Quote:
Originally Posted by BWinmill
That's one possibility. Another possibility is that someone could have been venting in a peculiar way, even though they have not relation to MR or Ectaco. Of course, it could have been an employee of Ectaco acting independently or under direction. I'm sure that there are other options too, since I have a hard time understanding certain types of actions by certain types of people.
One thing I should mention is that I launched a mini-investigation into the Wikipedia posts before posting about my doubts here. I'm not going to claim that my investigation is authoritative because my knowledge in such matters is limited, but I do feel that my knowledge in this area is better than most people. (Apologies for being immodest, but it seems as though very few people have a basic understanding of how the Internet works.) That mini-investigation didn't provide anything definitive, which is why I started challenging other people.
|
Well I do know that you can't go anywhere on the net without leaving some trace probably. I was just agreeing with you that accusing without actual evidence is hearsay at best. We can speculate all we want about who did what but without solid proof nothing can be proven. I've learned that much from watching shows like Law & Order among others. I would imagine that with enough software of the right type someone could even misdirect suspicion onto others who were innocent of whatever was being investigated too. Certainly I've heard about the early days of the net when hackers would hate having to pay for the phone bill and would re-direct calls through whatever they directed them through to avoid the charges. I can only imagine that if a person had enough time and inclination much more could be done today. Certainly the police and CIA among others have their hands full with cyber crime I'm thinking. Whether or not someone would go to the trouble of doing something like that on Wikipedia is a whole other story though I'd guess.