Don't tell me that I don't know what I'm talking about
October 26, 2006 11:35 AM   Subscribe

So I solved this problem, based on the help given by a few members, who I'm very grateful for. But was it really necessary for a load of people to come into the thread in the meantime and tell me that I didn't know what I was talking about?
posted by reklaw to Etiquette/Policy at 11:35 AM (175 comments total) 29 users marked this as a favorite

Do you want mommy to kiss your boo-boo?
posted by smackfu at 11:37 AM on October 26, 2006 [5 favorites]


Turns out my description of the problem and diagnosis was mostly accurate -- Hotmail had used my details to change a setting (although, alright, it hadn't used the POP protocol to do so, 'cos POP is just for retrieving mail). Still, it felt a bit unnecessary for people to tell me my problem couldn't exist and lecture me on How Email Works.
posted by reklaw at 11:37 AM on October 26, 2006


Another pointless callout. You got the help you sought. It's the freakin' INTERNET, it's full of people who don't know their ass from a hole in the ground. Why would they not post nonsensical answers your question?
posted by fixedgear at 11:40 AM on October 26, 2006 [3 favorites]


Well, that's kinda the point. I don't tend to post questions on most forums, because the Clue Deficient turn up and start spouting off about irrelevant crap (likewise if you post answers in most places, the same people turn up to argue with you). It just seems to me like "hey, fuck it, let's take a guess" is an increasingly prevalent attitude in AskMe.

And, ultimately, aren't all callouts pointless? Isn't, like, life pointless? OMG EXISTENTIAL MOMENT
posted by reklaw at 11:42 AM on October 26, 2006


My impression is that "hey, fuck it, let's take a guess" has been a prevalent attitude on AskMe since day uno.
posted by cortex at 11:46 AM on October 26, 2006 [3 favorites]


It just seems to me like "hey, fuck it, let's take a guess" is an increasingly prevalent attitude in AskMe.

Yup. It sucks. People who don't know should keep their mouths shut. Instead, because they've logged onto the Internet to express themselves, they post random musings — and about half the time, they have the nerve to get uppity and defend whatever ignorant nonsense they pulled out of their...

Anyway. Yeah, it sucks. Been that way for awhile, though. Sometimes I flag 'em. Nothing ever happens.
posted by cribcage at 11:52 AM on October 26, 2006


My impression is that "hey, fuck it, let's take a guess" has been a prevalent attitude on AskMe since day uno.

You don't think that a lot more people have been posting ill-considered answers recently? Seems like at least once in every question now someone asks something that they were told in the 'more inside', or Googles up a link that was included in the original question, or posts something like "maybe you should ask X official person?" that could practically have been auto-added by looking at the category.

In the end, I just don't appreciate being told that my hypothesis -- which turned out to be right -- was "the stuff of pure fantasy". Especially annoying were the people who insisted at great length that I had caused the problem and was apparently just too dumb to realise it. The whole experience was a lot like ringing tech support, offering an obviously-technically-competent description of the problem, and then being asked if the thing's plugged in and if I've turned it off and on. Silly, annoying, unnecessary.
posted by reklaw at 11:54 AM on October 26, 2006


Because you insisted on telling people what the problem wasn't. Over and over. And it was pretty clear that was indeed the problem. And, in fact, it turned out that was the problem.

Now you will no doubt tell us that, no, that wasn't the problem. Even though you've confirmed it was.

That's why.
posted by Ragma at 11:55 AM on October 26, 2006 [3 favorites]


So wait, let me get this straight...you posted a question, phrased it incorrectly so that people had to correct you in the thread, got the answer you needed, insist that although your characterization of the problem was incorrect you had nothing to do with the problems describing what was wrong or implementing the solution, and then posted a MeTa to complain that you'd been treated poorly?

Christ, I read that thread and there was nothing misplaced in any of the statements in it.

Plus, and I think this bears mention, you frequently act like a jerk to other people on the site, so, in a way, are complaining that they may be treating you in a similar fashion. Gimme a break.
posted by OmieWise at 11:56 AM on October 26, 2006 [1 favorite]


Flag the totally useless answers and we'll get rid of them. Early on in a thread, or in a thread with few answers people do sometimes enter "stab in the dark" mode which I see as a sort of brainstorming function. Not always helpful, but possibly more helpful than getting no answers at all. There are also people who feel compelled to answer any question they think they know even a little something about, even if they're not correct or not the good person to answer the question. I sort of lump this in the "you get what you pay for" category or maybe the karmic siren/owl payback category (I think you know what I mean). Most of those answers didn't seem insanely off base, and it's not always clear from the question how much the questioner actually knows about the stuff they are having trouble with. I'm glad you solved your problem.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 12:00 PM on October 26, 2006 [2 favorites]


A perfect example, by the way. Good rule of thumb: If you find yourself typing, "I have no basis for thinking that," then maybe you oughtn't click POST.

As for "acting like a jerk": I don't recognize Reklaw's username, so I don't know whether that's true, but it's a stupid excuse. Moreover, I suspect it's irrelevant because I've seen several of the most controversial MeFites post AskMe threads without being hassled.
posted by cribcage at 12:02 PM on October 26, 2006


Because you insisted on telling people what the problem wasn't. Over and over. And it was pretty clear that was indeed the problem. And, in fact, it turned out that was the problem.

No. People insisted on telling me, over and over, that it was impossible that Hotmail had told my ISP to forward my mail -- either I must have done it, or my ISP must be allowing old passwords, or something else weird.

It turns out that Hotmail HAD told my ISP to forward my mail, exactly like I thought. I was not asking for help diagnosing the problem, because I had already done that. I was asking how to solve it. And the people who suggested that the setting could be changed in a webmail interface were the ones that solved it. But that wasn't until here, after I'd had to explain slowly and carefully to a bunch of people that I KNEW WHAT THE DAMN PROBLEM WAS. See?
posted by reklaw at 12:02 PM on October 26, 2006


I just read that whole thread and can't see much evidence of piling-on, other than blacklite's mention of it. When I think of piling-on, I think of comments more like this:

"Get the hell over yourself and stop spouting silly psychobabble."

"You obviously need this putting in plainer language. Your idea sucks. It is stupid. "
posted by googly at 12:04 PM on October 26, 2006 [1 favorite]


Not true. My original statement of the problem was "Hotmail changed some kind of setting on my ISP's mail server, telling it to forward emails to the Hotmail account". Which was right. I didn't actually say anything 'wrong 'about POP until here ("It doesn't seem beyond the bounds of possibility that POP3 would have a command for that, but hey.") By which time several people had already corrected my original post, despite me saying "changed a setting", not "sent a POP command" at that point.
posted by reklaw at 12:07 PM on October 26, 2006


"It turns out that Hotmail HAD told my ISP to forward my mail, exactly like I thought."

