Re: Re: New User

Paula McCallum wrote:

> I just don't understand how this
> information would pin point who sent this message.

I don't understand why it is very important to identity sleuth this
emailer.  This isn't a harsh or threatening or otherwise intimidating
email.  Just because s/he chose to be anonymous with a yahoo account and
a yahoo webmailing doesn't mean those of us who like to dabble in
identity sleuthing should be ratting out the sender.

The emailer has a beef about someone being a road captain and also
something else that transpired at the last meeting.  S/He chose to use
the yahoo webmailer and accessed it from a level3 dialup.  Such a dialup
might be associated with any number of providers, because many providers
'contract out' their dialup services.  For example, some EarthLink
dialup users access from level3 dialups.

The fact that the dialup can be geographically associated with somewhere
around Methuen MA doesn't tell us very much since we would expect the
writer to be not so far from Manomet MA since this type of club is going
to have its members geographically proximal to each other.

> I assume this guy/gal went to the meeting
> from waht they said in their e-mail which would narrow it down to
> about 40-50 people who were there that night (it could probably be
> narrowed down further to about 1/2 with computer access).

That's how you narrow it down all right.

> There can't
> be that many computer literate folks in our group to have been that
> sophisticated to post an anonymous e-mail.

This isn't actually a very sophisticated anonymity.

> He wrote to me because I
> write the group's newsletter and to the guy in our club who receives
> all corospondence.  I don't think I would have found anything on my
> first attempt if it hadn't been for the spamcop post with his IP #
> and this happening to someone else (Chad Ayers).

-- 
Mike Easter
kibitzer, not SC admin