A Beautiful thing has happened today.

"Steven J Sobol" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected]...
> Lawrence Glasser <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > If you're trying to block someone, and you have the capabilities,
> > sometimes it's better to block their IP Address (e.g., 66.32.48.182),
> > rather than their e-mail address... That way, if their e-mail address
> > changes, they're still blocked.
>
> That works if they are using an internet connection with a permanent IP.
> Dialups, and consumer-grade broadband, usually use IP addresses that
> change occasionally. You can usually get a cable IP and hang onto it a
> while, but it's still dynamically assigned and can change (speaking as
> a former Adelphia Cable customer, and a current Charter customer - it's
> happened to me with both providers, although Adelphia's DHCP leases seem
> to last significantly longer than Charter's).
>

Although Mr. P uses an Earthlink DSL account, and I am pretty sure the IP is
static.

Tom Veldhouse

---

› See More: A Beautiful thing has happened today.

"Thomas T. Veldhouse" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "P. Reality" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news[email protected]...
> >
> > Phillipe.
>
> What the hell is wrong with you Phillipe. Why must you insist on people
> reading your posts. If they don't want to, killfile. That is your
> philosphy, but you don't respect it yourself. Man, you sink to new lows
> every time I look.
>
> Tom Veldhouse


Why do you insist on nitpicking the everliving crap out of people's posts,
only to plonk them before they respond?

"Thomas T. Veldhouse" wrote:
>
> "Steven J Sobol" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news[email protected]...
> > Lawrence Glasser <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > If you're trying to block someone, and you have the capabilities,
> > > sometimes it's better to block their IP Address (e.g., 66.32.48.182),
> > > rather than their e-mail address... That way, if their e-mail address
> > > changes, they're still blocked.
> >
> > That works if they are using an internet connection with a permanent IP.
> > Dialups, and consumer-grade broadband, usually use IP addresses that
> > change occasionally. You can usually get a cable IP and hang onto it a
> > while, but it's still dynamically assigned and can change (speaking as
> > a former Adelphia Cable customer, and a current Charter customer - it's
> > happened to me with both providers, although Adelphia's DHCP leases seem
> > to last significantly longer than Charter's).
> >
>
> Although Mr. P uses an Earthlink DSL account, and I am pretty sure the IP is
> static.
>
> Tom Veldhouse

Apparently, my example (66.32.48.182) was a bit too subtle.

Try it, and I think you'll be pleasantly surprised!

Larry

Lawrence Glasser wrote:

> "Thomas T. Veldhouse" wrote:
>>
>> "Steven J Sobol" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news[email protected]...
>> > Lawrence Glasser <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > > If you're trying to block someone, and you have the capabilities,
>> > > sometimes it's better to block their IP Address (e.g., 66.32.48.182),
>> > > rather than their e-mail address... That way, if their e-mail address
>> > > changes, they're still blocked.
>> >
>> > That works if they are using an internet connection with a permanent
>> > IP. Dialups, and consumer-grade broadband, usually use IP addresses
>> > that change occasionally. You can usually get a cable IP and hang onto
>> > it a while, but it's still dynamically assigned and can change
>> > (speaking as a former Adelphia Cable customer, and a current Charter
>> > customer - it's happened to me with both providers, although Adelphia's
>> > DHCP leases seem to last significantly longer than Charter's).
>> >
>>
>> Although Mr. P uses an Earthlink DSL account, and I am pretty sure the IP
>> is static.
>>
>> Tom Veldhouse
>
> Apparently, my example (66.32.48.182) was a bit too subtle.
>
> Try it, and I think you'll be pleasantly surprised!
>
> Larry

I just opened a shell and did a whois on this. It does not give the
specifics but DOES give phone numbers for abuse reporting.

dave@entertainment:~> whois 66.32.48.182

OrgName: EarthLink Network, Inc.
OrgID: ERAD
Address: 1375 PECHTREE ST, LEVEL A
City: ATLANTA
StateProv: GA
PostalCode: 30309
Country: US

NetRange: 66.32.0.0 - 66.32.255.255
CIDR: 66.32.0.0/16
NetName: EARTHLINKDSL-2BLK
NetHandle: NET-66-32-0-0-1
Parent: NET-66-0-0-0-0
NetType: Direct Allocation
NameServer: ITCHY.MINDSPRING.NET
NameServer: SCRATCHY.MINDSPRING.NET
Comment:
RegDate: 2000-10-13
Updated: 2002-10-30

TechHandle: DAE4-ARIN
TechName: Domain Administrator, Administrator
TechPhone: +1-404-815-0770
TechEmail: [email protected]

