Comments on: Metafilter accounts on BugMeNot

Metafilter accounts on BugMeNot

kamus — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 15:37:48 -0800

I am concerned about the appearance of Metafilter accounts on BugMeNot.

By: dobbs

dobbs — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 15:41:12 -0800

With any luck matt can just get the IP of the person who made the initial blue post and ban their legit account if they have one, no?

By: ..ooOOoo....ooOOoo..

..ooOOoo....ooOOoo.. — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 15:46:09 -0800

Probably pointless to respond since there are a plethora of kamus-es (kamui?) but from the bugmenot faq:

Are you going to steal my identity or rob my credit card?
No. Our policy forbids accounts to paid services from being posted. However, just like a discussion forum, if you happen to find one then email and it will be removed. Privacy is not considered a commodity.

Are you going to bankrupt my paid content service?
See above. If you are losing sleep over this then email the url and we'll add your site to the "automatically blocked" list.

By: dirtynumbangelboy

dirtynumbangelboy — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 15:47:03 -0800

The amusing part being, of course, that the login in question is 'kamus'

By: myopicman

myopicman — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 15:49:10 -0800

there look to be 5 other mefi accounts listed on bugmenot, although 2, possibly 3, look fake.

nice things? what nice things?

By: dirtynumbangelboy

dirtynumbangelboy — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 15:52:04 -0800

public@bugmenot.com is the email address that mathowie needs.

By: ..ooOOoo....ooOOoo..

..ooOOoo....ooOOoo.. — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:00:03 -0800

Crap, I tried to put the address in and it didn't work. Thanks dirtynumbangelbiy.

By: mathowie

mathowie — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:01:29 -0800

Yeah, as much as I love bugmenot, the thing wasn't designed for gaining entry to sites with memberships. The point of bugmenot was to get around annoying places that put a gate up in front of their content. You can read everything outside of metafilter that you can when logged in.

I hope they don't have slashdot and totalfark accounts on there. Seems dumb.

By: cedar

cedar — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:01:29 -0800

Set the flesh eating bacteria loose.

This is going to be a problem and I wonder if there is some server side thing that can be done to reject bugmenot. I have no doubt that this is the tip of the iceberg and there are going to be plenty of people willing to pay five bucks to mess with MeFi. The one post a day thing will mitigate this somewhat but it could make for some ugly threads and waste a great deal user #1's time playing whack-a-mole.

bugmenot logins... featured soon on the site that shall not be named.

By: PrinceValium

PrinceValium — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:03:46 -0800

Just click on "this login didn't work" and it gets deleted. poof!

By: sbutler

sbutler — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:03:47 -0800

well... let's say kamus is a 2nd declension noun. The plural would then be kami. Technically, if it were translated you'd want the genetive plural, kamorum.

By: biffa

biffa — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:03:49 -0800

there look to be 5 other mefi accounts listed on bugmenot, although 2, possibly 3, look fake.

It lists 9 , I would suggest 8-9 are fake, login obviously is old, some are just something somone has added as an ineffectual dig at someone they don't like, such as jpoluos and y2karl, others are crap linked to kamus. Once Matt gets back from wherever Matt goes in the day then no doubt he will sort this chimp out, and hopefully use his sign-up money for an ice cream.

By: moonbird

moonbird — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:06:28 -0800

i just deleted 'em all.

By: Sidhedevil

Sidhedevil — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:08:31 -0800

once Matt gets back from wherever Matt goes in the day

It does feel kind of mysterious and Ward Cleaver-ish, doesn't it?

By: Ethereal Bligh

Ethereal Bligh — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:09:13 -0800

They actually don't seem to be deleted when you say that they don't work.

By: Dick Paris

Dick Paris — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:09:26 -0800

... the thing wasn't designed for gaining entry to sites with memberships. The point of bugmenot was to get around annoying places that put a gate up in front of their content

*studies ~~fine~~ line -- decides to go back to studying mass, space and light*

By: ChrisTN

ChrisTN — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:11:41 -0800

Just click on "this login didn't work" and it gets deleted. poof!

No, it doesn't. And don't call me a poof.