That part is made up in your brain, and is not true.
posted by Ragma at 12:07 PM on October 26, 2006 [9 favorites]


Oh, and I only "act like a jerk", so to speak, to people that I think are deluding themselves to an obvious truth and need it spelled out in big flashing lights for them to see. Not to people who ask a technical question that I don't know shit about. And there's the difference.
posted by reklaw at 12:08 PM on October 26, 2006


Wait, so you got answers that helped you solve your problem, but now you're in Meta complaining that some people misunderstood you and gave the wrong advice? You're resentful towards people who were just trying to help you solve your problem for free out of the goodness of their hearts? What an ingrate.
posted by gokart4xmas at 12:09 PM on October 26, 2006


As for "acting like a jerk": I don't recognize Reklaw's username, so I don't know whether that's true, but it's a stupid excuse. Moreover, I suspect it's irrelevant because I've seen several of the most controversial MeFites post AskMe threads without being hassled.

cribcage, I think your reasoning only holds if you think that people were being obnoxious (which they weren't!) out of revenge. I barely recognize reklaw's name, but kind of remember him being kind of unrepentantly jerky before, and I searched for his name and "jerk", and there were all kinds of examples. googly provided more. My point, and the reason I think it's relevant, is that it's ridiculous to make a MeTa about site tone if you've helped to set that tone. I don't support being jerky in AskMe threads, and I try not to be too jerky elsewhere on the site, but I sure as shit think that if the issue is site etiquette, one had better practice what they preach.
posted by OmieWise at 12:10 PM on October 26, 2006


That part is made up in your brain, and is not true.

OK, promise to stop comment-overloading this thread, but how exactly DID it happen then, genius? Consider:

1. Mail started getting forwarded to my Hotmail account at the time when I originally gave Hotmail my POP details, and have been coming ever since.
2. Hotmail no longer had my password.
3. My ISP was sending me bounce messages because it was clearly trying to forward my mail.
4. I have never told my ISP to forward my mail. I have never before used or seen the interface to do so.
5. Going to the webmail interface and disabling forwarding on my ISP's side solved the problem.

Would you like to suggest some other theory that might fit these facts? I'd really, really like to hear one.
posted by reklaw at 12:11 PM on October 26, 2006


Reklaw, I can't think how Hotmail possibly told your ISP to forward your mail -- what basis do you have to know this to be true?

There are essentially two ways to "tell" your ISP to forward your mail:

1. Call and ask a human to take care of it -- human-to-human request, and the human at the ISP takes care of the forwarding.
2. Use whatever facility your ISP has put in place via the web to forward email from them to somewhere else.

(Note that "use POP/IMAP/whatever to set the correct setting" isn't there, since no mail transmission protocol has such a capability built-in.)

So you're saying that either someone from Hotmail called your ISP and convinced a human there to forward your email, without your permission and without the ability to prove to your ISP that he or she was you or was acting in your stead, or you're saying that someone (or some program) at Hotmail was able to use your ISP's web-based mechanism to forward your email, again without your permission and without the ability to prove to that web-based mechanism that he/she/it was you or was acting in your stead. Both of those require that your ISP was willing to accept Hotmail's word that you wanted this forward in place, which is almost 100% not the case, and in the 0.00000000000001% chance that it IS the case, 100% cause for you to dump your ISP posthaste.
posted by delfuego at 12:11 PM on October 26, 2006


It was the Karma Police. They sometimes show up in full riot gear and put the jackboot to your throat.
posted by The God Complex at 12:13 PM on October 26, 2006


reklaw: It turns out that Hotmail HAD told my ISP to forward my mail, exactly like I thought.

With all due respect, reklaw, you haven't established this. You've established that your ISP has a web-based interface with an option for forwarding your e-mail. This option was set, and you don't recall changing it yourself or having your ISP do it for you. Therefore you're assuming that Hotmail did it.

I think this is--how do I put this?--extremely unlikely. Your ISP's web-based interface is non-standard and password-protected.

You asked: That's basically my question: is there any way that Hotmail could have set a setting on my behalf to tell the server to keep forwarding my mail? It doesn't seem beyond the bounds of possibility that POP3 would have a command for that, but hey.

POP3 doesn't have such a command.
posted by russilwvong at 12:14 PM on October 26, 2006


So to make it clear, I'll jump on the bandwagon you're decrying: you keep stating that Hotmail made the forwarding change with your ISP mail account, but you have no ability to demonstrate how they could possibly have done so, and a lot of people with a lot of technical know-how have said explicitly that there is no (technical or literal) way for Hotmail to have done so. When they said this, you didn't like it, but it doesn't make it any less true.

For a bare physical-world analogy: this is like saying that you don't like how hot it is in your (locked tight, no way in) house, and that when investigating the cause, you found that your thermostat was set to 100 degrees one hour ago and that you're sure that the plumber must have done it. Everyone points out that your house has been locked up tight for the past three days and that there was no way for the plumber to have made the change, and you said "well, how ELSE would the thermostat have been set to 100????".
posted by delfuego at 12:17 PM on October 26, 2006


delfuego: They did, at the time, have my current and correct password, which was surely enough to prove to any web-based mechanism (or whatever it might have been) that they had the right to forward my mail. My password then changed so Hotmail didn't have it any more, but the setting had already been altered -- so my ISP mail continued to come to Hotmail.

If it isn't what happened, what's the alternative explanation?
posted by reklaw at 12:17 PM on October 26, 2006


This pile-on sucks.
posted by Mister_A at 12:18 PM on October 26, 2006


Hotmail cannot change your forwarding settings. It simply isn't possible. And, to quote, "when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

You changed it and forgot. That doesn't mean you're a stupid person. But that's the most likely explanation.
posted by GuyZero at 12:18 PM on October 26, 2006


I CAN'T BELIEVE that people are still trying to tell me that I don't know what I'm talking about in this thread. There are two choices here. Either:

1. I'm some kind of raving crazy idiot who somehow set up mail forwarding with my ISP and forgot about it, DESPITE the fact that I've never seen the interface to do so, and DESPITE the fact that the forwarding started at exactly the time I gave my details to Hotmail.

or

2. Hotmail did it.

Now, which is more likely? Hmm....
posted by reklaw at 12:20 PM on October 26, 2006


In other words: "[you] are deluding [yourself] to an obvious truth and need it spelled out in big flashing lights [...] to see."
posted by OmieWise at 12:20 PM on October 26, 2006


Possibilities for how reklaw's email started getting forwarded to Hotmail:

1. reklaw changed a setting (either in the webmail interface, through a .forward, or some other similar mechanism, there are lots of ways, not just the interface you keep talking about) and has now forgotten he did it, or didn't realize or understand he was doing it at the time. (Most likely)

2. Someone at reklaw's ISP noticed his email was being grabbed by Hotmail and added the forwarding at their end. (Extremely unlikely -- customers would complain)

3. Hotmail was somehow able to get into reklaw's ISP account and change the mail forwarding settings. Either a human from Hotmail contacted the ISP (unlikely) or some bot at Hotmail logged on to the ISP and changed the setting (so unlikely as to be laughable -- imagine the uproar on Slashdot).
posted by event at 12:21 PM on October 26, 2006


REKLAW, YOU'RE DELUDING YOURSELF ABOUT AN OBVIOUS TRUTH. COULD YOU, LIKE, CUT IT OUT?

Were they big and flashy enough? ;)
posted by The God Complex at 12:22 PM on October 26, 2006 [2 favorites]


1. Mail started getting forwarded to my Hotmail account at the time when I originally gave Hotmail my POP details, and have been coming ever since.

This is what you're describing:

web browser < --> Hotmail < --> mail server

1a. As you describe it, at some point prior to 2002 you configured Hotmail to check your mail server for incoming e-mail, using the POP protocol. That means that Hotmail would fetch e-mail from your mail server.

1b. Today, your mail server is actually forwarding e-mail to Hotmail.

1a and 1b aren't the same. 1a is a change to Hotmail. 1b is a change to your mail server.

How did this happen? We can't tell. All we can tell you is that Hotmail couldn't have done it using the POP protocol, and it's extremely unlikely that Hotmail did it through your ISP's web interface.

