![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 16 of 16. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by rainbowbrite on August 25, 2005, at 2:12:57
could we have a board that is not viewable to everyone. I havent read much on admin so sorry if this is an old suggestion.
but, less worry about what you say...
what do people think?
Im suggesting it but I have no suggestions as to how it would work.
OH wait!!! it could be babble-paranoid :-)
Posted by chemist on August 25, 2005, at 4:58:08
In reply to I have a suggestion/idea, posted by rainbowbrite on August 25, 2005, at 2:12:57
> could we have a board that is not viewable to everyone. I havent read much on admin so sorry if this is an old suggestion.
>
> but, less worry about what you say...
>
> what do people think?
>
> Im suggesting it but I have no suggestions as to how it would work.
>
> OH wait!!! it could be babble-paranoid :-)
>
>hello there, chemist here...i propose we call it instead babble-stalking, featuring IRL visits at place of employment of target (insert my name and/or yours here) and troll() who is one of several people who realized early that i and/or you react rather nastily when led into or start some skirmish on PB...
on babble-slander/libel, we can have the ISPs and phone company records posted, as well as the empty and meaningless paperwork and /dev/null email addresses provided to people like me by people like that. just to make sure everything is visible and not invisible.
additionally, babble-TRO can be linked to babble-stalking, allowing us to keep that element relegated away from where i live and work.
all the best, chemist
Posted by Toph on August 25, 2005, at 10:59:22
In reply to I have a suggestion/idea, posted by rainbowbrite on August 25, 2005, at 2:12:57
Hi rain. I can't see you, but I'm glad you're there.
Posted by Dr. Bob on August 25, 2005, at 11:58:28
In reply to I have a suggestion/idea, posted by rainbowbrite on August 25, 2005, at 2:12:57
> could we have a board that is not viewable to everyone. I havent read much on admin so sorry if this is an old suggestion.
>
> what do people think?It's been part of the discussion about smaller boards, how about if we continue this there?
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050614/msgs/516381.html
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050628/msgs/523081.htmlBob
Posted by gardenergirl on August 25, 2005, at 12:37:25
In reply to Re: I have a suggestion/idea » rainbowbrite, posted by chemist on August 25, 2005, at 4:58:08
Just wondering if you are okay. The tone of your recent posts has me worried about you.
gg
Posted by rainbowbrite on August 25, 2005, at 14:08:46
In reply to Re: I have a suggestion/idea » rainbowbrite, posted by Toph on August 25, 2005, at 10:59:22
Hi! nice to see you
look for all the colors...then you see me lol
Posted by rainbowbrite on August 25, 2005, at 14:13:33
In reply to Redirect: board that is not viewable to everyone, posted by Dr. Bob on August 25, 2005, at 11:58:28
umm, I guess so. But I will need more than a link...ill need a detailed map to get around I think. could that be arranged? Ill go take a look.
Posted by chemist on August 25, 2005, at 17:13:55
In reply to Hi chemist » chemist, posted by gardenergirl on August 25, 2005, at 12:37:25
> Just wondering if you are okay. The tone of your recent posts has me worried about you.
>
> gghello there, gg...i am fine, despite some real and likely overblown events on the homefront. i have caught up on sleep, am winding down, and working early mornings, not ideal, but regular.
i have to re\"evaluate the quality of service provided me by my ISP - based on their own statements, to clarify - and deal with a little security issue with a wonky ip routing table. and a visitor.
the issue of secure communication as posed to rainbowbrite can likely be addressed by inserting a soft link, i suspect, pointing to the local directory where the chosen few can chat quietly amongst themselves.
``Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean people are not out to hide their conversations from you.''
in the interest of fairness, is it not high time that these following lines be posted? some members of the PB crowd are susceptible to real or imagined slights and i imagine paranoid ideation might result. unfortunately, they would be correct in this case.
why the overseers and participants have carried on like this for almost 2 months - if not longer - is only making some of us (not i) feel excluded for the very real reason being that, well, we are.
here are the first few lines of document source of a post off the Admin board (the first row is white space):
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en">
<head>
<title>Re: why does admin go quiet sometimes? Phillipa</title>and here is the source of an Admin post if one switches to the frames-supported view (first row != NULL):
script type="text/javascript" src="/__utm.js"></script>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Frameset//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-frameset.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en">
<head>
<title>Psycho-Babble Administration</title>nice work.
i suggest activating gpg-agent and when PB members sign up, a key pair is generated automatically. the babblemails can be encrypted on the host server (the secret ring is resident, public keys signed and exported to the round-robin keyserver net) when sent locally between parties.
further, the emanating redirect can also be encrypted or at least signed, as all PBers will have a public key of their own and the secret keys stay on the PB server.
heck, even if it doesn't work out, it beats the slimy way y'all are going about it now, does it not?
all the best, chemist
Posted by gardenergirl on August 25, 2005, at 21:20:06
In reply to Peek-a-boo Dr. Bob et al. » gardenergirl, posted by chemist on August 25, 2005, at 17:13:55
Sorry, you lost me there. I don't speak that language. But thanks for replying!
gg
Posted by Phillipa on August 25, 2005, at 21:44:55
In reply to Re: Peek-a-boo Dr. Bob et al. » chemist, posted by gardenergirl on August 25, 2005, at 21:20:06
Hey chemist, I saw my name. Are you talking about me? Did I do something bad? Fondly, Phillipa
Posted by chemist on August 26, 2005, at 11:10:28
In reply to Re: Peek-a-boo Dr. Bob et al., posted by Phillipa on August 25, 2005, at 21:44:55
hello there, chmeist here...phillipa and gg...the first part of the prior post was a mention that some troubles on several personal fronts - from the very real to the very likely imagined or invented by myself - are fading as a regular schedule of work and non-work approaches a steady-state.