By: moonbird

moonbird — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:12:33 -0800

eb: bummer. i ran through the list hitting the no workie button, went back to the main, refreshed, and a "no logins" message showed. closing and reopeining the browser shows the same logins.

By: dobbs

dobbs — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:15:31 -0800

It would take multiple people (hopefully from different IPs) clicking "it don't work" otherwise ppl at NYT and other places could just go in once a day and delete all the logins making bugmenot pretty useless.

By: philfromhavelock

philfromhavelock — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:16:13 -0800

>well... let's say kamus is a 2nd declension noun. The plural would then be kami. Technically, if it were translated you'd want the genetive plural, kamorum.

[this is good]

By: mathowie

mathowie — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:28:18 -0800

amazon and thinkgeek on bugmenot? That doesn't seem to make any sense at all. Are people supposed to use it to anonymously buy junk or something?

By: kenko

kenko — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:31:22 -0800

I don't get it. What does kamus mean, that kamorum is funny?

By: fenriq

fenriq — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:34:20 -0800

Someone got their irony in my sarcasm!!!!

Damn, maybe I can sell it to Nestle?

By: Ethereal Bligh

Ethereal Bligh — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:34:41 -0800

Hopefully neither of those accounts are hacked and have cc# attached to them.

I'd just like to know if kamus did this himself.

By: sbutler

sbutler — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:45:35 -0800

kenko: actually, I didn't bother looking it up. K isn't common in latin, except as borrowed from Greek (if I remember correctly), so you'd really best search under camus.

Now, neither of those words appear in my New College Latin & English dictionary (which is starting to show its age). But Whitaker says "(c/k)amus: necklace, muzzle/bit/curb for horses". But kamorum can be much more interesting: "kind of beer".

... but to ruin the joke, I think philfromhavelock was just amused anyone would respond with a bit of latin grammar.

By: dabitch

dabitch — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 17:01:20 -0800

I'm finding lots of strange sites listed on bugmenot, thinkgeek and other community sites (even my own, does that make it cool?).. How odd.

By: joelf

joelf — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 17:04:43 -0800

Actually it was me who posted it in the first place I didn't know this had been done before, and I need to apologize about it. I didn't think that it would be trouble; I didn't know about the damage and offensive nature of the 8/01 incident before I posted the link. I am glad it didn't turn into the login incident. I didn't mean it to be malicious, or mean spirited, I thought that a link referencing itself fit the metafilter theme and i didn't even consider that anyone who uses the board would take it to extremes.

I have sent an email to bugmenot describing the trouble some sites listed on there may cause. I sent an apology to Matt as well. Again, to the metafilter community, very sorry for what could have been a pretty awful mess.

By: arse_hat

arse_hat — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 17:07:55 -0800

Ethereal Bligh "I'd just like to know if kamus did this himself." I don't think he did, as the user name and pass works on a number of sites including ones that could cost him money. I have changed the passwords and sent an e-mail to all the addresses he had listed in his profiles. If he did do this then he is scary dumb.

By: kenko

kenko — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 17:09:52 -0800

Ah, I hadn't seen that part of ..ooOOoo....ooOOoo..'s comment.

By: kenko

kenko — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 17:10:44 -0800

It could be fourth declension too, then it'd be kamuum.

By: loquacious

loquacious — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 17:20:30 -0800

joelf: Eh. I had fun. Thanks. :) Sometimes we need a little grabassery. And thanks for fessing up.

By: mathowie

mathowie — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 17:36:43 -0800

well if we had to stare into pages of gaping assholes, we'd probably be rougher on joelf, but in this case it was no big deal.

I need a red phone for things like this.

By: BradNelson

BradNelson — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 17:45:09 -0800

I hope they don't have slashdot and totalfark accounts on there.

Slashdot is pay now? I don't see it.

By: ThePinkSuperhero

ThePinkSuperhero — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 17:47:29 -0800

oh gosh, mathowie, don't remind me. I had just cleared the image from my mind!

By: dabitch

dabitch — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 17:49:38 -0800

They've got fark-accounts listed.