Is it possible that someone at your ISP noticed the continual Hotmail POP requests and configured your e-mail to forward to Hotmail?

event: 2. Someone at reklaw's ISP noticed his email was being grabbed by Hotmail and added the forwarding at their end. (Extremely unlikely -- customers would complain)

How would they notice?
posted by russilwvong at 12:22 PM on October 26, 2006


1. I'm some kind of raving crazy idiot who somehow set up mail forwarding with my ISP and forgot about it, DESPITE the fact that I've never seen the interface to do so, and DESPITE the fact that the forwarding started at exactly the time I gave my details to Hotmail.

I vote for this one.
posted by delfuego at 12:23 PM on October 26, 2006 [4 favorites]


"Would you like to suggest some other theory that might fit these facts? I'd really, really like to hear one."

You're an idiot?

I could dress that theory up in nicer language, and provide some verbose explanstions, but at the end of the day it really comes down you this -

You set a forwarding rule.

I know........ You don't remember ever doing it. But it got done. And Hotmail didn't do it. I know....... you think they did. But they didn't.

Now we have people trying to explain the situation to you and you continue telling them they're wrong, all the while admitting you don't understand administering email servers and the details of POP3. This makes you an idiot. Perhaps you are very smart about other things. Perhaps you are a wonderful human being. Perhaps we'd all love to buy you a beer just for the joy of your company. But on this issue, you are an idiot.
posted by Ragma at 12:23 PM on October 26, 2006 [1 favorite]


Aren't you bored of saying the same old shit over and over again?

They lied! And they suck at warhotmail! We fucking know! Jesus. And yet you keep taking up the front page with your crap, and then posting endless self-satisfied rants on the subject in the comments. WE FUCKING KNOW ALREADY. GIVE IT A SODDING REST.

posted by If I Had An Anus at 12:24 PM on October 26, 2006


reklaw: ... DESPITE the fact that the forwarding started at exactly the time I gave my details to Hotmail.

Again, fetching (Hotmail pulls the e-mail from your ISP) and forwarding (the ISP pushes the e-mail to Hotmail) are not the same, although they would both result in the e-mail appearing in your Hotmail inbox.

When you configured Hotmail to fetch your mail, your e-mail would appear in your inbox. But that doesn't mean forwarding was set up at that time. It could have happened later.

If you're 100% certain that you didn't do it, I'm inclined to think the most likely thing is that the ISP did it. They might have done it for a lot of customers at the same time; maybe it's more efficient for them to forward the e-mail instead of getting the POP requests from Hotmail.
posted by russilwvong at 12:26 PM on October 26, 2006


Hello, ISP...yes, this is David Osbourne calling from MSN/Hotmail. We would like you to change one of your customer's settings so that e-mail can be forwarded to/from -- or, whever we want it to do -- on behalf of one of our most important clients. Yes, yes, I know we have 100's of millions of users. No, we don't have the manpower to call on behalf of all of our users, but consider reklaw to be a stellar customer. Um, what's the password on the 'reklaw' account? Um, don't know. Um...can you just do us a favor and override that requirement? Please? Yes, yes...we can get Bill to send you an autographed photograph in the mail as a return favor. Okthxgdbye.
posted by ericb at 12:27 PM on October 26, 2006 [4 favorites]


Another possibility is that the first time you changed your POP password, an ISP employee might have noticed that Hotmail couldn't fetch your e-mail any more (this would have generated error messages in the ISP's logs), and changed your mail account to forward to Hotmail.
posted by russilwvong at 12:28 PM on October 26, 2006


3. Hotmail was somehow able to get into reklaw's ISP account and change the mail forwarding settings. Either a human from Hotmail contacted the ISP (unlikely) or some bot at Hotmail logged on to the ISP and changed the setting (so unlikely as to be laughable -- imagine the uproar on Slashdot).

This is the one I vote for, you see. Is it really that unlikely that an organisation the size of Hotmail wouldn't have built up some way of setting up mail forwarding at people's ISPs? If they have your mail username and password, they can change anything you can -- it's just a matter of finding how. Especially considering that my ISP is quite a large one, it really doesn't seem that unlikely that Hotmail would have set up some method of doing this, especially considering how much time and trouble it would save them on checking POP mail in the normal way.

People can insist that I'm an idiot all they like, but I know exactly what I have and haven't done. I know that I never set up mail forwarding myself. I know that the only reason the mail started coming to Hotmail was that I gave them my mail server location, username and password. And I know that the mail kept coming after I changed the password.
posted by reklaw at 12:29 PM on October 26, 2006


Seems doubtful that hotmail did this.

Was it your ISP forwarding mail, and not hotmail? Surely. Did you fix it by disabling mail forwarding on your ISP's webmail interface? Undoubtedly. Did Hotmail login to your webmail account and do these modifications for you? I don't believe that. Hotmail would have to have coded a specific script that knows your ISP's webmail site, how to login to it, how to get to the mail forwarding page, and how to activate that. Not to mention that they'd need to know your internet username and password (you didn't use the same values on hotmail, did you?).

You may not remember doing it. The interface may well have looked different years ago (surely not the same version as now, let alone the actual software). Your ISP might have done it themselves after you've contacted them somehow. Maybe you had some problems, contacted Hotmail support, and they contacted your ISP for you and got the forwarding setup. But it was certainly no automated process initiated by the Hotmail software.

You rely on your memory. We rely on how this stuff works. You have no explanation for how Hotmail would have done any of this, other than "Well, _I_ certainly didn't do it". That's pretty weak. There's other ways for this change to have taken place that don't involve Hotmail.

Ultimately it's all meaningless. It works now. Good for you. You should stop arguing about how right you are, though. I mean, seriously, the point of that AskMe was to solve your problem, not stick it to the techies that think they know better than you, right? Well, problem solved. Move on. You won't convince anyone, I think.
posted by splice at 12:29 PM on October 26, 2006 [1 favorite]


I barely recognize reklaw's name, but kind of remember him being kind of unrepentantly jerky before

The real issue here is: who recognizes my name, and do they think I'm a jerk? Huh?
posted by COBRA! at 12:29 PM on October 26, 2006


Um, what's the password on the 'reklaw' account? Um, don't know. Um...can you just do us a favor and override that requirement?

THEY HAD MY PASSWORD AT THE TIME.

Could everyone who doesn't know what the fuck they're talking about kindly leave this thread now?
posted by reklaw at 12:30 PM on October 26, 2006


russilwvong: That does sound like a reasonable alternative explanation. I really think there are a number of ways that this could have happened. I don't understand why people want to insist that it's so impossible.
posted by reklaw at 12:32 PM on October 26, 2006


Could everyone who doesn't know what the fuck they're talking about kindly leave this thread now?

Door closes, reklaw leaves.
posted by fixedgear at 12:33 PM on October 26, 2006 [2 favorites]


Could everyone who doesn't know what the fuck they're talking about kindly leave this thread now?

/builds cheapseats
posted by The God Complex at 12:33 PM on October 26, 2006


Could everyone who doesn't know what the fuck they're talking about kindly leave this thread now?

Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out, reklaw.
posted by OmieWise at 12:35 PM on October 26, 2006


Ha. Ha. What special unique funny snowflakes you are.
posted by reklaw at 12:36 PM on October 26, 2006


Is it really that unlikely that an organisation the size of Hotmail wouldn't have built up some way of setting up mail forwarding at people's ISPs?

