who sells drugs on mud river and hamlin?

who sells drugs on mud river and hamlin?

Posted in the Hamlin Forum

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Oh The Drugs

New York, NY

#1 Sep 29, 2013
Post from a public wifi network so your IP will not be traced . Tell it !
mamau

Hamlin, WV

#2 Sep 29, 2013
Oh The Drugs wrote:
Post from a public wifi network so your IP will not be traced . Tell it !
aint' this a set up?????
Public Knowledge

Charleston, WV

#3 Sep 30, 2013
Ja Lawrence from Garretts Bend
stupidanswer

Huntington, WV

#4 Sep 30, 2013
Buffalo Creek & Bear creek is where its at. Mostly pills.

“I am just me!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#5 Oct 1, 2013
Oh The Drugs wrote:
Post from a public wifi network so your IP will not be traced . Tell it !
It is still possible for it to be traced. All information is stored. IP addresses will be traced to the public place, such as a Mickey D's or the Library. All information is logged. Then with cameras everywhere, and then you have people that seem to see everything and know everyone. Questions are asked and answered and soon they have a name to go with the information.
stupidanswer

Huntington, WV

#6 Oct 2, 2013
Well you must be someone that worries about the junkie community we live in. Good luck in court in November

“I am just me!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#7 Oct 3, 2013
stupidanswer wrote:
Well you must be someone that worries about the junkie community we live in. Good luck in court in November
Who are you directing this comment towards? Who has court in November?
takeit

Huntington, WV

#8 Oct 9, 2013
stupidanswer wrote:
Buffalo Creek & Bear creek is where its at. Mostly pills.
when you start holding the land owners accountable. Then I bet Butcher Holler and Buffalo Creek problem will take care of its self.
anonymous

Hamlin, WV

#9 Oct 9, 2013
Take Pride in History wrote:
<quoted text> It is still possible for it to be traced. All information is stored. IP addresses will be traced to the public place, such as a Mickey D's or the Library. All information is logged. Then with cameras everywhere, and then you have people that seem to see everything and know everyone. Questions are asked and answered and soon they have a name to go with the information.
are you mentally handicapped or simply stupid?

you haven't even the slightest inkling how the internet works.

people get caught snitching because, for the most part, they're retarded, can't keep their mouths shut, and have to run and tell somebody that they just told on so and so.

you sound like a high school kid that just read 1984 for the first time. trust me, nobody in lincoln co has access to the cia's prism database.

no, the police (or the cia for that matter) can't take a grainy surveillance video(still) and create a 12mp enhanced image of the face of some passing bystander (you can't create data where there isn't any, gigo), and they can't magically trace a post on a public forum to the ipad jill used over starbuck's wifi to make said post.

yes, ip addresses have been used in prior legal cases as a way to tie a specific person or computer to a crime committed, however (much the the mpaa and riaa's chagrin), you can't successfully sue someone or attain an arrest warrant for someone based solely on information garnered from an ip address.

what information, pray tell, do you think is logged when you access a website? wouldn't your assumption also mean that the providers of said public wifi spots keep exhaustive access logs detailing every single bit (bit as in the unit of measurement for data, not a small amount) of data the router routed?

even given all of that, how would they link a specific mac address (something that can EASILY be changed) with a specific device used by a random customer on any given date? it's impossible, you don't have enough information. technology doesn't work this way. pls lrn2computers before you go dolling out technological advice.