By: rooftop secrets

rooftop secrets — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 17:59:47 -0800

None of the accounts on Bugmenot work. Not that I tried them or anything while I was lurking. No siree. Just a hunch really. You know what, forget it.

By: loquacious

loquacious — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 18:16:47 -0800

Hark! Is that the Matt-phone!? To the Matt-cave!

By: blender

blender — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 18:27:04 -0800

I have a "Kamus Inggris Indonesia" (ie an Indonesian/English dictionary) sitting on my desk, plural being kamus kamus.

By: lazy-ville

lazy-ville — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 18:28:35 -0800

By: Sidhedevil

Sidhedevil — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 18:36:20 -0800

MetaFilter: pages of gaping assholes

By: Sidhedevil

Sidhedevil — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 18:36:59 -0800

because it's always OK to tag-mine #1.

By: Armitage Shanks

Armitage Shanks — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 19:03:41 -0800

When you stare into the gaping asshole, the gaping asshole stares back into you.

By: loquacious

loquacious — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 19:05:24 -0800

I knew someone was going to tag that.

By: jpoulos

jpoulos — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 19:09:44 -0800

Account #3
jpoulos
I_Hate_Noobs

Aw man. So untrue. I ♥ the noobs. ♥ 'em , I do.

By: arse_hat

arse_hat — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 19:11:56 -0800

Got hold of Kamus and he is changing passwords.

By: tracicle

tracicle — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 19:11:59 -0800

I need a red phone for things like this.

The Matt-Signal!

By: mr.marx

mr.marx — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 19:23:59 -0800

well if we had to stare into pages of gaping assholes, we'd probably be rougher on joelf, but in this case it was no big deal.

you don't WANT to be exposed to anus?

By: orange clock

orange clock — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 19:37:47 -0800

I need a red phone for things like this.
posted by mathowie at 5:36 PM PST on December 1

Just post your mobile number in the faq.

By: me3dia

me3dia — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 20:18:09 -0800

TypeKey is up there. Lotta good that service does if banned trolls can just go grab another login.

By: philfromhavelock

philfromhavelock — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 21:04:12 -0800

>... but to ruin the joke, I think philfromhavelock was just amused anyone would respond with a bit of latin grammar.

You're right, sbutler.

By: dobbs

dobbs — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 22:04:29 -0800

You aren't very smart, are you?

You wanna tell me why what I said was stupid?

By: scarabic

scarabic — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 23:39:24 -0800

dobbs am smart, too! chunk say dobbs smart! chunk love dobbs!

By: dobbs

dobbs — Wed, 01 Dec 2004 23:57:58 -0800

heh. Thanks scarabic (I think). FTR, I wasn't insulted by the comment but am rather curious as to how my logic isn't logical.

By: arse_hat

arse_hat — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 00:05:30 -0800

joelf, "Actually it was me who posted it in the first place"
loquacious, "joelf: Eh. I had fun. Thanks. :)"
mathowie, "well if we had to stare into pages of gaping assholes, we'd probably be rougher on joelf, but in this case it was no big deal."
WTF?
Joelf. While it was good of you to own up to what you did you are still an addle-pated sucker of Satan's mother's withered dugs. You exposed the MeFi to a potential shit storm of crap but more importantly you exposed the owner of the account to much worse. To forestall argument, yes it's true folks ought not use the same login/password combo at more than one site, but human nature being what it is some people will do it anyway. As a member of this community couldn't you have just notified Matt and Kamus when you found Kamus's combo online? We all do dumb things from time to time but I would hope the other members here would protect each other. It's one thing to call someone’s opinions out but in exposing someone’s login info this event exposed a user to potential real world harm.
Matt. Is looking at someone's abused rectum really worse than having logins exposed that could cost MeFi member’s money and much time to sort out? Yes again, good security practice by users would avoid that but being offended by a post is a lot less damage than having account info exposed.
I guess I am just disappointed that no one seems too upset that a user's login was exposed. I have loved MeFi for awhile and the last couple of weeks with it's dwindling load of political posts has been wonderful but this sucks.