Yes it really is that unlikely.
posted by event at 12:36 PM on October 26, 2006


MSN/Hotmail must've been behind the change. Surely, they call and or process scripts to access password-protected accounts at ISP's. It's not difficult, since Hotmail is "the world’s largest and most famous web-based email service handl[ing] 100 million emails each day, for 230 million active users worldwide.
posted by ericb at 12:38 PM on October 26, 2006


reklaw: Is it really that unlikely that an organisation the size of Hotmail wouldn't have built up some way of setting up mail forwarding at people's ISPs? ... especially considering how much time and trouble it would save them on checking POP mail in the normal way.

Yes, it's extremely unlikely. Checking POP mail in the normal way isn't any time and trouble at all. There's old, reliable software that fetches mail using POP. That's why Hotmail offered the service in the first place.

I don't understand why people want to insist that it's so impossible.

For Hotmail to have developed software to change people's ISP settings would have been extremely bizarre and scandalous behavior. As various people have noted, we'd have heard about this by now.
posted by russilwvong at 12:38 PM on October 26, 2006


Ultimately it's all meaningless. It works now. Good for you. You should stop arguing about how right you are, though. I mean, seriously, the point of that AskMe was to solve your problem, not stick it to the techies that think they know better than you, right? Well, problem solved. Move on. You won't convince anyone, I think.

Yeah, I agree, I guess. I just find it absolutely unbelievable that not only did my original AskMe get derailed by a bunch of people insisting that my problem couldn't possibly exist and I was an idiot, but then after I've solved it using a solution that follows on quite logically from my original statement of the problem, a bunch of people come here to insist that I must still somehow be wrong.

I know this whole mail forwarding thing happened. I don't know how it happened, but there are plenty of things that seem likely. I know that I didn't cause it. Bored now. The end.
posted by reklaw at 12:39 PM on October 26, 2006


I poured some coffee onto my hard drive now it doesn't work CURSE YOU MICROSOFT!!!
posted by Mister_A at 12:42 PM on October 26, 2006


Could everyone who doesn't know what the fuck they're talking about kindly leave this thread now?

Can I take this as my invitation to enter this thread?
posted by yeti at 12:42 PM on October 26, 2006


Suggestion, reklaw -- call your ISP and have them take a look at your customer record. See if/when/by whom the change was made. If I were you and believed that someone other than myself made a change to my account, I'd be very concerned about it and would wonder what other information might have been compromised or changed.
posted by ericb at 12:43 PM on October 26, 2006


"but I know exactly what I have and haven't done"

This is provably false simply by the evidence at hand. I know......... You think it's not.

Here's something new to think about - For the rest of your MetaFilter life people will link to this thread as evidence that you wouldn't know the truth if it walked up, introduced itself, gave you it's business card, shared some stories about it's summer vacation, and then kicked you in the nuts. You would stand there, cranky and confused as the truth pummeled your balls, repeating each time, "Sorry.... Who are you again?".

You and the truth have a very problematic relationship. We'll try to spend less time getting you two together.
posted by Ragma at 12:45 PM on October 26, 2006 [23 favorites]


reklaw call your ISP, start a trouble ticket requesting any logs involving email forwarding and your account.

It is (remotely) possible that some well-intentioned admin at your ISP setup a forwarding rule when he/she noticed bounces. Now I know admins at ISPs and they have far better things to do with their time so I highly doubt this, but far stranger things have happened.

Hotmail did not change your forwarding settings. Leaving aside the massive technical issues, any competent ISP would happily let their grandmother burn alive before letting a third party muck about in internal email settings.

Now it's (remotely) possible that Hotmail does have some sort of arrangement with your ISP (especially if it is a big one) to semi-automatically request a forwarding change, but I cannot imagine that your ISP would do this without confirmation.

Again, ask your ISP. We're guessing, they'll know.
posted by Skorgu at 12:45 PM on October 26, 2006 [1 favorite]


I just find it absolutely unbelievable that not only did my original AskMe get derailed by a bunch of people insisting that my problem couldn't possibly exist and I was an idiot, but then after I've solved it using a solution that follows on quite logically from my original statement of the problem, a bunch of people come here to insist that I must still somehow be wrong.

Listen, buddy, take a step back and look at the situation:

1) Your solution to the problem via the original AskMe was relatively prompt. You insist that the answers that didn't provide the solution were derails, but they were actually all legitimate responses that helped to lead to the solution.

2) You re-opened this conversation all by yourself. No on started this thread to talk about what an idiot you appear to be, you started it because you weren't satisfied with a solved problem and serious technical questions about your interpretation of the problem and it's solution.

I will grant you that perhaps this MeTa callout was started by Hotmail to add to your woes, but I find it extremely unlikely.
posted by OmieWise at 12:48 PM on October 26, 2006 [10 favorites]


You and the truth have a very problematic relationship. We'll try to spend less time getting you two together.

Most informed bit in this whole thread.
posted by delfuego at 12:49 PM on October 26, 2006 [1 favorite]


I just went back to the original thread and read through it. I think everyone's comments were pretty much dead on: your ISP mail server had a forwarding rule which forwarded your e-mail to Hotmail.

The only guesses which weren't accurate were damn dirty ape's here and here, where he thought that Hotmail was set up to fetch your mail.

Not to be condescending, but I think it's useful to remember the Fidonet rules:
1. Don't be offensive.
2. Don't be easily offended.
posted by russilwvong at 12:49 PM on October 26, 2006


Hotmail could not, would not, did not do this. Period. Your uninformed guesses are not a good enough reason to tell everyone who says Hotmail didn't do this that they don't know what they are talking about. Leave it alone. You or your ISP are responsible. Ask your ISP.
posted by team lowkey at 12:49 PM on October 26, 2006


a bunch of people come here to insist that I must still somehow be wrong.

Actually, you were the first to come on here and insist you were right. People (predictably) reacted to that. If you can't stand the heat, git outa da kitchen, you know?

If you had flagged the offending comments and moved on, none of this would have happenned, and you'd still have your solution. There's always people that turn out to be wrong. There's also people who believe they're right that turn out to be mistaken. There's no determination either way here, since no one can establish what really happenned.

But you know what? Between the opinions of people who work with tech stuff day in and day out, and that of users with little technical knowledge but absolute certainty in their memories of what they did, I will pick the techs every single time. If you don't agree with me, work in tech support for an ISP for a year or so. You will see that conviction in one's recollection of events doesn't count for much against cold facts. Ultimately it's all about solving the problem though, so you don't really argue with the user, you just lead them to do what you want. Perhaps your AskMe thread wasn't exemplary in that respect, but then it's just a community site, not a professional tech support outfit. People will get it wrong, people will miss the point, but all that matters is getting the fix, then you can/should move on, regardless of asshats in your thread.
posted by splice at 12:50 PM on October 26, 2006


This setting would have been changed somewhere around 2001. Is it really likely that my ISP has logs going back that far?
posted by reklaw at 12:50 PM on October 26, 2006


Depends on your ISP, but if it's a big one, maybe. I'd suggest calling them and asking if they can pull up the record for your account.
posted by russilwvong at 12:54 PM on October 26, 2006


The real issue here is: who recognizes my name, and do they think I'm a jerk?

