van Spaandonk wrote: The gist of the argument appears to be that you need explicit permission in each case. Since you claim to have such permission, perhaps you could include a link with each uploaded paper pointing to the explicit permission you received for that paper, or where you have received blanket permission, a link to that instead. A link meaning what? A copy of an e-mail message? That can easily be faked. Actually, in many cases I do not have written permission per se, but the authors sent me the papers and said go ahead and upload them. I could not have gotten many of the papers otherwise, except by scanning them, which is very tedious. You might say the paper itself constitutues permission. I have blanket permission for several of the ICCF conferences, from the conference organizers. For ICCF-14 (the most recent) the organizers told me it is okay with them but I should ask each author individually. That is easy, because I am the editor and all papers are coming to me anyway, so I know the author's latest e-mail address. Anyway, the argument is kind of ridiculous because the Internet has millions of documents, photos and videos that may or may not violate copyright, depending on who you ask. I consulted with one of the top copyright law firms in Georgia (pro bono I am glad to say!), and they told me that since: I am not selling these papers; the papers appear to have little or no financial value; and I am clearly using them for academic purposes, therefore I am not in violation of copyright. Note that I have thousands of other papers, including 1,200 scanned ones, that I cannot get permission to upload, and I have not uploaded them. They are listed in the LENR-CANR database. Most are unimportant but there 50 or so that I would love to upload. I told that to Petri Krohn. - Jed