By: arse_hat

arse_hat — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 00:08:06 -0800

And I should close my tags

By: ruddhist

ruddhist — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 00:15:25 -0800

And you should lay off. Yeah, it was a crap thing to do, but he apologized to us and to Matt, and, ultimately, there was no harm done. And now that Matt is alerted it won't be happening again.
Let it go.

By: arse_hat

arse_hat — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 00:22:50 -0800

ruddhist. "but he apologized to us and to Matt" Big Fuck'n Deal. He didn't do anything of real or portantial harm to me, you or Matt. Has he apologized to Kamus? And why won't it happen again?

By: ruddhist

ruddhist — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 00:37:50 -0800

Has he apologized to Kamus?
That's really between them, isn't it? I'd probably be pretty pissed off if it happened to me, but it didn't. So it's none of my business, anyway.

And why won't it happen again?
I'm assuming it won't happen again because Matt already contacted the BugMeNot folks and told them to block MetaFilter logins. Maybe I'm wrong and he hasn't done that, and if he hasn't, then I don't know that it won't happen again. But I do know that Mr. Haughey generally tends to take pretty good care of his flock, yeah?

He didn't do anything of real or portantial harm to me
That's right.

Look, I never tried to justify it. I'm just saying joelf apologized and tried to make it right, it's been rectified, and Matt's given his judgement from upon high. We all know this was a Bad Thing. Let's move on, alright?

By: dobbs

dobbs — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 00:39:35 -0800

arse_hat, I may be completely wrong (I'm not too smart, remember), but I was under the impression that someone created the account KAMUS with the intention of fucking up MeFi by submitting it to Bugmenot. Otherwise, how would Bugmenot get their login info?

Though I don't think joelf was thinking too clearly when he made the post, I don't think he offended Kamus as this mess was exactly what Kamus was hoping for. He's no doubt giggling at this very thread.

Again, I could be wrong, but that was my understanding of what happened. No doubt Kamus is an angry MeFite. (Or a stupid one who thinks something like this and other "pranks" are funny. Whoever s/he is, s/he's obviously very very bored and not too swift.)

This is what I meant with my initial post though as I read it now I see I put "post" when I meant "login". I thought Matt could see who initially signed up the Kamus account (via IP) and compare it to existing member's IPs and ban the culprit.

By: arse_hat

arse_hat — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 00:49:18 -0800

“Has he apologized to Kamus? That's really between them, isn't it? “
OK cool so should I find your MiFi login info and tell someone else about it you won't mind if anyone else here who might know about just does nothing?

“And why won't it happen again?
I'm assuming it won't happen again because Matt already contacted the BugMeNot “
How does BugMeNot enter into it? It just happened to be the vehicle. It does not change that fact that joelf brought it public instead of bringing it to Matt.

“But I do know that Mr. Haughey generally tends to take pretty good care of his flock, yeah?”
Yeah, but NOT THIS TIME.

“He didn't do anything of real or potential harm to me
That's right.”
And your point?

“Look, I never tried to justify it. I'm just saying joelf apologized and tried to make it right, it's been rectified, and Matt's given his judgment from upon high. We all know this was a Bad Thing. Let's move on, all right?”
Obviously not with me or I would not have brought it up.

By: arse_hat

arse_hat — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 01:00:05 -0800

dobbs. Kamus is a real person and and hehas been here at MeFi for a while. This compromissed login was the same login he used for other sites. Right after the MeFi incident someone did the same thing at MoFi. This was Dave's login for a number of sites (yes i know that's dumb but people do it all the time) including things that could cost him a sack of cash. After I saw what was happening I hi-jacked a number of his accounts and changed the password and then sent it to him. All is well now but my issue is why would anyone here, after finiding another user's live password online publish it and why would Matt say "in this case it was no big deal"?

By: ruddhist

ruddhist — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 01:10:08 -0800

I understand your point and it's valid. My point is that joelf understands he handled the situation poorly and doesn't need a new asshole torn for him by the Junior MeTa Police. And the rest of us understand how to handle the situation should it happen again in the future. So everyone understands everything and you can calm down, kthx.

