>>>>>Gregory
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>MSDN forum management did not back him up. And by miracle - since miracles do exist - a bit later there's 'evidence' ...
>>>>>
>>>>>I said I would not reply on this forum, but you have consistently implied that I ( presumably with the connivance of Eric Den Doop ) am making all this up and fabricating evidence to support an international conspiracy against Naomi.
>>>>>
>>>>>If this is what you really think, have the guts to come out and say it publicly rather than "hinting" and "suggesting". My blog is open for comments so stop hiding here and post your opinion openly.
>>>>
>>>>Andy,
>>>>
>>>>I do think this place is open enough
>>>>
>>>>I am not saying that evidence has been fabricated - how could I ? All I am saying is that it is convenient
>>>>I'm also saying that this has gone too far. I simply cannot understand why
>>>>
>>>>The end result will be that someone will be banned. To me, it's a bit severe
>>>
>>>Andy makes a good case that Naomi used her privileges here to get his password and then log into his account at Foxite. If she's done so, then she has violated the trust of Michel and everyone who uses the UT. I'm not sure she should be banned from this site, however if she misused her privileges - and again the evidence is pretty overwhelming - then she should have those privileges revoked.
>>________
>>Russel,
>>
>>I have said - a couple of lines above
>>
>>>>I am not saying that evidence has been fabricated - how could I ?
>>
>>
>>I have also said that I have doubts. And let me clarify this
>>Doubt means: I cannot believe it. I do not know the lady personally and I cannot believe that she is an evil hacker - judging by the messages I have read from her on the ut
>>
>>
>>As I see it (and I may be wrong)
>>The IP addresses are dynamic. Like mine. If I close the connection to my provider and re-establish a new one, I will have another IP address
>>
>>Reading the blog I see 2 facts
>>(1) A certain Marisha hacked IP 68.163.99.115 from Boston ?
>>(2) 70.23.12.52 was used to hack on 05/28/2007 11:08:28 PM
>>That same dynamic address was used by Nadya on 05/29/2007 11:31 PM which is 24 hrs later
>>
>>
>>See, Russel, my (human) reaction is: I cannot believe it
>>This does not mean that it did not happen.
>>
>>But I find it hard to believe. But then, I may not be very good at judging characters
>
________________
>I'm kind of with you on this. If Naomi has a static IP, then how did she 'hack' from more than one IP address, and if they're dynamic, then what IP she gets is the luck of the draw. She may get the same one more than once, and when she doesn't, somebody else will.
>
>Like you, I don't really know what happened. Maybe she did, maybe she didn't, but if you're going to accuse somebody in public of being an evil hacker, then your evidence had better be air tight and not just circumstantial as this seems to be.
________
Alan,


Ok, Nadya may be a bit different. She may not know the rules of posting a link or copying the code + author
But to be honnest, those rules are not clear to me either

If I look at the evidence, I can think, but I do not know
I could not stand and watch someone being beaten in public. Call it stupid, I do not know, but that is how I felt. I am not ashamed of having said so.

Now supposing, just supposing she did. What is in there for here ? I mean, if I could log in to your account on a place like the ut or so, what can I do or use ? What would be the benefit to me ? That is one of the reasons I said: I cannot believe it