the second part was simply grabbing the header line from a post on admin (the page is displayed without frames, and it happened to be one of phillipa's: just one i grabbed, and nothing at all more than that).
the second few lines include a some javascript for purposes that are well-established by peolple who are professionals and, most importantly, are not to my knowledge suffering from paranoia.
when one invokes a URL with frames, they see a split screen, two panels. one of them is the true URL, and so-called pseudo URLs at least one and usually three in number - are literally hidden from the viewer (they are referenced from the one, true frame they would be reading and, most importantly, submitting typed information to a linked, hidden, and seemingly ``owned'' spot just as i am am doing right now in replaying to the posts). also, others can be precluded because of expired cookies that are taken; i was not aware until a while back that this form of communication was available here.
the discussion concerning the smaller board over a month to two ago - as best as i can reacall - was a trial run by Dr. Bob and alexandra_k. the thread on Admin where Toph, NikkiX2, Dinah, and rainbowbrite were enjoined by Dr. Bob for some reason just this a.m. to redirect the banter to a URL which was tied to the goings-on in july. go figure.
my mistaken assumption that a rootkit had been triggered resulted in some down-time for me. you need look no further than the PB pages from Admin (at least) viewed with or without frames to confirm what the cause likely is. also, should you need a little more clarity, you can go back to the transition from HTML to DHTML/javascript, and i feel that (Dr. Bob, can you pardon the double-double quotes? i am not at all certain that the event handling and associated keyPress and onKeyPress are sturdy, and the miskeys are more than usual) any of the O'Reilly books will do: i grabbed one of mine on DHTML (Dynamic HTML, D. Goodman, 1996) and quite a bit of javascript stuff and other facts are contained therein.
the embedded javascript that, when triggered, results in the execution of a script and an action for a person who is under the impression that another person - or some such - was not responsible for their puzzling observations while making use of what really is an extension of another's window ought to confuse anybody.
in short, i can grab what you type in real time and it is unencrypted as long as your DOM is not to blame.
Dr. Bob has, at the PB site and via the use of the framed alternate loophole, set up a way to communicate with PBers - or who knows, some have the privilege to do so in his absence, for whatever reason - and as long as one of the not-so-correct cookies does not key with those of the others, you do not get a real-time, virtual console of typwd messages.
for further clarification, examine the posting page where your cookies (although not enough to wipe you out) are taken in and swapped out. and it should be clear that you have not done anything bad or underhanded. all the best, chemist
Posted by Dinah on August 26, 2005, at 12:28:45
In reply to here we go... » Phillipa, posted by chemist on August 26, 2005, at 11:10:28
Hi chemist.
I'm not really very good with technical stuff, and don't really understand a lot of what you said, but if it is of any help, I'm not aware of anything untoward going on at Babble. I certainly have no access to personal Babblers information while Dr. Bob is away.
I'm concerned for your distress, Chemist. I don't remember your sounding quite this distressed before. Have you made any changes lately in medications that might be having some interplay with what stressors you're having in real life?
I ask this as someone who's as ignorant of medications as I am of inner computer workings, but it is a question asked in friendship and concern.
Posted by chemist on August 26, 2005, at 13:45:35
In reply to Re: here we go... » chemist, posted by Dinah on August 26, 2005, at 12:28:45
> Hi chemist.
>
> I'm not really very good with technical stuff, and don't really understand a lot of what you said, but if it is of any help, I'm not aware of anything untoward going on at Babble. I certainly have no access to personal Babblers information while Dr. Bob is away.
****
that's okay. i am taking care of it myself.
****
>
> I'm concerned for your distress, Chemist. I don't remember your sounding quite this distressed before. Have you made any changes lately in medications that might be having some interplay with what stressors you're having in real life?
>
> I ask this as someone who's as ignorant of medications as I am of inner computer workings, but it is a question asked in friendship and concern.
Posted by gardenergirl on August 26, 2005, at 15:06:48
In reply to Re: here we go... » chemist, posted by Dinah on August 26, 2005, at 12:28:45
Yes, I'm just as puzzled as Dinah. The technical aspects of what you write, chemist, are way above my head. But I also hear a flavor of distress that worries me, too.
I'm glad you feel you are taking care of what is upsetting you. I hope you are taking care of your health as well.
Warmly,
gg
Posted by JenStar on August 26, 2005, at 16:24:40
In reply to Peek-a-boo Dr. Bob et al. » gardenergirl, posted by chemist on August 25, 2005, at 17:13:55
hi Chemist,
to be honest, I don't follow your post. Can you help explain the headers and what you're pointing out in them? I'm not too saavy about such stuff. I'm sorry you're feeling paranoid -- I don't think anyone is hiding anything, though. I'm not in favor of smaller private boards, but I'll still listen to discussion about it!hope you're well.
take care,
JenStar
Posted by chemist on August 27, 2005, at 2:13:33
In reply to can you explain? I don't get it! :( » chemist, posted by JenStar on August 26, 2005, at 16:24:40
> hi Chemist,
> to be honest, I don't follow your post. Can you help explain the headers and what you're pointing out in them? I'm not too saavy about such stuff. I'm sorry you're feeling paranoid -- I don't think anyone is hiding anything, though. I'm not in favor of smaller private boards, but I'll still listen to discussion about it!
>
> hope you're well.
> take care,
> JenStar
hello there, very well, thanks...the troubles are over...be well, tjm
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.