BBC SCAMS STRICTLY VIEWERS!

On Dec 15, 12:10*pm, "Agamemnoel" wrote:
wrote in message

...
On Dec 15, 11:14 am, "Agamemnoel" wrote:



wrote in message

...
On Dec 15, 2:12 am, Hollyhoop wrote:

On Dec 15, 12:44 pm, "Agamemnoel" wrote:

wrote in message

.. .

On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:07:41 -0000, "Agamemnoel"
wrote:

crap deleted

Do you really think that you make this trivial subject important
just
by SHOUTING?

It was on the BBC main News.

Well you can't. It's a load of crap like all 'reality TV'
You are welcome to watch it if you have nothing more important to do
in your tiny life, but please don't bother normal people with it.

You are not a normal person. You are a retard.

Who said repartee was dead?

*shrugs* what else should I have expected from Aggy

Regards

Ged

Ag still hasn't answered my question: Ag, WHY do you watch everything
John Barrowman is on? Do you fancy him?

Imbecile.

Truth got under your skin? I'll take that as a 'yes' then. It's
nothing to be ashamed of. I'm sure a lot of gay men fancy him.

Idiot!

Aggs you will be pleased to hear that the BBC have officially said the
voting cock up was "unforgiveable" so you can rail against it forever,
free of any need to forgive them. I bet that's made your Christmas!

wrote in message
...
On Dec 15, 12:10 pm, "Agamemnoel" wrote:
wrote in message

...
On Dec 15, 11:14 am, "Agamemnoel" wrote:



wrote in message

...
On Dec 15, 2:12 am, Hollyhoop wrote:

On Dec 15, 12:44 pm, "Agamemnoel" wrote:

wrote in message

.. .

On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:07:41 -0000, "Agamemnoel"
wrote:

crap deleted

Do you really think that you make this trivial subject important
just
by SHOUTING?

It was on the BBC main News.

Well you can't. It's a load of crap like all 'reality TV'
You are welcome to watch it if you have nothing more important to
do
in your tiny life, but please don't bother normal people with it.

You are not a normal person. You are a retard.

Who said repartee was dead?

*shrugs* what else should I have expected from Aggy

Regards

Ged

Ag still hasn't answered my question: Ag, WHY do you watch everything
John Barrowman is on? Do you fancy him?

Imbecile.

Truth got under your skin? I'll take that as a 'yes' then. It's
nothing to be ashamed of. I'm sure a lot of gay men fancy him.

Idiot!

Aggs you will be pleased to hear that the BBC have officially said the
voting cock up was "unforgiveable" so you can rail against it forever,
free of any need to forgive them. I bet that's made your Christmas!

I always wanted to see three couples in the final so I'm happy. It's the way
it happened that the BBC has to answer for. It should stop using telephone
voting and use the internet instead.

On Dec 16, 12:17*pm, "Agamemnoel" wrote:
wrote in message

...
On Dec 15, 12:10 pm, "Agamemnoel" wrote:



wrote in message

...
On Dec 15, 11:14 am, "Agamemnoel" wrote:

wrote in message

....
On Dec 15, 2:12 am, Hollyhoop wrote:

On Dec 15, 12:44 pm, "Agamemnoel" wrote:

wrote in message

.. .

On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:07:41 -0000, "Agamemnoel"
wrote:

crap deleted

Do you really think that you make this trivial subject important
just
by SHOUTING?

It was on the BBC main News.

Well you can't. It's a load of crap like all 'reality TV'
You are welcome to watch it if you have nothing more important to
do
in your tiny life, but please don't bother normal people with it.

wrote in message
...
On Dec 16, 12:17 pm, "Agamemnoel" wrote:
wrote in message

...
On Dec 15, 12:10 pm, "Agamemnoel" wrote:



wrote in message

...
On Dec 15, 11:14 am, "Agamemnoel" wrote:

wrote in message

...
On Dec 15, 2:12 am, Hollyhoop wrote:

On Dec 15, 12:44 pm, "Agamemnoel"
wrote:

wrote in message

.. .

On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:07:41 -0000, "Agamemnoel"
wrote:

crap deleted

Do you really think that you make this trivial subject important
just
by SHOUTING?

It was on the BBC main News.

Well you can't. It's a load of crap like all 'reality TV'
You are welcome to watch it if you have nothing more important
to
do
in your tiny life, but please don't bother normal people with
it.

You are not a normal person. You are a retard.

Who said repartee was dead?