“I am just me!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#10 Oct 9, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
are you mentally handicapped or simply stupid?
you haven't even the slightest inkling how the internet works.
people get caught snitching because, for the most part, they're retarded, can't keep their mouths shut, and have to run and tell somebody that they just told on so and so.
you sound like a high school kid that just read 1984 for the first time. trust me, nobody in lincoln co has access to the cia's prism database.
no, the police (or the cia for that matter) can't take a grainy surveillance video(still) and create a 12mp enhanced image of the face of some passing bystander (you can't create data where there isn't any, gigo), and they can't magically trace a post on a public forum to the ipad jill used over starbuck's wifi to make said post.
yes, ip addresses have been used in prior legal cases as a way to tie a specific person or computer to a crime committed, however (much the the mpaa and riaa's chagrin), you can't successfully sue someone or attain an arrest warrant for someone based solely on information garnered from an ip address.
what information, pray tell, do you think is logged when you access a website? wouldn't your assumption also mean that the providers of said public wifi spots keep exhaustive access logs detailing every single bit (bit as in the unit of measurement for data, not a small amount) of data the router routed?
even given all of that, how would they link a specific mac address (something that can EASILY be changed) with a specific device used by a random customer on any given date? it's impossible, you don't have enough information. technology doesn't work this way. pls lrn2computers before you go dolling out technological advice.
You are obviously the one that believes you know it all. I know computers and how things work very well. As for information being stored, yes information can be traced, and word of mouth goes a long way. As for people getting a device to randomly change ip addresses, yes they exist but most do not have the knowledge or money to purchase one. I said nothing about providers keeping information. I said if a person goes to lets say a library for example and uses the computer, the information is stored in the computer. And can be accessed. Someone witnesses said person on the computer at a certain time, then guess what? They are no longer anonymous. And if you take your lap top IPad, or Kindle to Mickey D's and the IP is tracked there, They ask around and get a name to go with it. People will tell all they know just because they can't keep to their own business. So I have no idea what your problem is. Perhaps you should read what I previously typed, again and again. Until you understand. Oh and for the record, before you start name calling. Maybe you should proof read your own comments before posting.

“I am just me!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#11 Oct 9, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
are you mentally handicapped or simply stupid?
you haven't even the slightest inkling how the internet works.
people get caught snitching because, for the most part, they're retarded, can't keep their mouths shut, and have to run and tell somebody that they just told on so and so.
you sound like a high school kid that just read 1984 for the first time. trust me, nobody in lincoln co has access to the cia's prism database.
no, the police (or the cia for that matter) can't take a grainy surveillance video(still) and create a 12mp enhanced image of the face of some passing bystander (you can't create data where there isn't any, gigo), and they can't magically trace a post on a public forum to the ipad jill used over starbuck's wifi to make said post.
yes, ip addresses have been used in prior legal cases as a way to tie a specific person or computer to a crime committed, however (much the the mpaa and riaa's chagrin), you can't successfully sue someone or attain an arrest warrant for someone based solely on information garnered from an ip address.
what information, pray tell, do you think is logged when you access a website? wouldn't your assumption also mean that the providers of said public wifi spots keep exhaustive access logs detailing every single bit (bit as in the unit of measurement for data, not a small amount) of data the router routed?
even given all of that, how would they link a specific mac address (something that can EASILY be changed) with a specific device used by a random customer on any given date? it's impossible, you don't have enough information. technology doesn't work this way. pls lrn2computers before you go dolling out technological advice.
I also believe you are over thinking on this one. I was simply commenting where someone said you can just go to a public place and no one will know who it was posting. If certain people want to know something bad enough, they will find out one way or another.
1 post removed
anonymous

Hamlin, WV

#13 Oct 9, 2013
Take Pride in History wrote:
<quoted text> I also believe you are over thinking on this one. I was simply commenting where someone said you can just go to a public place and no one will know who it was posting. If certain people want to know something bad enough, they will find out one way or another.
no, you went off on some diatribe as if we're all stuck in the matrix and dispensed incorrect and irresponsible advice about something you have no clue about.

despite what you see in movies and tv shows, computers and the internet are not magical devices that any 16 yr old and his rag tag group of friends can use to access all information at any time.

i meant to use that statement about discovering a mac and lan addy from a device at a glance in the last post for this one, my bad.

i'm pretty sure the cops and feds wanna find some people pretty damn bad, but they can't even with all of their resources and it's not because of bureaucratic nonsense.

like i said previously, if somebody gets caught snitching more often then not it's either because of their own loose lips (which do indeed sink ships) or because the inquirer has a contact inside the pd, not because the person they snitched on is some crazy good interweb detective.

for instance, if it wasn't for bradly manning opening up to adrian llamo and revealing himself to llamo in excruciating detail he might have never been caught. the military tried to figure out who manning was despite the fact that he used military computers physically available to him to access a military server.

sorry, but if the military can't do it, joe schmoe oxy dealer down the road can't.

