On Friday, November 1, 2019, 10:36:22 PM PDT, Razer <[email protected]> wrote:
On November 1, 2019 8:19:25 PM PDT, jim bell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>You are obviously one of those people who is resisting the idea of
>>uncovering this seemingly-lost data.
I give no fucks either way really. I'm just a casual observer commenting
And your comments are totally illogical.
>>Have you ever considered the server was destroyed, stolen and turned
>>into components for black market sale all data wiped or a thousand
>>other possibilities?
>We notice that you said, "THE server". As if there was only one
>>server. And it had only one hard drive. Ever. And that server's data
>>was NEVER backed up. Ever. So how do you know all this detailed
>>information?
>I don't. I just figure for the time period it wasn't likely to be a RAID array
>or anything complex.
Apparently, you missed the point completely. I repeatedly pointed out that
there is no reason to believe that the operator of the CP server didn't keep
backups, or change out disk drives occasionally. Such ordinary practices
WOULD have left copies of data. Just not obvious and available to everyone
else. But why should that data not have been included in (at least one)
current archive? Was it merely accidentally forgotten? Or intentionally left
out? See below.
And such weak excuses! You simply ASSUME that the issue is whether the data is
accessible today. No, it isn't,. It is "how did the data get to be
unavailable?" Or, at least, was not incorporated. You cannot even argue that
you KNOW that the data ISN'T available, known to one of the people who took
care of the system. How do you know that they don't have a cumulative backup
of writeable CD's, stacked on a shelf in their living room? Easily available.
But somebody may have somehow CHOSEN to change the data, not merely not
include all of it. You DON'T know.
And how do you know that nobody actually deliberately tampered with the
database? I just posted a comment describing good evidence and argument that
somebody did, indeed, intentionally remove all instances of ONE meaning of 'ap'
("assassination politics") and left many others instances only differing in the
meaning of the string, 'ap', or ' ap ', or ' ap story'. You won't have an
explanation, at least not an admission that does not utterly destroys your
position.
>And, have YOU ever considered that the hard drives or floppies of
>dozens or hundreds of individual CP subscribers, who received and
>perhaps archived these messages themselves may still have the data
>available somewhere, perhaps on a dusty 500 megabyte Seagate drive,
>sitting comfortably in their basement? Or some old data cartridges?
>Or some old writable CD's?
>"It's not the crime, it's the coverup!"
>We all learned in the October 2016 scandal involving Hitlery Clinton's
>emails, that they went from "missing" to discovering that Anthony
>Weiner's laptop contained 600,000 emails of varying kinds, and that the
>FBI "sat on" them for about a month, until just about a couple of weeks
>before the November 2016 election. When, according to the news, they
>suddenly "discovered" those emails. And in an extraordinary effort a
>few days long, they carefully studied each and every email and solidly
>established that none of them were ever, ever, ever evidence of any
>crime whatsoever.
>I hypothesize the house or structure containing the server/data/whatever, was
>hit by a JDAM and it evaporated.
It ain't the data! It's how it was REMOVED! And you haven't established that
you KNOW it was removed in an 'innocent' manner. And, it is looking more and
more like it is OBVIOUS that the data was deleted in an extremely specific and
detailed fashion. I've described many facts, and why they are seemingly
consistent only with a deliberate, intentional effort to remove all references
to 'ap' that mean "assassination politics", but to leave in numerous cases
other references the string 'ap', or even ' ap ', in instances that clearly
mean things other than "assassination politics".
So, you are argumentationally bankrupt.