As for Number One, well, he doesn't answer to you, to me, or to any of us. He's like Judge Dredd: judge, jury, and executioner. He is the law.

Yeah, but NOT THIS TIME.

O ye of little faith. Want a cookie?

By: dobbs

dobbs — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 01:15:43 -0800

Kamus is a real person and and hehas been here at MeFi for a while.

A while? His user number is 18262. The user page lists him as signing up 2 weeks ago.

Ugh. Whatever. I think most people made the same assumption I did. That something hadn't been hacked as much as it had been intentionally FUBAR'D.

On preview...

By: arse_hat

arse_hat — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 01:25:46 -0800

"joelf ...doesn't need a new asshole torn for him by the Junior MeTa Police"
I disagree. Fucktard needs to see that he could have done real harm to another human being. This was not just a call out in the meta world. Shit for brains did a lot worse than tubgirl/footballs/goatse.
" And the rest of us understand how to handle the situation should it happen again in the future."
Really? I would not have figured that out from this thread. No one seemed to care about the fate of the account holder. Just whether or not he or she got to be righteous about seeing some picture of a sorry looking shithole.
"As for Number One, well, he doesn't answer to you, to me, or to any of us. He's like Judge Dredd: judge, jury, and executioner."
Good point. Matt please delete my account.
"Want a cookie?"
No.

By: Vidiot

Vidiot — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 01:35:35 -0800

Well, that was a nice little flame-out.

By: lazy-ville

lazy-ville — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 04:08:49 -0800

Dobbs: If the NYT et al. would want to disable bugmenotted logins, why would they need to delete them from the bugmenot site?

By: moift

moift — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 06:32:25 -0800

asshole, Fucktard, Shit for brains, tubgirl/footballs/goatse, righteous sorry looking shithole.

This thread is a lot of fun, someone link it again on MeTa when it drops into the archives so I can continue to revel in its simple delights with minimal clickage, please.

By: loquacious

loquacious — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 09:12:26 -0800

Holy shitmittens, Batman!

WHAT THE FUCK, ARSE_HAT? Are you just crawling out of your skin to live up to your nick or what? Take the cookie. Put the cookie in your eating hole. Eat the cookie.

By: bshort

bshort — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 09:36:39 -0800

Joelf needs to be banned. Twice, even.

By: dobbs

dobbs — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 10:23:59 -0800

If the NYT et al. would want to disable bugmenotted logins, why would they need to delete them from the bugmenot site?

I didn't say they would "need to". They can delete them from their end, but it's far simpler for them to just click "this login doesn't work" on bugmenot (if that deleted the login) than to go into their own admin service, hunt for the login and delete it, no?

By: tracicle

tracicle — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 11:37:35 -0800

I think arse_hat is speaking up for kamus since kamus can't speak for himself at present. Both are members of MonkeyFilter - kamus has been a member there since July with no problems - and I have to say it does seem that the only thing kamus did wrong was use the same login at multiple sites. If anyone should be getting flak here, it's the person who took kamus's login details from whatever site (not necessarily Mefi or MoFi, by the sounds of it) and gave them to bugmenot. In my opinion, kamus didn't do it.

So there, my two cents.

By: caution live frogs

caution live frogs — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 11:57:52 -0800

for the record: since kamus can't post here pending account re-opening, the story can be found here on monkeyfilter. in which arse_hat apologizes somewhat for the language and kamus tries to gather the shattered remnants of his online dignity and rebuild a once-proud online reputation.

it would be nice, matt, if we could change our passwords... if my account here was compromised i'd be really unhappy if i had no way to fix it. so pretty please?

By: dash_slot-

dash_slot- — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 12:20:35 -0800

OK, lemme get this straight:

joelf gets a hold of a members password, realises it's applicable in a variety of sites via bugmenot, including Mefi, hasn't explained how he acquired this info, nor has he apologised to the victim - kamus - whose login was appropriated by several other members, and matt
only BANS the victim? Accepts an apology from the offender but no sympathy to kamus?

What is this - BizarroMefi?

By: dobbs

dobbs — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 12:29:22 -0800

hasn't explained how he acquired this info,

I thought he got it from Bugmenot. I thought that was the point of is thread: Look at all the non-newspaper sites that Bugmenot has logins for.