OrgAbuseHandle: ABUSE60-ARIN
OrgAbuseName: ABUSE TEAM
OrgAbusePhone: +1-404-815-0770
OrgAbuseEmail: [email protected]

OrgTechHandle: ELNK-ORG-ARIN
OrgTechName: EarthLink, Inc.
OrgTechPhone: +1-404-815-0770
OrgTechEmail: [email protected]

# ARIN WHOIS database, last updated 2003-09-09 19:15
# Enter ? for additional hints on searching ARIN's WHOIS database.


Dave

In article <[email protected]>,
DItalianSalami <[email protected]> wrote:

> And for the person saying Trolling isn't against the AUP. SOME
> providers do have a provision for trolling in their TOS.

Some folks know the definition of Trolling.

"Lawrence Glasser" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> >
> > Although Mr. P uses an Earthlink DSL account, and I am pretty sure the
IP is
> > static.
> >
> > Tom Veldhouse
>
> Apparently, my example (66.32.48.182) was a bit too subtle.
>
> Try it, and I think you'll be pleasantly surprised!
>
> Larry

I knew that is what you were talking about How else would I know he had
DSL? I was simply referring to the fact that somebody mentioned a dynamic
cable modem IP address per the adelphia part of the thread, I just figured I
would mention it was neither dynamic or a cable modem.

Tom Veldhouse

"Thomas T. Veldhouse" wrote:
>
> "Lawrence Glasser" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > >
> > > Although Mr. P uses an Earthlink DSL account, and I am pretty sure the
> IP is
> > > static.
> > >
> > > Tom Veldhouse
> >
> > Apparently, my example (66.32.48.182) was a bit too subtle.
> >
> > Try it, and I think you'll be pleasantly surprised!
> >
> > Larry
>
> I knew that is what you were talking about How else would I know he had
> DSL? I was simply referring to the fact that somebody mentioned a dynamic
> cable modem IP address per the adelphia part of the thread, I just figured I
> would mention it was neither dynamic or a cable modem.
>
> Tom Veldhouse

Great minds think alike! <g>

Larry

"DItalianSalami" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Justin wrote:
> >
> > What amazes me is the depth of which Phillipe and I affect you. None of
you
> > care to hold really decent conversations, and when you disagree, you
mostly
> > label people trolls or call them liars. Then you "pluk" them and brag
about
> > plunking them. Way to go. When I grow up, I want to be just like you.
> >
> >
>
> How many times have you seen me complain? Not many. I just ignored you
> two most of the time. Out of you two You are the one that has a
> legitimate reason to be mad at Sprint. But when I've or anyone here has
> read one of yours or Philipes post they've read them all.
>
> And again I didn't plunk anyone my NG Provider has.
>
> And for the person saying Trolling isn't against the AUP. SOME
> providers do have a provision for trolling in their TOS.
>
> --
> -DItalianSalami
> -Remove Spamsux from Email to Respond


Then they should certainly ban you, Silly Sausage. Creating an entire
thread to brag about plonking (or having your ISP plonk someone) is
definitely trolling, according to you.

In article <[email protected]>,
"Justin" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> Then they should certainly ban you, Silly Sausage. Creating an entire
> thread to brag about plonking (or having your ISP plonk someone) is
> definitely trolling, according to you.

If a posting generates a lot of responses that does not make it a troll.

Please pick which of the following you may wish to use in reply to
Salami, and please do it before Smith expropriates them all:


http://www.seghea.com/emails/troll.html

"P. Reality" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Justin" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> > Then they should certainly ban you, Silly Sausage. Creating an entire
> > thread to brag about plonking (or having your ISP plonk someone) is
> > definitely trolling, according to you.
>
> If a posting generates a lot of responses that does not make it a troll.
>
> Please pick which of the following you may wish to use in reply to
> Salami, and please do it before Smith expropriates them all:
>
>
> http://www.seghea.com/emails/troll.html

I like that. It's still funny to look at the double standard. They act
like this board was short of trolls before you and I showed up.

Justin wrote:

>
> Then they should certainly ban you, Silly Sausage. Creating an entire
> thread to brag about plonking (or having your ISP plonk someone) is
> definitely trolling, according to you.
>

Then I guess we are in the same boat since you created a whole thread
about your first official plonk, sorry I mean "plunk".

And aren't you the one that brags about not resorting to name calling or
cussing, yet everytime you've responded to me you decided to call me
by a name other than the one I use on the NG.

--
-DItalianSalami
-Remove Spamsux from Email to Respond