That is unreal. So that's why we all had to get new log-in info?


Argh. I am going to close my account.

incredibly unreal.

i mean, i get that she's trying to find out who's infiltrating her site and giving all that information to the kimkinsexposed site authors...even that some of the members might be glad for these kind of measures for that reason...

but at what cost?

i don't know about them...but i would never have enjoyed feeling like someone could track my EVERY move on the site and especially for a certain amount of clicks after i left the site. what i did on the site was my business...what i did when i left the site each day, ABSOLUTELY no business of hers.

surely the members can't be ok with this, can they?

i can't imagine...

I just posted the whole article in the Painful Revelations thread. So far the only post to follow ignores my post.

I am sure it will be deleted soon. I also sent a message to tech that I want any trackers disable and my account closed.

It isn't just an invasion of privacy for the kimkins members, but for others, as well.

Basically, what she is doing is watching the IP addresses, agents, timestamps, and referrers of all image requests made to her server. So if anyone posts a call for an image that is stored on her server onto another site, she can see the IP, referrer (what website/page the image is on), and user agent (browser, OS, etc.) of every individual who loads that page, unless they have graphics turned off.

So she's either watching all the logged requests for images that are stored on her server that her member(s) posted innocently, or she has people purposefully posting them so she can track who loads the page the image they are on and sees them. She can then see which of her members are loading which pages at other sites. That's not necessarily so informative, as even lurkers will show. But if the site allows images im PM, or if the person's timestamps match certain ways or post/replies match, then it's not difficult to figure out Nick Y at her site is also Nick H at another site.

BTW, every web sever I'm aware of logs these things. It is only when we study them for the purpose of analyzing who is on pages outside our own site, or plant them elsewhere for those reasons like that, that it gets unethical, IMO.

Every site logs every page and image request you make to its server, and many webmasters study the click patterns so they can optimize traffic flow/usability.

She - none of us - can see what pages you are on outside her server, unless the page includes an image that comes from her server. (or a script, but we hope few forums or blogs allow users to post those.)

(I would add that that is also how advertisers develop a "profile" - by having their ads on a multitude of sites, they can gather a collection of sites/pages a person visits)

Well that was quick. My account is gone already, I think they responded to me within 10 minutes.

The thing is, she still has your IP address. If there was any doubt, all they need to do is match the timestamps of the just-created and received PMs with the logged IPs. Emails you send have your IP too.

If you're on dial-up, your IP will change a lot, so it's not as easy to track. But most of us these days have a static IP, so it gets pretty easy to id you by your IP address. (Which often gives away what city or state you're in, too.)

None of this is anything to worry about, IMO, unless you are a member there who is trying to avoid letting her know that you are reading or posting to these other sites or blogs, or who you are on the other sites.

She just emailed that she would refund my money but said all that was a big bunch of lies. That it was part of a smear campaign against her and that anyone can use cookies.

Spyware is routine dropped on a computer without the computer owners knowledge. I'm not saying they're using spyware, but it's a possibility. It's also possible they're tracking with the cookie they make you accept in the login. I've seen some pretty sophisticated cookies that can track out URL's clicked to once you're off a site. I'm not saying they're doing it from cookies, but that it is a possibility.

LOL - was that a freudian slip that it's in their cookies programming?

I didn't even notice

True, but to the best of my knowledge, all of those methods are illegal.

Of course, so are deceptive trade practices, so I guess ya never know. It sure would be suicidal, though.

Of course... OK I better not say that.

Oh the thread is going on and on.....someone posted about you, probably thinking she's safe since you're now gone:


For what it's worth, robinb is actively participating in the fascination thread. That explains to me why she's so upset about any posssible tracking measures

i don't post on the fascination thread anymore but i don't remember seeing you there when i was there before, robin?

Thanks for your comments. First of all I'm also a Kimkins diet critic. I' m going to answer your comments first then get into that.

(1) Most of the blame I see to Kimkins diet is for eliminating dietary fat which is actually not eliminated, it is only replaced with body fat. Can this make a great difference?

Concerning lacking nutrients, they say that about low carb diets in general. They say that the supplements we get cannot supply us with everything we need. I'm not against that except that I have been on Atkins diet for 4 years and have had no problem. I take plenty of supplements and they have been doing great for me.

(2) Forget about the 300 calories which you eat when you are on that diet. Your body does not look at it. Your body has been served two items:

1. A dish of 300 calories of food.
2. All you can eat buffet of body fat.

If it could successfully get 1500 calories from that buffet, it knows only that it has been served 1800 calories in additions to all the supplements you get.

(3) Our bodies must have at least 70 grams of protein a day in order to perform vital functions like muscle repair,..etc. When we are on a low carb diet we need more protein in order to get the minimum necessary glucose for the body. So we need at least 100 grams of protein a day in order to live healthy. This translates to 400 calories.

With this in mind, both you and me can see that 300 calories of food cannot supply the amount of protein necessary for healthy living. It tells us also why Kimkins' food must be made mostly of protein. There is simply no place for fat unless the calorie allowance goes up.

I see two problems with Kimkins diet.

(1) I'm against counting calories and portion control. I think if you eat less than you want, you will lose additional weight but you can't maintain it unless you live all your life eating less than you want.

(2) I don't see that anyone should eat as low as 300 calories in order to guarantee getting the necessary amount of protein. Also, I don't think that it is good to reduce carbs dramatically for a long period of time.