Not me, and totally.
posted by cortex at 12:55 PM on October 26, 2006 [1 favorite]


Shorter MeTa thread:
reklaw: Hi everyone, I'm a huge asshole.
Everyone else on the internet: Fair enough, but also you have no idea what you're talking about.
posted by ibmcginty at 12:56 PM on October 26, 2006 [10 favorites]


give it a sodding rest
posted by matteo at 12:58 PM on October 26, 2006


The change at Hotmail, requiring a subscription fee, did not occur in 2001, but in 2004.
"MSN accounts once had POP3 email access. They sold their POP3 servers to Qwest in favor of HTML servers...While...[the ability to check one's own e-mail using Microsoft Outlook and Outlook Express, etc.] was free for a number of years, Microsoft announced on September 27, 2004 that they were making it a subscription-only service for new users immediately and existing users from April 2005. However, existing users are still able to access their Hotmail accounts via this protocol for free as of August 2006. It is unclear if or when Microsoft will revoke this feature as many users rely on this function. Users can get around this restriction however, by using software that simulates a POP server to which the e-mail application connects."
posted by ericb at 1:01 PM on October 26, 2006


So, yeah, I'm gonna call my ISP and see if they have logs that can prove me right. Will probably have to wait until the weekend though. Watch for updates...

Hey guys, you know what'd be really fun for the rest of this thread!!??!!?? Since we've already started taking a little opinion poll on who does/doesn't like reklaw, maybe we could just all do that for a while! I'm honestly (seriously) not even remotely offended, and kinda interested to know what you all think of me. So just let it all out, if you're, like, in the mood for that kinda thing. Feel free to go digging through all my past comments to prove your case one way or the other!!

I'm gonna go have a sandwich.
posted by reklaw at 1:03 PM on October 26, 2006


Since we've already started taking a little opinion poll on who does/doesn't like reklaw, maybe we could just all do that for a while!

I'm neutral on reklaw, but cortex is gonna die.
posted by COBRA! at 1:04 PM on October 26, 2006


Oh, and ericb, that's talking about Hotmail-to-POP (ie. checking your Hotmail in Outlook Express) not POP-to-Hotmail, which is what we're talking about. Thanks for demonstrating that you don't know what the hell you're talking about, though.
posted by reklaw at 1:05 PM on October 26, 2006


Ummm, reklaw jackhole, you realize that ericb was referencing your description of when the Hotmail-checking-POP-accounts option went to a paid service, right? Nice to jump down his throat for being an idiot when it's (again) you being one.
posted by delfuego at 1:09 PM on October 26, 2006


I don't have an opinion on reklaw's asshattery either way, but the whole Hotmail/Qwest/MSN thing sure makes my ass pucker.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 1:13 PM on October 26, 2006 [2 favorites]


No, delfuego, the Hotmail-checking-POP-accounts option went paid in 2002, exactly like I said. Then ericb said that I'd got it wrong, it was in 2004, and quoted what he did above, which is actually about checking-Hotmail-in-a-mail-client (like Outlook). So he's wrong. And you're wrong. And it's absolutely amazing that you continue to argue about this when you can't even understand such a simple technical distinction.
posted by reklaw at 1:14 PM on October 26, 2006


ROFLMAO
posted by taosbat at 1:16 PM on October 26, 2006


I just find it absolutely unbelievable that we can't post a popcorn-munching smiley gif to this thread.
posted by If I Had An Anus at 1:17 PM on October 26, 2006


Ah, indeed, that Wikipedia article is talking about being able to access your Hotmail account via POP; I did reverse that, because I was taking you at your word:

ericb, that's talking about Hotmail-to-POP (ie. checking your Hotmail in Outlook Express) not POP-to-Hotmail

(You'll note that you have those reversed.)

And all of this says nothing about the original point; there's not a chance in hell that someone/something/somescript at Hotmail made a change to your ISP's forwarding rules. You can say I don't know what I'm talking about all you want, but one of us has worked with/on all the various email protocols since about 1994, and one of us is self-admittedly clueless when it comes to those same protocols. I'll leave it to the readers to figure out whom is who.
posted by delfuego at 1:19 PM on October 26, 2006


ROFLSTALIN
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 1:20 PM on October 26, 2006 [2 favorites]


So your unshakable belief, reklaw, is that Hotmail, a unit of Microsoft, is using the POP authentication information their users give them to secretly log into those users' Webmail accounts and turn on forwarding, so that even if the users turn off Hotmail's POP mail checking for those mailboxes, Hotmail will continue getting copies of their mail? Even though that would be patently illegal?

You really think that's likely?

Neither is it likely that anyone at your ISP set up this forwarding without telling you, since the POP requests from Hotmail wouldn't contain your Hotmail e-mail address anywhere.
posted by nicwolff at 1:21 PM on October 26, 2006


If you don't want to trust people's expertise, work on the logic yourself:

You configured your Hotmail account to pull your mail from your ISP mailbox via POP3.

Some time passed, and they started charging for this mail pulling service which meant that you couldn't turn it off.

But in the meantime, they somehow managed to tell your ISP to push the mail to Hotmail by forwarding-- even though they were still claiming to be pulling it over with POP3? And they claimed to be using POP3 even though there would never be any mail to pick up, since it was all forwarded?

It's one thing to think that all the mail administrators and other experienced folks here and in the green are lying to you about what is and isn't feasible, but do you think Hotmail themselves were lying all that time as well?
posted by mendel at 1:22 PM on October 26, 2006


ROFLSTALIN

*wipes coffee stain off of monitor*

Brilliant!
posted by ericb at 1:23 PM on October 26, 2006


So, yeah, I'm gonna call my ISP and see if they have logs that can prove me right. Will probably have to wait until the weekend though. Watch for updates...

Guys, how about we make reklaw a deal. Everybody stop giving him abuse in this thread, and in return he promises to post the actual reply from his ISP here ASAP. Then, mocking can recommence, as the ISP will reply that there's no way Hotmail logged into their webmail and changed settings.
posted by matthewr at 1:26 PM on October 26, 2006


Wow, this is truly pathetic. Hats off, reklaw. Bite the hand that feeds...
posted by prostyle at 1:26 PM on October 26, 2006


You really think that's likely?

Not especially. But, somehow, that -- or something like that -- is what happened. Because the emails started coming when I gave Hotmail my mail password. They weren't coming before that, and why would I set up manual forwarding when they were already coming? The emails turned up in my Hotmail inbox, every day from when I turned it on to when I turned it off yesterday.

even if the users turn off Hotmail's POP mail checking for those mailboxes, Hotmail will continue getting copies of their mail? Even though that would be patently illegal?

I never have been able to turn off POP mail checking, because the settings got hidden behind some kind of paywall. I assume this was an accidental bug. Back then in 2002, when it happened (ie. my ISP mails kept coming to Hotmail even though the setting went paid-for and I changed my POP password), don't you think I might have remembered if I'd just set up forwarding manually?

Maybe Hotmail did it. Maybe my ISP did it. Maybe it was some rogue program I installed one time or something. But it certainly wasn't me.
posted by reklaw at 1:28 PM on October 26, 2006


If you ask. I think you come off as strident, overdramatic, repetitivem sometimes insensitive towards others while being too sensitive about self which can be terribly self defeating, but would wish no harm upon you, and haven't a clue what you are really like, or if it is an act.
Shalom
posted by edgeways at 1:30 PM on October 26, 2006


sorry for the typo
posted by edgeways at 1:30 PM on October 26, 2006


Yeah, go back to the opinions about me. I like that better. I'll stick them all on my profile page, for the benefit of the community. It'll be neat.

Nothing you can say is gonna make me leave another comment in this thread, even if you say yet another thing about email that proves you don't know shit about it. I can only hope that reasonably tech-savvy people reading this can see that my opinion here is justified. I am, seriously, done with this.
posted by reklaw at 1:35 PM on October 26, 2006


reklaw, you did it and didn't realize you were doing it. Or maybe you've just forgotten.

