Few folk seem upset that I claimed
@dangreene was full of it, so let's start off with the most obvious thing:
They ain't been here since their accusations dropped. No reason to stay away, someone claiming to be a long-time detractor made a new account, posts for 90 minutes and then fucks the fuck off again. Bit odd they wouldn't revel in some of their dastardly deeds, but we can expand on that.
Their 'evidence' comes after:
1) Phil showed his 'evidence' first an hour previously, with some very odd screenshots, conveniently apparently doxxing himself by showing off things like his Xbox, iphone and PC MAC addresses. And yet - no signs of any of those being breached by someone here, and let's face reality, there are folk here who likely have pursued that intel to see where it leads.
2) Isn't real evidence - it confirms absolutely nothing!
What did Dan show us? Screenshots of an outdated Comcast system which makes no logical sense, listing a business no longer relevant to DSP, and bizarrely omitting the modem he has used for almost a decade! (Which is the XB6/7 one). It lists random others ones, but bizarrely not that one. Sus. Remember, Phil CLAIMED the hacker had turned it off previously. And yet it was not listed on Dan's screenshots when showing off the modems. The three Dan lists on HIS evidence is Netgear CM1200, CP E110C4D and TEC CGA4131COM. If it retains lists of previous modems used, the omission of the XB6/7 is quite telling.
Oh, and the Managed sites screenshot thing is BS too, doesn't work. Others have done what Dan had showed, using the same device and software DSP has - adding YouTube to the list of blocked sites, and then went ahead and loaded YouTube anyway.
What does this prove? That Dan is lying.
Now, if Phil had not said anything ABOUT their leaks, he may have had a leg to stand on and claim that someone still attacked him, but Phil, as per usual, overplayed his hand - he has stated on at least TWO occasions that 'someone' had leaked his information from this 'attack'. Since the only source of that is in this very topic, Phil is attempting to legitimize Dan's claims, making himself a victim, and therefore has doomed his victim narrative that even some detractors began believing was genuine. The moment Phil began saying his information was leaked, and knowing Dan's evidence was BS, it proved this was a co-ordinated attempt by Phil and Dan (or whoever the hell they are).
Of course, as I state ALL of this, there is one more, possible, final, glimmer of hope of an excuse from Phil to proclaim innocence: He can claim he never saw the evidence on here, but was told about it, and so assumed that his details were, in fact, leaked. It's his last gasp line of defence, to plead ignorance based on trusting the people in his ear.
Believe what you wish to, but Phil has prior for manufacturing drama and someone sure did their best to help him fabricate this, IMO. I'm done with it.
(For the record - I'm merely regurgitating information I've learned from the efforts of others looking into this. If I come across as barely intelligent, you're sorely mistaken - I'm a dumb piece of s
