From: BTSinAustin <>
Subject: Re: In defense of Ramashiva
Full headers:
X-Received: by with SMTP id c67mr28849344qke.52.1514917879512;
Tue, 02 Jan 2018 10:31:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by with SMTP id n81mr1326579vke.14.1514917878996;
Tue, 02 Jan 2018 10:31:18 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 10:31:18 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <>
Injection-Info:; posting-host=; posting-account=fHocpwoAAABQL-d-c6hsspXXKXpwm6pS
References: <> <>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: In defense of Ramashiva
From: BTSinAustin <>
Injection-Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2018 18:31:19 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 98
Print Article
Forward Article
On Monday, January 1, 2018 at 2:41:15 PM UTC-6, risky biz wrote:
> On Monday, January 1, 2018 at 5:16:53 AM UTC-8, BillB wrote:
> > It was mentioned on this newsgroup recently that Ramashiva outed "Bea" with the name of an
unrelated person (which was said to be opening up that unrelated person to the risk of real world
harassment, which seems a stretch).
> Really, Bill? 'A stretch'?
> ramashiva: 'Eventually the low life scumbags on this newsgroup who lie about me
> and threadstalk me with nasty insults will figure out that I am a man with whom you should never
> Hopefully it won't be necessary for obituaries to be published before they get the message.'
> Brewmaster: 'I wouldn't mind if a stalker saw the posted address and came to her house and shot
her . .
> Brewmaster: 'I DO have a violent criminal conviction on my record, unlike Coleman.'
> Below is a post from 'susan' which seems to indicate that someone was spam dialing her business
which she, apparently, was naive enough to reveal the location of. One of the recent calls,
coincidentally, originated in Canada.
> bratt: 'Within the last week there was one more call to planet, and in the past at least one call
from Canada (which I highly doubt was Dutch) . .'
> > Just to set the record straight since Ramashiva isn't here to defend himself, the name Ramashiva
gave was not "unrelated". It was Bea's same-sex partner, living at the same residence. Also,
Ramashiva did make it clear at the time that he wasn't 100% sure that that was Bea's real name, but,
as it turns out, his online detective work was worthy of his claimed 200+ IQ. Had he decided to
carry his investigation any further, it is almost certain he would have uncovered the whole truth in
very little time.
> What makes you so dead certain sure that ANY of that identifying information is correct?
'ramashiva' claimed that he extracted his information by typinbg her screen name into a search
engine and identifying a Zillow profile in Portland with the user name 'Bea Foroni'. Why isn't it
just as possible that any of the following 20 people are the one who set up that user name on
Zillow?  Did it also never occur to you that she
may have set up that Zillow account to MISLEAD internet psychopaths?
> And what makes it more acceptable to expose a related person to the psychopaths who post on the
internet than an unrelated person?
> I see now that there were two posts. The second was posted by a previously unheard of 'Oregon
Enforcement Bureau. 'ramashiva' denied being the source of that but both had the same basic
information: a street address. Do you know anyone who might be willing to take credit for the second
> > Finally, it is important to remember that Ramashiva only resorted to trying to out Bea when she
persistently acted like an anonymous internet coward, mercilessly harassing Ramashiva for weeks on
end after he had asked her several times to simply leave him alone.
> Oh- boo, hoo, hoo. Verbal behavior is unacceptable but real threats of physical violence and
harassment are acceptable. What other conceivable reason could there be to post an address and how
socially responsible is it to post an address subjecting someone to that based on 'I'm really pretty
darned sure that's the right one'? Interesting logic.
> The LOL part is that 'ramashiva' was as much, if not more, culpable of the behavior he condemned
in Bea. Read the 'outing' posts linked above.
> Bea must have really gotten under your skin. You're coming off as hypersensitive to any criticism.
Bea would usually slag my threads with comments that weren't relevant and even repeatedly accused me
of advocating slavery because I criticized some ahistorical posts of hers. My response was to
verbally repudiate her claims, not expose her physically to internet psychopaths. That seems to me
to be the manner in which a person with character would respond to it and I'm not nursing any ego
wounds over it.
> BTW- I'm not accepting any responses to this post.

If it hadn't been for this episode the world would have been robbed of one of the funniest Usenet
confessions ever.  Bea kept homemade PVC spears and a baseball bat with WD40 on it by the door.  
Classic stuff.