Understand that the web interface which you used today to fix the problem is not the only way to set up forwarding. In fact, back in 2001, web interfaces were not all the rage like they are today, so it's most likely that setting up forwarding would have been through some other mechanism entirely. Just because you've never logged onto that particular web interface before, that doesn't mean you didn't change the forwarding settings through some other mechanism.
posted by event at 1:37 PM on October 26, 2006 [1 favorite]


This is quite the stupid argument.
posted by smackfu at 1:43 PM on October 26, 2006 [1 favorite]


Nothing you can say is gonna make me leave another comment in this thread

That's probably because you're afraid to engage in a debate about your own (unquestioned) abrasiveness and (apparent) ignorance. I commend you for that fear, actually. It is a very wise fear.
posted by dersins at 1:45 PM on October 26, 2006


This is hilarious. Anyway, I would imagine that event has it correct.
posted by grouse at 1:47 PM on October 26, 2006


This thread practically screams out for one of interrobang's Drawn Metafilter Comments.

*ties yellow ribbon around monitor for img tag*
posted by gigawhat? at 1:48 PM on October 26, 2006


"The enmity here is all one sided, you know? I really don't give a shit about random people on the Internet. You, on the other hand, seem to take it all very seriously."
posted by Armitage Shanks at 1:56 PM on October 26, 2006


LOL, thank you so much, reklaw. What a fucking hysterical thread.

Ahhhh!!! Made my day.
posted by agregoli at 2:00 PM on October 26, 2006


reklaw: So, yeah, I'm gonna call my ISP--

Great.
posted by russilwvong at 2:01 PM on October 26, 2006


Hotmail: I am in yr ISP forward'n yr 3ma1lz
posted by drezdn at 2:10 PM on October 26, 2006 [2 favorites]


See, I posted on the AskMe because I felt that everyone was dumping on a clueless user who couldn't figure out his e-mail, and I wanted to be helpful because I feel bad when I see clueless people dumped on like that.

I had no idea how militantly ignorant reklaw was.
posted by blacklite at 2:14 PM on October 26, 2006


ISPs, even supposing they all have web UIs to change this stuff, change their UIs all the time. Their's a reason thing like POP are used. It's a standardized protocol. For hotmail to go change settings for all their users, they'd need a full time team to keep track hundreds of non-standard UIs and script accordingly. Legal and PR ramifications for hotmail aside, this is ridiculously less likely than you having done something and forgotten/not realizing that you had done it.

Also this has been mentioned before, but apparently it didn't take:
Because the emails started coming when I gave Hotmail my mail password.

The emails didn't start coming until you gave your password because Hotmail needs your password to grab your mail. This is not the same as your ISP forwarding your mail. Yes, changing your forwarding settings would also require your password, but if the forwarding was also set up at the same time, you would've been seeing two copies of every incoming email up until the time that option switched to being paid-for.
posted by juv3nal at 2:15 PM on October 26, 2006


aw crap. "Their's" --> "There's"
posted by juv3nal at 2:16 PM on October 26, 2006


I like that you like Blue Jam, and that I am on your friends list because I like having friends.

Also, I like food that tastes good, pretty women, and the feeling of warm sand between my collection of toes.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 2:16 PM on October 26, 2006


All this, and languagehat is missing it?
posted by raedyn at 2:21 PM on October 26, 2006


I was wrong about this pile-on sucking; it's getting pretty good.
posted by Mister_A at 2:21 PM on October 26, 2006 [1 favorite]


But was it really necessary for a load of people to come into the thread in the meantime and tell me that I didn't know what I was talking about?

Yes.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 2:24 PM on October 26, 2006


I'm honestly (seriously) not even remotely offended, and kinda interested to know what you all think of me.

Well, I would have kept it to myself, but since you asked: You're a complete douchebag for posting an inane, mocking 9/11 thread on the fifth anniversary. Then again, you knew it was a complete douchebag move when you did it, so this isn't news to you. I hope someday soon you or your loved ones will be murdered, and complete strangers mock their deaths. Since you asked.
posted by Gamblor at 2:27 PM on October 26, 2006


Tell us what you really think, Gamblor.
posted by grouse at 2:29 PM on October 26, 2006


Looks like someone can dish it out and not take it.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 2:33 PM on October 26, 2006 [1 favorite]


I know exactly what I have and haven't done.

Would that I had such certainty!

Whatever, I think this thread is proof that the image tag should stay away - it would have devolved into a micturating pachyderm parade yonks ago, leaving no room for the furious bellowing to develop so richly.
posted by jack_mo at 2:33 PM on October 26, 2006 [1 favorite]


Oh, and I only "act like a jerk", so to speak, to people that I think are deluding themselves to an obvious truth and need it spelled out in big flashing lights for them to see.

This callout from YOU is, like, the funniest thing ever. You know absolutely NOTHING about plenty of topics, and still insist on shitting all over those threads (see my previous thoughts on you here). You are a douche, reklaw, and always have been, and if you decided to never post in any thread ever again, I'd jump up and down and cheer. I can only hope this pile-on continues until you decide to never grace us with presence again.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 2:42 PM on October 26, 2006 [3 favorites]


Nothing you can say is gonna make me leave another comment in this thread

Nothing you can say is gonna make me eat my vegetables!

/pouts, juts lower lip outward.
posted by ericb at 2:44 PM on October 26, 2006


I gotta say, jack_mo makes an excellent point. I've enjoyed the odd image, but for the most part the site works better without them. I don't advocate a perma-ban, but the heavy image users might take note.
posted by team lowkey at 2:49 PM on October 26, 2006


Went to Spinning PowerCycling class, came back, thread just getting good...
posted by fixedgear at 2:51 PM on October 26, 2006


Reklaw— While you can be a bit of a dick, I generally like you. (Who knows? I also like Dios).

But this is a hand-cutting flameout in the making, mate. Either get ready for a mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa or being derided for several months...
posted by klangklangston at 2:54 PM on October 26, 2006


I can't remember how I first heard about Metafilter back in early 2001 and I don't remember the actual process of signing up for an account.

Clearly, this means that mathowie personally set up a Metafilter account expressly for me and anyone who doubts this can suck it.
posted by turaho at 2:56 PM on October 26, 2006 [3 favorites]


"Is it really that unlikely that an organisation the size of Hotmail wouldn't have built up some way of setting up mail forwarding at people's ISPs?"

Yes, it's incredibly unlikely. I'd go so far as to say it's pure fantasy.
posted by majick at 3:02 PM on October 26, 2006


Graw. What a thread.

I am filled with utter admiration for reklaw's memory. I wish I could be so sure of everything I've ever (or never) done.

Also in the original thread it seemed people were trying to answer your question. They were assuming (at least I was) you would want to know if you were woefully misinformed about the way mail works, which implies a bit of respect for your intelligence.

The alternative would have been "No you dummy you suck! GOD how STOOPIT!" Or perhaps condescension. "Aw how cute. You think hotmail is BIG BROTHER." Or maybe even snide eliteness. "Heh. I couldn't possibly explain the workings of mail servers to such as yourself. Your brain might explode."

But yeah, you're coming off here as just such an arse. Sometimes it's best to just shut up and go home happy with whatever answers you get, biting back all the indignation.
posted by routergirl at 3:10 PM on October 26, 2006 [1 favorite]


(um. The second part of that was obviously directed at Reklaw, not at *you*. Sometimes I click "post comment" too fast.)
posted by routergirl at 3:12 PM on October 26, 2006


I, too, enjoy the site without inline images.