*shrugs* what else should I have expected from Aggy

Regards

Ged

Ag still hasn't answered my question: Ag, WHY do you watch
everything
John Barrowman is on? Do you fancy him?

Imbecile.

Truth got under your skin? I'll take that as a 'yes' then. It's
nothing to be ashamed of. I'm sure a lot of gay men fancy him.

Idiot!

Aggs you will be pleased to hear that the BBC have officially said the
voting cock up was "unforgiveable" so you can rail against it forever,
free of any need to forgive them. I bet that's made your Christmas!

I always wanted to see three couples in the final so I'm happy.

Good because there's nothing wrong with you being gay and you should
celebrate your homosexuality not be ashamed of it. Well done.

You are completely deranged! Is Bruce Forsyth gay? Is Tom Chambers gay? Is
Vincent Simone gay?

You are obviously projecting.

Agamemnoel wrote:

wrote in message
...
On Dec 15, 12:10 pm, "Agamemnoel" wrote:
wrote in message

...
On Dec 15, 11:14 am, "Agamemnoel" wrote:



wrote in message

...
On Dec 15, 2:12 am, Hollyhoop wrote:

On Dec 15, 12:44 pm, "Agamemnoel" wrote:

wrote in message

.. .

On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:07:41 -0000, "Agamemnoel"
wrote:

crap deleted

Do you really think that you make this trivial subject important
just
by SHOUTING?

It was on the BBC main News.

Well you can't. It's a load of crap like all 'reality TV'
You are welcome to watch it if you have nothing more important
to do
in your tiny life, but please don't bother normal people with it.

You are not a normal person. You are a retard.

Who said repartee was dead?

*shrugs* what else should I have expected from Aggy

Regards

Ged

Ag still hasn't answered my question: Ag, WHY do you watch
everything
John Barrowman is on? Do you fancy him?

Imbecile.

Truth got under your skin? I'll take that as a 'yes' then. It's
nothing to be ashamed of. I'm sure a lot of gay men fancy him.

Idiot!

Aggs you will be pleased to hear that the BBC have officially said the
voting cock up was "unforgiveable" so you can rail against it forever,
free of any need to forgive them. I bet that's made your Christmas!

I always wanted to see three couples in the final so I'm happy. It's the
way it happened that the BBC has to answer for. It should stop using
telephone voting and use the internet instead.



Why bother with that dance show at all? Saturday night! Go out and get laid.

IMBECILE! wrote:

No. You can't understand English.

Or perhaps I can but what you write is not English...

address they are on, but only once from that email and only once from
that IP address with their current email and registration.

Erm, you ever heard of DHCP? A vast number of internet users will have
a different IP every time they post. The web mail users will be served
by multiple machines as well.

So in short - correlation between IP address and email address is not
going to help you here.

Most people have a permanent connection and are not going to disconnect
and reconnect to get a new IP address. Besides which the time taken to
reconnect will put a limit to the number of times they can vote in an
hour. On top of that I said voting would be link to registration and
confirmation of email addresses and a voting link.

As already pointed out, you can't use the IP address anyway since one
address may be shared by thousands of users with different email
addresses at any given time.

Secondly a permanent connection does not imply a static IP address. Many
ISPs will give dynamically allocated IP addresses to broadband users.

who wants to vote to register and confirm their email address first
and then confirm that they have voted by clicking a link in an
email which is sent to them after they have voted.

Oh, that could work, its not like one person could possibly have
more than one email address now is it...

It's not like anybody presses redial over and over again.

Of course they can. There is nothing in the voting rules that says you
can't vote multiple times, so whay are you trying to solve a problem
that does not exist?

Look at what happened with John Simpson.

Who is he?

Once they have voted a message is sent to them to confirm they have
voted. The link they click could send back information of their
system profile so that multiple votes from the same machine and
different aliases within a short space of time between them can be
trapped. 5 votes per machine should be enough to cover most households.

That would be a woosh then...

I get the feelings that you would be hard pressed to get a clue in a
clue forest surrounded by horny clues having rolled yourself in clue
aphrodisiac.

You are totally clueless and deranged.

Were you looking in the mirror when typing that?

(you know aggy, there is a village not far from here in need of an
idiot, shall I put your name forward?)

Think more like 100's of thousands of users who share an IP address
due to use of proxys, firewalls, and webmail accounts and you would be
closer.

Get an education. Voting would requite several forms of confirmation. I
made that clear originally. Learn to understand English.


