00000f06

REPLYTO: 1:396/3 UUCP

REPLYADDR: me@privacy.invalid
From: Diesel 

"p-0''0-h the cat (UK) - The voice of the Sheeple"

news:oy7a70wukkm.avt2wsvs19jq$.dlg@40tude.net Sun, 15 Feb 2015
20:29:48 GMT in alt.comp.anti-virus, wrote: 

> Yeah, that was really too funny. I can't stop laughing.

What's funny is that you failed to identify hex AND base64 coding and 
tried to deflect from that with a nonsense puzzle of your own that 
doesn't hold well against freq analysis. mine didn't hold super well, 
but, alas, no effort was made to actually hide the post, either. 

I specifically used hex and base64 to make a point. The point being, you 
are a poser. Like so many of your 'friends' who post here. And the point 
was made well. No custom routine, no nonsense bs material if decoded. 
Just two well known coding schemes (base16 and base64) were used. 
Standard stuff that *should have been* identifiable to anyone who's into 
IT. You and G. Morgan *failed*

And unlike yours, mine actually contained messages. Yours contained 
nothing of substance. Repeating characters isn't something to be 
laughing about. Your inability to identify two well known coding schemes 
is certainly something to laugh your ####ing ass off about, though.





-- 
My truck does not leak. It's just marking its territory! 
--- NewsGate v1.0 gamma 2