> > If Mike had uploaded them without full inspection, no problem. But, as I > understand the narrative, he knowingly uploaded them.
I found them after uploading them, as I and the Daily Dot article said. He discovered the files when he uploaded the contents of the sticks to the > Internet Archive, Best told the Daily Dot in a Twitter message. “Scrolling > down through the list, I found about a hundred awstats log files listed in > a row,” he said, referring to Cryptome analytics data. On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Michael Best <[email protected]> wrote: > To prove the GCHQ slide could've been fake, getting John to fix the leak > and stop calling me a liar. Same as I've said all along. How is that > implausible? > > On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 5:08 PM, Razer <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Got it. Totally altruistic motivation... >> >> >> On 10/10/2015 01:46 PM, Michael Best wrote: >> >> "Any money" is still more than I'll make off this. My only compensation >> is a headache from ridiculous accusations. >> >> Any chance you hold this same standard to Snowden and consider his press >> coverage as >> "an ongoing for-profit commercial motivation as redistributor" for the >> NSA docs? >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Oct 10, 2015, at 16:39, Razer <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 10/10/2015 01:35 PM, Michael Best wrote: >> >> Nope, laughing at someone who has no idea how little a media mention is >> worth in terms of money. >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> >> Yes I do and it depends on how much money you consider 'money'... For >> some, paying the rent is enough. Ask any artist or musician. >> >> RR >> >> >> >> On Oct 10, 2015, at 16:33, Razer < <[email protected]>[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Nervous laugh... >> >> On 10/10/2015 01:32 PM, Michael Best wrote: >> >> I say Best's name's appearance in DailyDot or >>> any other media constitutes an ongoing for-profit commercial motivation >>> as redistributor. >> >> >> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. >> >> >> >> >> >