The victim needs to find out how Bugmenot got his info.

By: ruddhist

ruddhist — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 12:33:48 -0800

If I have it right, dash_slot-, joelf only noticed that kamus' login was available via BugMeNot. He didn't actually submit it to BugMeNot. His offense was posting to MeTa using the compromised login instead of reporting it directly to Matt, for which he has apologized.

I think. Even I'm a little confused at this point.

on preview: what dobbs said.

By: ruddhist

ruddhist — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 12:38:05 -0800

Er, posting to MeFi, not MeTa, that is. I am confused.

By: graventy

graventy — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 12:40:55 -0800

Man, I'm surprised more people haven't been banned since we re-opened accounts. Think of the cash that could bring in. People, already addicted to MeFi, given a forced timeout, would probably pay 10-20 bucks to get back in on the hot, sweaty action.

By: dash_slot-

dash_slot- — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 12:44:46 -0800

Fine, understood. But kamus is a possibly slapdash, certainly victimised member here: he's banned, is he? And joelf, who made a stupid, abusive post, is not?

Reinstate him, asap, I say.

By: t r a c y

t r a c y — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 12:47:44 -0800

and matt only BANS the victim?

has matt actually "banned" this kamus person or has he simply shut the acct down temporarily, so it can't be further abused...?

the story can be found here on monkeyfilter.

yah, that mofi thread probably doesn't help anyone's perception of what's going on, what with it being a bit inane.

By: taz

taz — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 12:50:21 -0800

The way I understand it is this:

Somebody got ahold of Kamus' username and password and posted it to bugmenot as a MeFi password.

Joelf notices it on bugmenot, tries it here, and it works, so he makes a post about it to give a heads-up to everybody, but, as a joke, uses Kamus' account to do it.

It turns out that Kamus used the same username and password on a number of sites, so anybody in possession of that information could (and did, evidently) mess with a lot of his online info.

Because kamus is new here, nobody really knew if he was a regular user whose account got hacked, or if he was somebody who signed up just to throw the username/password out for anyone who wanted to screw around with MeFi.

arse_hat, though, knew kamus from monkeyfilter, and realized that it couldn't have been that kamus just signed up for a joke account to give the password out, and that kamus was in a really bad position having this info out wild on the web, so he went to a lot of likely spots, tried kamus' name/pass combo, and wherever it worked, he changed the password so others couldn't get in, then sent all that info to kamus.

Nobody here, as far as I can see has really done anything wrong. Matt suspended the account until he could sort things out; arse_hat protected kamus from further danger, but then overreacted a bit here; joelf made the effort to point out what was going on with this account, but also made a joke that wasn't really the best idea.

joelf has apologized, arse_hat has apologized over at MoFi, and there really shouldn't be any hard feelings anywhere as far as I can see. Matt isn't going to punish kamus for this bad incident that happened to him, but he couldn't leave the account open either. He probably just hasn't had the time to deal with it yet.

By: Ethereal Bligh

Ethereal Bligh — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 12:52:15 -0800

(I said this over on mofi, too, since kamus is talking in that thread):

This whole thing has been confusing from an observer's perspective. At first, it really looked like someone had gotten an account, made some comments, and then posted bugmenot to the front page as something a bit too clever. I wasn't sure if there was malice behind it; but it should have been obvious to anyone what would happen. So, at first I figured that kamus was kamus, if you get my drift.

Then I went over to monkeyfilter, because of the comment here in the meta thread, to see that someone had posted as kamus there. And, then looking at the mofi history, it looked like kamus was a long(er) term monkey and so it seemed less likely to me that he did this himself. At that point, I figured that somhow his info had gotten on bugmenot and someone maliciously (and, again, too cleverly) then posted to mefi as kamus.

Turns out, according to what kamus and joelf have said, that kamus didn't do it and joelf did it but didn't intend it to be malicious at all. Joelf just found the login on bugmenot. So, no one involved supposedly had any malicious intent.

It's still a mystery as to how kamus's info got on bugmenot.

