After denying the leaked logs, then acknowleding them, then denying them
again, Cryptome edits their own Wikipedia page. *Again.*
Next time, raise issues on the article's talk page with sources. This isn't
the first time and it's a major breach of protocol for Wikipedia.
This is the first time Wikipedia's watchlist has caught an edit I found
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Michael Best <themikebest@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Here is Cryptome's full set (so far) of post-admission replies. I'm unable
to make anything consistent out of it.
"Admission of leaked logs" is rather generously overstated of what we
Me: You understated things? As in, left something(s) out??
Cryptome: Told what was needed to defuse your exaggeration and resist
your demands to auth visitors.
Note that Cryptome doesn't dispute the email that I quoted, which was copy
and pasted in it's entirety.
Rigged and disinfo remain valid. You overstated the disclosure. Leaking is
Nothing is ever deleted, that is subterfuge to escape culpability. You
ratted Cryptome visitors. Not the first or last.
*Note that Cryptome is definitely NOT using subterfuge to escape
culpability or advising users of the data leak/breach/compromise/whatever
spin word Cryptome wants to use.
Still refusing to validate what you faked, rigged and released. And will
not, it's your story, run with it.
Our claims remain valid despite the biased cherry-picking so beloved of
childish argumentum ad hominem -- Cicero's bitch.
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 4:45 PM, coderman <coderman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 10/9/15, Michael Best <themikebest@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Not sure how I was right AND the info is rigged and disinfo...
QUANTUMSQUIRREL casts suspicion, just like shade, too.