No, English is not the problem. You just have not thought through the
technicalities.

You said: "I made that clear originally", so let's analyse that a little...

You said: "If would be very difficult to fix the vote if the BBC
recorded all the IP addresses and make sure there are no duplicates".
This is completely pointless for the reasons highlighted. Same IP used
for multiple votes does not indicate they are duplicates. Different IP
used on vote and registration process, also does not indicate anything
of merit.

You went on to say "force everyone who wants to vote to register and
confirm their email address first and then confirm that they have voted
by clicking a link in an email which is sent to them after they have
voted", which is also completely ineffectual.

Finally you said: "If people were repeatedly voting from the same IP
address and/or email (and they still have to click on the email sent to
them) then their votes would be all cancelled" - this has slightly more
promise, however, as has been pointed out, is also so easy to circumvent
as to be pointless.

So all your "forms of identification" add up to diddly really. I could
create as many email addresses on a domain as I wanted, and then have
one vote per address. It would be equally simple to reply to each of the
confirmation emails automatically if required to spoof your "system".


But you liked it so much you have obviously decided to stick with it?
ok, suits your style quite well if I may say so.

IMBECILE! You can't understand English.

No, you need your sig *after* the last bit of text. Like this:

You can't understand English.
--
IMBECILE!



--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

"John Rumm the ignorant clueless tosser"
wrote in message et...
..

Were you looking in the mirror when typing that?

No, I was thinking of you, you DERANGED IGNORANT IMBECILE!


Think more like 100's of thousands of users who share an IP address due
to use of proxys, firewalls, and webmail accounts and you would be
closer.

Get an education. Voting would requite several forms of confirmation. I
made that clear originally. Learn to understand English.


No, English is not the problem. You just have not thought through the
technicalities.

Yes I have. You are a dissembling liar.


You said: "I made that clear originally", so let's analyse that a
little...

You said: "If would be very difficult to fix the vote if the BBC recorded
all the IP addresses and make sure there are no duplicates". This is
completely pointless for the reasons highlighted. Same IP used for
multiple votes does not indicate they are duplicates. Different IP used on
vote and registration process, also does not indicate anything of merit.

You went on to say "force everyone who wants to vote to register and
confirm their email address first and then confirm that they have voted by
clicking a link in an email which is sent to them after they have voted",
which is also completely ineffectual.

Finally you said: "If people were repeatedly voting from the same IP
address and/or email (and they still have to click on the email sent to
them) then their votes would be all cancelled" - this has slightly more
promise, however, as has been pointed out, is also so easy to circumvent
as to be pointless.

I qualified all of that with the provision that the vote would be verified
with several different provisions including verification of email address
and clicking on an email link to confirm the vote and the submission of a
system profile simultaneously.


So all your "forms of identification" add up to diddly really. I could
create as many email addresses on a domain as I wanted, and then have one
vote per address. It would be equally simple to reply to each of the
confirmation emails automatically if required to spoof your "system".

No it wouldn't if the BBC included a OCR-proof gif image on its web pages
with a code which needed to by typed in to confirm the reply and the vote
was genuine and the voting information would also have to be verified by an
encrypted cookie containing the time and a code number from when you made
the initial vote which if deleted would invalidate the vote verification
process.

Now how many code words do you think you could get through in an hour along
with manually switching your cookies, editing the time and date which the
file was created in the file properties and doing that in the right order to
confirm each multiple vote was genuine?



But you liked it so much you have obviously decided to stick with it?
ok, suits your style quite well if I may say so.

IMBECILE! You can't understand English.

No, you need your sig *after* the last bit of text. Like this:


The word imbecile is referring to you. You have proven once again that you
are an imbecile and that you don't understand English by not recognising
that.

Well its tonight this sort of fixed final, well I no longer trust it to be a
fair vote so will not phone in.
--
Regards,
David

Please reply to News Group

In message , David
wrote
Well its tonight this sort of fixed final, well I no longer trust it to
be a fair vote so will not phone in.

Guess who sent out a press release two hours ago naming the winners?

--
Alan
news2006 {at} amac {dot} f2s {dot} com

"David" wrote in message
...
Well its tonight this sort of fixed final, well I no longer trust it to be
a fair vote so will not phone in.

As expected Tom and Camilla won. If the rules hadn't been changed after the
voting had already began last week, the judges would have most likely
eliminated them. But then again if John Sergeant hadn't pulled out they
would have probably been in the final anyway and in any case they performed
the best show dance.