“I am just me!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#14 Oct 11, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
no, you went off on some diatribe as if we're all stuck in the matrix and dispensed incorrect and irresponsible advice about something you have no clue about.
despite what you see in movies and tv shows, computers and the internet are not magical devices that any 16 yr old and his rag tag group of friends can use to access all information at any time.
i meant to use that statement about discovering a mac and lan addy from a device at a glance in the last post for this one, my bad.
i'm pretty sure the cops and feds wanna find some people pretty damn bad, but they can't even with all of their resources and it's not because of bureaucratic nonsense.
like i said previously, if somebody gets caught snitching more often then not it's either because of their own loose lips (which do indeed sink ships) or because the inquirer has a contact inside the pd, not because the person they snitched on is some crazy good interweb detective.
for instance, if it wasn't for bradly manning opening up to adrian llamo and revealing himself to llamo in excruciating detail he might have never been caught. the military tried to figure out who manning was despite the fact that he used military computers physically available to him to access a military server.
sorry, but if the military can't do it, joe schmoe oxy dealer down the road can't.
I did not say say some oxy dealer could find out who someone was. I was just saying, people are not the brightest. People screw up, no one stays anonymous forever. We are not talking about computer genius' here.
anonymous

Hamlin, WV

#15 Oct 11, 2013
Take Pride in History wrote:
<quoted text> I did not say say some oxy dealer could find out who someone was. I was just saying, people are not the brightest. People screw up, no one stays anonymous forever. We are not talking about computer genius' here.
orly?

this is your reply in a thread entitled "who sells drugs" (let's see if i can get the quote function to work without having to click reply, every other time i've tried to do so it doesn't work).
Take Pride in History wrote:
<quoted text> It is still possible for it to be traced. All information is stored. IP addresses will be traced to the public place, such as a Mickey D's or the Library. All information is logged. Then with cameras everywhere, and then you have people that seem to see everything and know everyone. Questions are asked and answered and soon they have a name to go with the information.
then when i called you out on being an overly paranoid and incredibly uneducated on the topic at hand, you said...
Take Pride in History wrote:
>quoted text> I said if a person goes to lets say a library for example and uses the computer, the information is stored in the computer. And can be accessed. Someone witnesses said person on the computer at a certain time, then guess what? They are no longer anonymous. And if you take your lap top IPad, or Kindle to Mickey D's and the IP is tracked there, They ask around and get a name to go with it. People will tell all they know just because they can't keep to their own business.
so yea, no, that's not what you where saying at all. you where implying that anybody can get this information and that's simply not the way it works. on top of that you also claimed that you "know computers and how things work very well" which is not only misleading to anybody that reads your posts in this thread, but also saying that i've no idea what i'm talking about when i work with this sh­it on a daily basis and have done so since the day i got my very first computer (intel 386 baby, i'm old skool). had you said what you just did say this conversation would be much different. using public wifi is a fairly safe way to remain anonymous on the interwebs. is it a foolproof, ironclad method of remaining anonymous online? of course not, but it would require quite a bit of time, resources, and detective work to deduce esp considering that it wouldn't be a routine that a person is following. as long as the person in question isn't running around telling ppl they snitched on somebody they should be fine.

aside from that, every dealer i've talked to really doesn't care about topix because the cops already know who deals what, they just don't have enough evidence to obtain a search warrant.
anonymous

Hamlin, WV

#16 Oct 11, 2013
yay! i made the quote function work properly!!!