Finally, given that kamus on mefi is new, and that his info appeared on bugmenot, from Matt's perspective it's probably hard not to be suspicious. I'm only convinced of kamus's complete innocence because of his history on monkeyfilter...something that Matt is probably unaware of. But we do know with certainty, because of jeolf's confession, that it wasn't kamus himself that posted the post. So it's hard to say that kamus has done anything at all wrong, except having his account compromised and appearing on bugmenot. Which, from all appearances, he's a complete victim of. So it doesn't make much sense to ban him from mefi. Joelf was very careless, but seems sincere about it being unintentional.

By: taz

taz — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 12:53:44 -0800

Also realize that it would be kind of pointless for Matt to change the password here and send the new one to kamus' email, since he has no way of knowing if the email account has been compromised.

By: Ethereal Bligh

Ethereal Bligh — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 12:53:57 -0800

Oh, what taz said. Much better than me. :)

By: sbutler

sbutler — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 13:22:24 -0800

Maybe he logged into a site over an unsecured WiFi connection? Like at a coffee house perhaps? Or looking at the MeFi cookies, could it be something contained in the USER_PASS?

There are tons of ways to get a password, especially from sites like MeFi and MoFi that don't use SSL during the login phase.

not that anyone I know ever runs ethereal at coffee houses. never...

By: dash_slot-

dash_slot- — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 13:39:53 -0800

So it's a zero-sum? No apology from joelf to kamus would be appropriate for impersonating him/her? Not that no apology under pressure is worth a bean, but clearly we all have different concepts of courtesy.

Oh well.

By: Ethereal Bligh

Ethereal Bligh — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 13:46:17 -0800

No, joelf definitely owes kamus an apology and, really, I'd sorta think that logging into someone else's mefi account without their permission, regardless of how innocent, is by its nature a banning offense. But I can sorta see how joelf (or anyone) might see that login on bugmenot and not stop to consider a) that it may belong to someone that didn't voluntarily put it on bugmenot; and, b) the havoc that could result from posting a login and pwd to the front page of MeFi. Sorta. Kinda. Maybe.

By: taz

taz — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 13:59:13 -0800

As far as I can tell, joelf isn't refusing to apologize to kamus, and from what I've seen of him upthread, he probably will. At the time he made the other apology, none of us knew that kamus was for real. It looks to me like joelf hasn't been back here since his last post, and much has been learned since then.

By: dash_slot-

dash_slot- — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 14:05:54 -0800

Although joelf didn't apologise directly to me, it's obvious he realized he made a mistake and that's OK.
- kamus, from the Mofi thread.

That's it then, he's cool about it.

/dismounts

By: loquacious

loquacious — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 14:42:32 -0800

I'm much less confused now, and it explains arse_hat's response and a whole bunch of other stuff. I was just playing grabass here in this thread; If I had known all of this I certainly would not have.

I think most of us that were also engaging in assgrabbery here and in the original thread in the blue had no idea that kamus was an existing online persona. I literally thought someone dropped five bucks at some point to make an account and then drop it in bugmenot.

Apologies, kamus. That sucks.

By: joelf

joelf — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 15:01:42 -0800

Hi All,

I read what was linked up on Monkeyfilter, I'm not a member there. Let me explain how this thing had happened.

I found Kamus' MiFi account on Bugmenot, after discovering they had one for Lavalife. I thought that Kamus had put it there himself. Still logged in as him i excitedly put it together what i though was going to be an amusing post.

I assumed that that it was on Bugmenot intentionally, and I hadn't considered that Kamus was a logon that was used all over the place. It wasn't until after the post was done that I realized it.

I'm really sorry about what happened to you Kamus. I didn't think that you were a victim of identity theft. I honestly didn't think that your account was anything more than someone's one-off joke, and I am stupid for doing so. I wish I had investigated it in detail before the excitement of what I thought was going to be a post pointing some of the unusual qualities of bugmenot.

Again I am sorry to the community for starting what could have been a filthy mess, and I am deeply apologetic to you Kamus for pigheadedly posting something without taking the time to evaluate the damage it could potentially cause.

