Gotcha! It waren't the (supposedly) inadvertent post you made using perfect English.

Technoid discourse...when emails are sent, they are tagged with the address of the SERVER they were sent from. This does not by any means identify a particular individual sending email from that server, of course.

BUT...starting back in WW Two, radio signals were traced back to the sender by getting a bearing from first one location (which identified a line, anywhere along which could be the party transmitting); then by getting a bearing from a second location (which identified a [theoretical point] where the two ines intersected). We won't go into why this was not refeered to a BIangulation, but was referred to as TRIangulation...too techinical, and anyway, the analogy falls apart at about this point.

In today's world, though, one can perform approximately the same feat by getting two intersecting SERVER addresses.

THEN, by examining all possibilities..i.e., which agents used the same server (note: not the same internet PROVIDERS, but just the servers from which those messages came, never mind whether it was from AOL or whatever), one can get a third vector.

This intersection proved interesting. I know who you are, roberto.

BUT I AIN'T TELLING.

Yet!

You are one cool dude. I salute you; you nailed, I think, ALL of us.

bbeque: TRIangulation actually added a third step. If you could find the transmitter from three locations, you could establish a little triangle inside which the transmitter must be located. The BIangulation thing targetted a general area. TRIangulation narrowed it down considerably. I imagine if they had tried QUADrangulation (which, to my knowledge, nobody ever did), they could have found the street corner.
Congratulations on finding Roberto, if you really have - remember that BIangulation isn't nearly as precise as TRIangulation. I dare you to tell who it is! Then, there's Arturo.