The governing Saskatchewan Party has released the new appointments to Crown Investment Corp's Board of Directors. The PDF of their brief histories is available here (PDF, 3 pp, 13 kb). I see the PDF has been corrected for Grant Gayton. The previous version caused a bit of a stir in some circles.

By far, the most "political" of appointees is Janice MacKinnon sitting for Investment Saskatchewan Corporation.

It's awfully inconvienient for the Dippers to call down the appointment of a former NDP Finance Minister, especially given her popularity with moderates.

Janice is known for speaking her mind, an admirable trait, but one that hasn't endeared her to the radical left of the Calvert NDP. I imagine the Links, the Axworthy's and the Romanow's are laughing uproariously at this appointment.

It's John Manley writ local.

Cheers,
lance

Posted at: 20:13 | Comments (0) | [sask] | G

Update: See this. The IP address was a web caching proxy and not a DHCP assigned address as these posts assume.

Previously I've talked about DHCP and how it relates to certain comments that some are alleging Mr. Warman wrote. I explained how both Bridging and Routing work for the purpose of showing how only 4047 possible network interfaces could have been the origination of the hateful comments referenced at FreeDominion.

Today is a little more non-exact, I'll be talking about odds. I am not a lawyer, as many have mentioned, I am a tech, and techs like numbers. Indeed, to a tech, numbers mean more than English. English can be manipulated and massaged into saying pretty much anything without saying anything at all. Numbers are different. 1 is 1, 2 is 2 and 4047 possible customers out of 32 million possible people means exactly that.

Connie states:

The logs were submitted as evidence and they were never challenged because they were pulled directly from the server and the last modify date was around the time of the Cools post (which was well before Lucy ever registered).

That removes doubt about whether the IP address, the browser version, the OS version or the timestamps are accurate. They are.

So, odds. I've been a little preempted in this post by Holmwood on a comment on Scott's thread. It was quite annoying actually to read pretty much what my post was about :). C'est la vie. A post is a post is going to be a post.

W3Schools states in September of 2003, 12.1% of visitors to their websites used Windows 98. (Windows 2000 was released in Feb, 2000, Windows XP was released in 2001). While there are numerous plug-ins and methods to modify the OS stamp now, there wasn't in 2003 other than programming a web interface. We can safely assume that the OS stamp isn't forged.

Additionally, FreeDominion offers the browser version, "Mozilla 4.0 compatible MSIE 6.0". What exactly does that mean? It means that the browser was Microsoft Internet Explorer 6.0, but that it is compatible to Mozilla 4.0.. Once again W3Schools observed statistics regarding browsers. 69.7% of browsers in September of 2003 were listed as Internet Explorer 6.

Let's narrow down those numbers, eh?

We know only 4047 possible computers could have been responsible for the post in question. Now we know that only 12.1% of operating systems being used matched the system logged. 12.1% of 4047 is 490. Now, of that we assume only 69.7% are using MSIE 6.0. That gives us, 341 possible computers.

Out of 32 million people in Canada we know that 1 out of a possible 341 wrote that message.

In September, 2003 Netcraft measured 43 million, one hundred and 43 thousand, three hundred and seventy-four (43,143,374) websites.

What are the odds of one of those 341 hitting the site in question, posting the stuff in question? Especially where Mr. Warman admitted to submitting similar comments to the comment in question, at a later date.

I mentioned earlier, I am not a lawyer, so I don't know what the turning point is for litigation, either criminal or civil, but as a tech...not good odds, Mr. Warman.

Cheers,
lance

Posted at: 11:40 | Comments (13) | [misc] | G