So nyah.
posted by The God Complex at 3:14 PM on October 26, 2006


See I'm torn. The technical half of my brain is screaming logical, consistent arguments about how there's No Way Hotmail would be that dumb.

On the other hand, Hotmail was owned by Microsoft and this is the kind of ill-conceived idiocy I could almost believe from them.

That said, idiocy of that level would be fucking world famous by now.
posted by Skorgu at 3:17 PM on October 26, 2006


MetaTalk: Fucking world famous by now.
posted by Duncan at 3:51 PM on October 26, 2006


Oh, jeez, give reklaw a break. He's pretty judgmental and he may get hot and say intemperate things at the drop of a pin but a soft word can turn away his wrath. Tha should count for something in his favor.
posted by y2karl at 3:55 PM on October 26, 2006 [1 favorite]


You re-opened this conversation all by yourself.

Exactly. And since you ask, yes, you're an unbelievable jerk. Now can you please please please cut off your hand leave in a huff?
posted by languagehat at 3:56 PM on October 26, 2006


Part of the problem may be that everyone tempered their responses with "highly unlikely", giving reklaw some wiggle room to think he could be right. So just to be clear what "highly unlikely" meant in this instance:

There could exist circumstances under which Hotmail could change your ISP's mail forwarding settings. People who understand how mail works have to allow you that point. But in the real world, it is just as possible and likely that Hotmail would fill out a change of address form at the post office for you because you gave them a new billing address. They have your information, and could figure out what to do with it if they wanted to. But they never would.
posted by team lowkey at 4:09 PM on October 26, 2006 [1 favorite]


Ways this could have happened:

Hotmail stops picking up POP Mail, reklaw notices he isn't getting e-mail any more, does a web search for fixes or just happens upon an article with information to forward to your ISP asking to have forwarding set up. Reklaw does this, but doesn't remember doing it.

Hotmail stops picking up POP Mail, ISP sends a courtesy e-mail to users who were using POP pick-up from Hotmail to say, hey, this is going to shut off, do you want us to set up forwarding for you? Just reply to this message or click this link, reklaw replies or clicks. Reklaw doesn't remember doing it.

There is NO WAY ON EARTH that Hotmail logged into your account or contacted your ISP to set up forwarding. It just didn't happen.

Your insistence that you are right, when you couldn't possibly be more wrong is the funniest shit I've read on-line in like 3 weeks. Good show!!!!!!
posted by willnot at 4:47 PM on October 26, 2006


If a soft word will give reklaw the kind break I have sometimes been given to look at my own behavior, I'm all for letting the water flow under the bridge.
posted by taosbat at 5:04 PM on October 26, 2006


Hey, while we're all here, is there any way I can set hotmail (Which I never check) to forward to my gmail?

Also, I agree with the gist of reklaw's original point; clearly more deletions in AskMe are needed.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 5:06 PM on October 26, 2006


"So just to be clear what "highly unlikely" meant in this instance:"

Highly unlikely like an intercessionary personal God.
posted by klangklangston at 5:39 PM on October 26, 2006 [4 favorites]


was it really necessary

Clearly, it was. Otherwise they would not have done so. Our users are smart and mature, and know better than to turn AskMe into a personalities pissing match.


[crickets]
posted by five fresh fish at 5:44 PM on October 26, 2006


Reklaw hopes that tech-savvy people are going to come into this thread and think "hmm, he has a point", despite the fact that nobody, anywhere, has suggested even slightly that he might be right about hotmail doing this.

Yeah, I agree, I guess. I just find it absolutely unbelievable that not only did my original AskMe get derailed by a bunch of people insisting that my problem couldn't possibly exist and I was an idiot, but then after I've solved it using a solution that follows on quite logically from my original statement of the problem, a bunch of people come here to insist that I must still somehow be wrong.

I can't believe that when I said 2+2=5, loads of people told me I was an idiot, and then when I brought it up here, people were still telling me that 2+2 doesn't make 5! WTF! I hope that any people who understand math who read this in the future will understand me.

Also, reklaw, whether or not you saw the current forwarding form matters fuck-all. It was 4 years ago. Could you have, at any point, filled in a contact or billing form for your ISP with a secondary address? There are loads of ways for a simple forward to be set up on your behalf, without you fully realising what you were doing. THERE ARE NO WAYS FOR HOTMAIL TO DO IT ON YOUR BEHALF except by illegally accessing your account. WHICH THEY DID NOT DO.
posted by bonaldi at 5:50 PM on October 26, 2006


so, recklaw: you still got the box your computer came in?
posted by quonsar at 7:14 PM on October 26, 2006 [5 favorites]


My question is: is it wreck-law or ree-klaw?
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:54 PM on October 26, 2006


OMG, stav. I always just assumed it was the former. The mind boggles.
posted by dame at 8:07 PM on October 26, 2006


I don't know how any future flameout can top this.
posted by blasdelf at 9:22 PM on October 26, 2006


Could everyone who doesn't know what the fuck they're talking about kindly leave this thread now?

But I just got here. Hang on, let me catch up. *reads both threads*


Ah, there's your problem. You're a stubborn old coot. It's ok. Just stop it.

Here, I have the cure. Stand over here near the backside of this nice elephant. It'll soon shower you with warmth and goodness and the sweet stink of alfalfa. Trust me, it's therapeutic.

Oh, not for you - for me.
posted by loquacious at 10:15 PM on October 26, 2006


Fellas, give the guy a break. It's faith like this that can move mountains, and reklaw should be encouraged to use his powers for good, not evil.
posted by Jimbob at 10:29 PM on October 26, 2006 [1 favorite]


reklaw writes "There are two choices here. Either:

"1. I'm some kind of raving crazy idiot who somehow set up mail forwarding with my ISP and forgot about it, DESPITE the fact that I've never seen the interface to do so, and DESPITE the fact that the forwarding started at exactly the time I gave my details to Hotmail.

"or

"2. Hotmail did it.

"Now, which is more likely? Hmm...."


1

reklaw writes "This is the one I vote for, you see. Is it really that unlikely that an organisation the size of Hotmail wouldn't have built up some way of setting up mail forwarding at people's ISPs?"

Yes, there are litterally hundreds of thousands of ways the email forwarding could have been set up. Hotmail would need a whole team of programmers working on the automation scripts and still not be able to cover all the bases. The perverbial monkeys on typewriters would have a better hit rate.

reklaw writes "Could everyone who doesn't know what the fuck they're talking about kindly leave this thread now?"

recklaw have you noticed that no one is coming to your side in this debate? Is it just possible that all the techy geeks who have bothered to respond may have the right of the situation?
posted by Mitheral at 10:36 PM on October 26, 2006


The mind boggles.

*waggles fingers, wiggles eyebrows, does an ironic little ta-da dance*
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 3:40 AM on October 27, 2006


You're a stubborn old coot.

Just a guess here, but based on his responses here, I'd say recklaw is far from old. It's easy to assume that everyone is at the same maturity level as ourselves in an online forum, so when they behave somewhat erratically, we attribute it to many things. But (speaking from personal experience) it never occurs to us that they could be very, very young, or O.C.D. or any other mental issue like that, and ridiculing them turns into a sadistic thing instead of a lighthearted thing.