I contacted Bugmenot last night and asked them to reevaluate the sites that are for members. Metafilter is now gone. and I pointed out that there is an account for amazon and thinkgeek. The Lavalife account was deleted as well.

Metafilter is a new toy for me. After gazing through the window at the shop for a year, I finally get one. One week later I fuck it up and do something incredibly stupid.

I bent my wookie.

By: Ethereal Bligh

Ethereal Bligh — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 15:25:54 -0800

Aw, his contriteness is charming. He can live. :)

By: Ethereal Bligh

Ethereal Bligh — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 15:30:57 -0800

contrition...don't hit me, languagehat

By: jonson

jonson — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 15:48:10 -0800

contriteness. Jesus. This is why we can't have nice words.

By: dash_slot-

dash_slot- — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 15:51:06 -0800

I like your apolgeticals, joelf. Have a cookie!

By: loquacious

loquacious — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 15:52:45 -0800

EB, it's ok. I already loosened his hat. With any luck he'll continue to provide us with his exemplary linguistic services, but hopefully using a softer switch.

Now, to which side does the 'spank joelf' line start? Should we have boys to the right and girls to the left this time, or should we split up into lefty-righty like last time? I think the workflow with lefty-righty is more efficient, but it's fun to mix things up.

Word, joelf. It takes some doing to mea culpa so publicly. Word.

By: cosmonik

cosmonik — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 17:58:11 -0800

It seems to me joelf did a good thing by drawing attention to this. He was far more noble than I.

I came across the login in bugmenot, thinking it was amusing to put MeFi in and see what came out. I found the kamus details (et. al), logged in to see if it was valid, and found the account empty. Nothing in the user page. Apparently devoid of use. Assuming it abandoned by someone who joined and found it not to his liking (my logic being why else would the account details be up there?), I used it for approximately six days, making perhaps twenty contributions across nine different threads. The bottom 20 in that list.

Obviously, I owe a cockbucketful of apologies to kamus (in whose name I spoke) and to MeFites to whom I spoke through the guise of kamus. But apologies are not excuses, so I expect some form of disciplinary action should be taken. I wouldn't have done it if I thought I was causing kamus or anyone any real harm; but then again, I did it & harm was caused, so obviously I wasn't thorough enough in my reasoning. I've lurked here long enough to know the potential shennanigans of login/login could happen again - and they did, to some extent.

Feel free to flame via post or e-mail. I've just had some very good news and am currently on a high; might as well begin to come down.

By: weretable and the undead chairs

weretable and the undead chairs — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 18:06:13 -0800

i want a cookie. (this is much more comfortable)

By: euphorb

euphorb — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 21:09:10 -0800

*Gives weretable a cookie*

The undead chairs get nothing.

By: taz

taz — Fri, 03 Dec 2004 03:35:50 -0800

I think starving out the undead chairs is a terrible idea. Weretables are a dime a dozen, but how often do you come across undead chairs? Take the La-Z-Boy Recliner, for example. Why so lazy? Why so reclined? Dead, that's why! Armchairs? Think about it - what do arms do? They kill, that's what! Folding chairs? That's got death written all over it. And don't even get me started on Ottomans.

So euphorb, I implore you - support the undead chairs' right to life, and cookies. Won't you please think of the highchairs?

By: dflemingdotorg

dflemingdotorg — Fri, 03 Dec 2004 06:18:24 -0800

I'd say that if joelf were to offer kamus to purchase his new identity, it'd be like buying them a beer. Which, to me, sets everything straight.

By: cosmonik

cosmonik — Fri, 03 Dec 2004 17:30:45 -0800

SO now that it's been sorted out, can we give the real kamus his account back? MoFi's been getting all his lovin'.

By: kamus

kamus — Sat, 04 Dec 2004 11:11:59 -0800

Hey- I'm back and now ready to polish my tarnished monicker back into the gleaming perfection it once enjoyed.

Thanks to Matt and all the folks who supported my sorry and unlikely cause!

By: dash_slot-

dash_slot- — Sun, 05 Dec 2004 07:24:05 -0800

Good to see ya back, ya unlucky sob.