“I am just me!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#17 Oct 12, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
orly?
this is your reply in a thread entitled "who sells drugs" (let's see if i can get the quote function to work without having to click reply, every other time i've tried to do so it doesn't work).
<quoted text>
then when i called you out on being an overly paranoid and incredibly uneducated on the topic at hand, you said...
<quoted text>
so yea, no, that's not what you where saying at all. you where implying that anybody can get this information and that's simply not the way it works. on top of that you also claimed that you "know computers and how things work very well" which is not only misleading to anybody that reads your posts in this thread, but also saying that i've no idea what i'm talking about when i work with this sh­it on a daily basis and have done so since the day i got my very first computer (intel 386 baby, i'm old skool). had you said what you just did say this conversation would be much different. using public wifi is a fairly safe way to remain anonymous on the interwebs. is it a foolproof, ironclad method of remaining anonymous online? of course not, but it would require quite a bit of time, resources, and detective work to deduce esp considering that it wouldn't be a routine that a person is following. as long as the person in question isn't running around telling ppl they snitched on somebody they should be fine.
aside from that, every dealer i've talked to really doesn't care about topix because the cops already know who deals what, they just don't have enough evidence to obtain a search warrant.
I never said just anyone could get the information. I was implying that if a person, not just any Tom, Dick, or Harry, wanted this information bad enough, they could get it. If it were through word of mouth, IP addresses, so forth and so on. And yes there are a lot of snitches out there too. But we all know that. And yes I would not be worried if I were a drug dealer, addict, or snitch. Because for one not many take this site seriously. Second of all it is all hearsay so no matter what anyone says it means not much of anything. Third there have been many times authorities have seen the selling of drugs in the open and did nothing about it. So that is that. So no disrespect in any way at all. I suppose there were some misunderstandings on the reading of the posts. So we will leave it at that. When someone reads one thing, or types something perhaps it comes out wrong, or may have been misconstrued.

“I am just me!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#18 Oct 12, 2013
anonymous wrote:
yay! i made the quote function work properly!!!
YAY WTG. I just have no idea how to do that. I just hit reply.

“I am just me!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#19 Oct 12, 2013
I meant to say, I still have no idea how to do that. I just hit reply.
anonymous

Hamlin, WV

#20 Oct 12, 2013
Take Pride in History wrote:
I meant to say, I still have no idea how to do that. I just hit reply.
you have to include the syntax ( who="username") in the quote tag.

example:(quote who="dumbass")those there harmoseksals r ruinn ths her nashun!(/quote)

obv, replace the parentheses "()" with brackets "[]" also idk if capitalization matters, but from experience it shouldn't. perhaps i should look up what forum software topix uses.

at any rate, the point of my postings where to show you not to talk about something you don't really know about as though you do know about it. anonymity is a serious thing online (lol internets is srs bzns!!) and following the advice of someone that doesn't know what they're talking about can get people caught (or even worse depending on the situation, i.e. gun care etc...).
takeprideinthemo uth

Huntington, WV

#21 Oct 13, 2013
Take Pride in History wrote:
<quoted text> I did not say say some oxy dealer could find out who someone was. I was just saying, people are not the brightest. People screw up, no one stays anonymous forever. We are not talking about computer genius' here.
I bet you live in hamlin. Does your husband still have to spray your Pus*y before sticking it.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Hamlin Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Create your own Forum (Jun '15) 5 hr The Last Warrior ... 1,501
Kayla Chapman 6 hr U know 9
Kayla Chapman Bradley smith 20 hr A friend 39
Looking for easy 20 hr Lolol 11
friend Thu Nikki Miller 2
Shay Imaboss Harper (Sep '14) Aug 23 dave 13
April King and her Horses (Jan '13) Aug 22 Robert casey 20

Hamlin Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Hamlin Mortgages