Like I said, I could be wrong, but I read this thread and think "Recklaw is 12 years old, and all these guys are picking on him."
posted by crunchland at 3:52 AM on October 27, 2006


hotmail forwarded your mom.
posted by quonsar at 4:30 AM on October 27, 2006 [4 favorites]


I think it's notable and credit-worthy that reklaw has stuck to his word an dnot re-entered the thread in classic "and ANOTHER thing!" fashion. Credit where due on that.

Though I do look forward to a graceful re-entry, post call-to-ISP.
posted by cortex at 4:59 AM on October 27, 2006


reknaw.
posted by flabdablet at 5:44 AM on October 27, 2006 [2 favorites]


*waggles fingers, wiggles eyebrows, does an ironic little ta-da dance*

More tushie!
posted by dame at 6:02 AM on October 27, 2006


Since I have you all here, can someone point out the origin of the hand-cutting-off flameout? (Apologies for the tangent, but I've been wondering this for months.)
posted by veronica sawyer at 7:06 AM on October 27, 2006


I think reklaw is my new favourite poster.
posted by Bugbread at 7:07 AM on October 27, 2006


veronica sawyer: "Since I have you all here, can someone point out the origin of the hand-cutting-off flameout?

Here ya go.
posted by Bugbread at 7:10 AM on October 27, 2006


Ah, goody. Thanks. What is it about crazies cutting their hands off in outrage?
posted by veronica sawyer at 7:14 AM on October 27, 2006


Here ya go.

...com/mefi/3344#73737

That url makes me numerifically quivery.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:19 AM on October 27, 2006 [1 favorite]


*takes advantage of stav's numerifically quivery state to suck his 2s, leading directly to wild 6*
posted by taz at 7:55 AM on October 27, 2006


*inquires as to which 1 8 which, gives corresponding 5*
posted by cortex at 8:10 AM on October 27, 2006 [1 favorite]


Oh, man. Revisiting the s_o_m conflagration (*wipes nostalgic tear*) led, synchronistically, to rediscovering a gem that Miguel posted in that thread, but which I think is eminently apropos for this one as well.
posted by Kat Allison at 8:21 AM on October 27, 2006


9! Dieses ist nicht angebracht!
posted by Stauf at 8:23 AM on October 27, 2006


My question is: is it wreck-law or ree-klaw?

It is "walker" backward?
posted by sciurus at 8:28 AM on October 27, 2006


*finishes quickly, washes up in the cinque*
posted by taz at 8:33 AM on October 27, 2006


73737

Shit. Beats my flush. Who needs a beer?
posted by horsewithnoname at 9:26 AM on October 27, 2006


Shit. Beats my flush.

I'm imagining that's the summary of a sci-fi story about pro-active excrement. Nanites, consumed daily, are expelled when defecating and march one's offal down the tubes without the need to waste significant amounts of water.
posted by cortex at 10:29 AM on October 27, 2006


So he can squat on the blue and squeeze this nugget from betwixt his sweaty loins, but he cannot immediately and fervently contact his ISP for the wronging they so wrongfully perpetrated on his POP3 server? Amazing.
posted by prostyle at 12:09 PM on October 27, 2006


I'm pretty certain reklaw isn't a twelve year old. I vaguely recall reading his old profile page (yes, it is walker backwards, hence the flabdablet funny) and I believe he said something about coming up with the name several years ago, and he wrote that profile two years ago. But I don't have reklaw's amazing ability to know without utmost certainty every detail I've read on the internet in the last few years, so I can't say for sure.
posted by team lowkey at 12:25 PM on October 27, 2006


Kudos, flabdablet. I just snorted a precious ounce of beer into my nose.
posted by Heatwole at 2:47 PM on October 27, 2006


I like how this thread scrolled of the front page, then a post got deleted and it scrolled back on again. It's the *thread* *that* *just* *won't* *leave*.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 4:58 PM on October 27, 2006


"My question is: is it wreck-law or ree-klaw?

It is "walker" backward?"


I always assumed so. But you know what happens when you assume.

That's right, you make an ass out of Uma Thurman.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 7:55 PM on October 27, 2006


I think reklaw is ree-klaw, as in the opposite of declaw.

Also, I wasn't around for s_o_m, but his parting words in his profile are a treasure: This online community experiment is a failure, and I do not want to be associated with it.
posted by yeti at 7:02 PM on October 28, 2006


HA. May it be so in this case. May it be so.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 10:12 PM on October 28, 2006 [1 favorite]


It is "walker" backward?"

I read that, and re-read that and each time I saw "It is wanker backwards?"
posted by terrapin at 3:23 PM on October 29, 2006


So, it's Monday come and gone.. I wonder what reklaw heard from his ISP?

Strange that we haven't seen a response yet.... ;)
posted by ranglin at 4:33 AM on October 31, 2006


ranglin: "Strange that we haven't seen a response yet.... ;)"

Not so strange:

reklaw: "Nothing you can say is gonna make me leave another comment in this thread"
posted by Bugbread at 8:48 AM on October 31, 2006


Well, I guess I can pop back very briefly to let you know what my ISP said, since I did say I would. The conversation basically went like this:

Me: Hey, could you dig through all your records for 2000-2002 to see if you could help me find the cause of my already-fixed problem?
Tech monkey: What?
Me: Could I speak to your supervisor?
Supervisor: Hey.
Me: (repeats question)
Supervisor: Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha no. Maybe if you sue us, we'll tell you.

And I say wreck-lore, but you feel free to say it however you want.
posted by reklaw at 11:15 AM on October 31, 2006


reklaw writes "Maybe if you sue us, we'll tell you."

I wouldn't sweat this reklaw, it's very unlikely they have logs that old even if they were logging that information in the first place.
posted by Mitheral at 1:22 PM on October 31, 2006


Supervisor: Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha no. Maybe if you sue us, we'll tell you.

So, wait... you didn't call them back 20 times, and scream at them for laughing at you, and rail against the machine that is society, and curse the day they were born, and then write a letter, insisting you were right, despite the evidence to the contrary, and give everyone involved the impression that you're a total jackhole?

What, aren't you feeling ok?
posted by crunchland at 3:42 PM on October 31, 2006


Well, thanks for the update, reklaw. I like what you've done with your profile page.
posted by russilwvong at 5:23 PM on October 31, 2006


Metafilter 1, Reklaw 0.
posted by matthewr at 1:42 AM on November 1, 2006


And I say wreck-lore, but you feel free to say it however you want.

Ah, sweet closure. Gracias.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 2:39 AM on November 1, 2006


wreck-lore? How on earth does "law" turn into "lore?"
posted by agregoli at 8:20 AM on November 1, 2006


"How on earth does "law" turn into "lore?""
You get congress to authorize the president to override the law.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 8:35 AM on November 1, 2006


wreck-lore? How on earth does "law" turn into "lore?"

Well, I don't know about you, but I say "law" and "lore" the same way. I was just trying to make it clear that it's aw, as in "aw shucks", not aw as in "away".
posted by reklaw at 10:19 AM on November 1, 2006


You have to be British I think. Or maybe even English. They talk funny.
posted by dame at 11:21 AM on November 1, 2006


Could be from up Maine, too.
posted by Bugbread at 7:35 PM on November 1, 2006


Brit. He mentions being in the UK in a more current Guiness thread. My word, what drama here!
posted by mwhybark at 11:36 PM on November 19, 2006


I also say where I'm from in my profile...

Was this really only a few weeks ago? Time crawls, doesn't it?
posted by reklaw at 3:33 PM on November 20, 2006


« Older Reminder: MeetUp in two weeks...  |  This comment looks fine in the... Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments