If I am not wrong, today still exixt only three direct remailer
(dizum, frell, paranoia).
All the other (banana, ipsum, micromix, middleman,
shalo, tncmm, slow )
are middleman, right?
So if a bad man would to stop anonymous remailing, he just
must to destroy three server (dizum, paranoia, frell) and
QSL or Omnimix would cease to work, correct?
If I use a chain of three or four remailer and out there only exist
middleman remailer, the last remailer of my chain will choose
another
middleman remailer and so my post will never arrive, correct?
Or I am wrong?

On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 17:03:09 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>So if a bad man would to stop anonymous remailing

the tutaspam stasi would sleep peacefully at night

On 8/18/2023 8:03 AM, Nomen Nescio wrote:

> If I am not wrong, today still exixt only three direct remailer
> (dizum, frell, paranoia).

We have: frell, frell2, dizum, paranoia.

However: Paranoia is currently down.

> All the other (banana, ipsum, micromix, middleman,
> shalo, tncmm, slow )
> are middleman, right?

Correct

> So if a bad man would to stop anonymous remailing, he just
> must to destroy three server (dizum, paranoia, frell) and
> QSL or Omnimix would cease to work, correct?

Correct

On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 17:54:41 -0400, Yamn Remailer <remailer@domain.invalid> wrote:
>> QSL or Omnimix

QSL is unmaintained. Omnimix does more and is maintained:
https://www.danner-net.de/om.htm
https://www.danner-net.de/omom/index.htm
https://www.danner-net.de/om/OmniMix_2.6.8_Uno_Setup.exe

On 8/18/2023 4:37 PM, D wrote:

> On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 17:54:41 -0400, Yamn Remailer <remailer@domain.invalid> wrote:
>>> QSL or Omnimix
>
> QSL is unmaintained. Omnimix does more and is maintained:
> https://www.danner-net.de/om.htm
> https://www.danner-net.de/omom/index.htm
> https://www.danner-net.de/om/OmniMix_2.6.8_Uno_Setup.exe

Thank you.

Correct.

Though QSL still works, it is unmaintained and is considered
abandonware.

"Omnimix does more and is maintained"

On Sat, 19 Aug 2023 02:43:16 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio
<nobody@dizum.com> wrote:

>On 8/18/2023 4:37 PM, D wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 17:54:41 -0400, Yamn Remailer <remailer@domain.invalid> wrote:
>>>> QSL or Omnimix
>>
>> QSL is unmaintained. Omnimix does more and is maintained:
>> https://www.danner-net.de/om.htm
>> https://www.danner-net.de/omom/index.htm
>> https://www.danner-net.de/om/OmniMix_2.6.8_Uno_Setup.exe
>
>
>Thank you.
>
>Correct.
>
>Though QSL still works, it is unmaintained and is considered
>abandonware.
>
>"Omnimix does more and is maintained"
>

Another QSL assassination attempt by one more insecure Omnimix user
who is totally distraught that everyone doesn't want to do things his
way.

Christman/QSL Still Live! (Live with the fact, you insecure schmuck.)

On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 20:41:13 -0500, Pat@TheAnswer.org wrote:
>On Sat, 19 Aug 2023 02:43:16 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio
><nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>>On 8/18/2023 4:37 PM, D wrote:
>>> On Fri, 18 Aug 2023 17:54:41 -0400, Yamn Remailer <remailer@domain.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> QSL or Omnimix
>>>
>>> QSL is unmaintained. Omnimix does more and is maintained:
>>> https://www.danner-net.de/om.htm
>>> https://www.danner-net.de/omom/index.htm
>>> https://www.danner-net.de/om/OmniMix_2.6.8_Uno_Setup.exe
>>
>>Thank you.
>>Correct.
>>Though QSL still works, it is unmaintained and is considered
>>abandonware.
>>"Omnimix does more and is maintained"
>
>Another QSL assassination attempt by one more insecure Omnimix user
>who is totally distraught that everyone doesn't want to do things his
>way.
>Christman/QSL Still Live! (Live with the fact, you insecure schmuck.)

some QSL users are probably using both QSL and Omnimix, while others
may not have the time or interest in figuring out how to use Omnimix,
even with it's comprehensive on-line tutorial; obviously, these "QSL"
spammers have been using superfluous nonsense as an excuse for their
obstinance and dislike of Omnimix . . . maybe they don't like pizza?

Assassination attempt... Oh please. spare us the dramatics.

Seems we are a little defensive aren't we?

Take the shit out of your eyes and read what was written.

QSL still works-Fact

QSL is unmaintained- Fact

QSL is abandonware-Fact

Richard Christman is retired.

The only one who is insecure is YOU.

On Sat, 19 Aug 2023 05:44:36 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio
<nobody@dizum.com> wrote:

>>
>> Another QSL assassination attempt by one more insecure Omnimix
>> user who is totally distraught that everyone doesn't want to do
>> things his way.
>>
>> Christman/QSL Still Live! (Live with the fact, you insecure
>> schmuck.)
>
>Assassination attempt... Oh please. spare us the dramatics.
>
>Seems we are a little defensive aren't we?
>
>Take the shit out of your eyes and read what was written.
>
>QSL still works-Fact
>
>QSL is unmaintained- Fact
>
>QSL is abandonware-Fact
>
>Richard Christman is retired.
>
>The only one who is insecure is YOU.
>

It seems like I did reach the insecure thumb-sucking schmutz. : o)

In article <35g0eidptnqajmflkcl52tgvasm4rglt1l@4ax.com>
Pat@TheAnswer.org wrote:
>
> On Sat, 19 Aug 2023 05:44:36 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio
> <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
> >>
> >> Another QSL assassination attempt by one more insecure Omnimix
> >> user who is totally distraught that everyone doesn't want to do
> >> things his way.
> >>
> >> Christman/QSL Still Live! (Live with the fact, you insecure
> >> schmuck.)
> >
> >Assassination attempt... Oh please. spare us the dramatics.
> >
> >Seems we are a little defensive aren't we?
> >
> >Take the shit out of your eyes and read what was written.
> >
> >QSL still works-Fact
> >
> >QSL is unmaintained- Fact
> >
> >QSL is abandonware-Fact
> >
> >Richard Christman is retired.
> >
> >The only one who is insecure is YOU.
> >
>
> It seems like I did reach the insecure thumb-sucking schmutz. : o)

Why do you use that QSL POS in the first place?

The original QS is much better with more features.

In article <952f50165fe1f991bd4d7569797d3ea1@dizum.com>
Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
> If I am not wrong, today still exixt only three direct remailer
> (dizum, frell, paranoia).
> All the other (banana, ipsum, micromix, middleman,
> shalo, tncmm, slow )
> are middleman, right?
> So if a bad man would to stop anonymous remailing, he just
> must to destroy three server (dizum, paranoia, frell) and
> QSL or Omnimix would cease to work, correct?

You are 33% right. It's clear you have not explored the
complete capabilities of OmniMix

> If I use a chain of three or four remailer and out there only exist
> middleman remailer, the last remailer of my chain will choose
> another
> middleman remailer and so my post will never arrive, correct?

Correct.

> Or I am wrong?

Don't think you can hide from us if you go fucking around with
the remailers. Far better people than you have tried it and two
of them are no longer viable.

>
> some QSL users are probably using both QSL and Omnimix, while others
> may not have the time or interest in figuring out how to use Omnimix,
> even with it's comprehensive on-line tutorial; obviously, these "QSL"
> spammers have been using superfluous nonsense as an excuse for their
> obstinance and dislike of Omnimix . . . maybe they don't like pizza?

I use Omnimix and sometimes I use QSL.
I must to confess that it was difficult for me to configure Omnimix in
order to use and manage my nymaccounts. Finally I did it.
I use my newsreader with Omnimix (I used the guide online).
I respect very much Omnimix and his creator.
I understand that I am using only a little percent of Omnimix
capability.

>
> You are 33% right. It's clear you have not explored the
> complete capabilities of OmniMix
>

Yes, I use omnimix for my nyms, but I confess that many of the tabs in
Omnimix are a mistery for me.
But if all the three last remailers disappear, Omnimix could still post
messages anonymously?
On 15 august and on 16 august or 17 august, Omnimix said to me that it
was not able to send my posts because remailers were not available.

>> If I use a chain of three or four remailer and out there only exist
>> middleman remailer, the last remailer of my chain will choose
>> another
>> middleman remailer and so my post will never arrive, correct?
>
> Correct.
>
>> Or I am wrong?
>
> Don't think you can hide from us if you go fucking around with
> the remailers. Far better people than you have tried it and two
> of them are no longer viable.

I hope that these two are still in good health.

On Tue, 22 Aug 2023 11:37:25 +0000 (UTC), Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> wrote:
>> some QSL users are probably using both QSL and Omnimix, while others
>> may not have the time or interest in figuring out how to use Omnimix,
>> even with it's comprehensive on-line tutorial; obviously, these "QSL"
>> spammers have been using superfluous nonsense as an excuse for their
>> obstinance and dislike of Omnimix . . . maybe they don't like pizza?
>
>I use Omnimix and sometimes I use QSL.
>I must to confess that it was difficult for me to configure Omnimix in
>order to use and manage my nymaccounts. Finally I did it.
>I use my newsreader with Omnimix (I used the guide online).
>I respect very much Omnimix and his creator.
>I understand that I am using only a little percent of Omnimix
>capability.

I've never used nyms or QSL, and have only used remailers to post
plain text to newsgroups; before Omnimix, I used "Jack B. Nymble"
https://web.archive.org/web/19981205142253/http://members.tripod.com/~l4795/jbn/index.html
(before JBN, it was more hit and miss, "Replay", "Potato", etc.);
quoting OM tutorial <https://www.danner-net.de/omom/tutornym.htm>
"...in Usenet communication, it's a one-way ticket that gives the
addressees of your messages no opportunity for an individual res-
ponse"[end quote], which is exactly the point of uncensored free
speech: i.e. free, public not private, no secrecy, no conspiracy...

> before Omnimix, I used "Jack B. Nymble"
> https://web.archive.org/web/19981205142253/http://members.tripod.com/~l4795/jbn/index.html

I used JBN too, many many years ago to create and manage nym accounts.
I wondered why it disappeared so suddenly and it was a true mistery to
me who was his creator. I hope that nobody hurted him.

On Tue, 22 Aug 2023 21:00:02 +0000 (UTC), Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> wrote:
>> before Omnimix, I used "Jack B. Nymble"
>> https://web.archive.org/web/19981205142253/http://members.tripod.com/~l4795/jbn/index.html
>
>I used JBN too, many many years ago to create and manage nym accounts.
>I wondered why it disappeared so suddenly and it was a true mistery to
>me who was his creator. I hope that nobody hurted him.

urban legend, gossip, unsubstantiated rumor, idle speculation etc.
but whomever "RProcess" actually is/was (person/group) contributed
a great deal, that much is certain . . . so the proverbial cat was
already out of the bag and the rest is history; nowadays, probably
everyone is either using Omnimix or is busy learning how to use it