Abandon All Fear

What nobody else seems to be saying…

Archive for the ‘The Love of Libel’ Category

[‘N’ is for…] BNP, protests and general annoyance.

Posted by BHudson on June 9, 2009

Well, the putsch has come off well, and the British Nazi Party have taken two seats in the European Parliament. As an extremist party, they won the votes because they appeared untainted by the uproar over expenses and the following witch hunt. Most people, of course vote irrationally – it seems to have been easy for some 0.7% of the population to overlook the racist fearmongering because of their concerns about immigration, and a general dissatisfaction with mainstream parties. Irrationality, of course, is at the heart of the BNP’s strength.

Nick Griffin, a man for whom I have many words and little time, is always denying his party’s racist ideals whilst endorsing Party style manuals with phrases such as ‘you should not refer to British Asians or British Muslims, for the simple reason that such people do not exist.’ Like all abhorrent groups, they thrive on oppression, which gives them a chance to whine about their freedom of speech and cast themselves as defenders of democracy. Now, I have very little sympathy for Griffin, and was even slightly pleased by the disressed look on his normally smug face as he fled the mob outside Parliament. That said, throwing eggs is yet to effect any substantial political change.

In this case, it has just let him say that they prevented him from bearing the scutiny of the media. Public scrutiny is what this party needs most. Protests are very well, but a few well placed questions in public would serve better to show just how racist they are.

Times is ‘ard, and people are angry. This produces the ‘perfect storm’ Griffin had been waiting for to give him a foothold in government. Perhaps it is the supposed detrimental effects of immigration (my view on immigrants is extremely simple, and rather unpopular these days, but that’s another post), or the fear of a loss of sovereignty, or anger at the mainstream parties, but suddenly the BNP seemed somewhat more palatable to the voters. An increasingly popular lie: ‘I know they used to be Nazi knuckle-draggers, but they’ve changed – they’re just like us, even if some of the Nazi knuckle-draggers are in the shadows.’ The truth – the Nazi knuckle-draggers are running the show. The BNP will never be civilised or worthy of a vote.

PS. Sorry for my long absence. This is really just an opinion article that seemed worthwhile regarding the recent EP elections. Now I’ve got more time, I might be able to come up with a couple of posts on political theory.

Advertisements

Posted in Bollotics, Fact Erosion, Free as in Speech, Little Hitlers, Opinion, Protest, Smear Campaigns, The Love of Libel | 6 Comments »

[Atheism] Probably

Posted by Lex Fear on February 15, 2009

I was really happy to see the atheist bus campaign get into full swing. God Bless those atheists, another medium for which they can use to rage against their parents.

I have purposefully held off from writing about it until now, after the dust has settled and things can be fully absorbed.

I’ll start by saying I also found myself disappointed by the weakness of the message. I would much preferred something more assertive, more disdainful of religion. Instead we get probably.

Funnily enough all sorts of speculation took place in the atheist blogosphere and fora as to why include the word. There were some rather feeble apologetics using such idioms as “intellectually honest”.

Since I had followed this saga from it’s inception and was following the commentary at The Friendly Atheist I thought I should help bring clarity to the perception of the ‘Christian response’ as well as information as to how probably got in there:

1) British Christians views on the signs range from ‘Meh’ to ‘Great! More opportunities to talk about God”.

The fact is the Christian religion is led by a man who was violently, brutally killed as a convicted criminal – Call it insane if you will but most genuine Christians see persecution in any form as a privelege and opportunity to stand with Christ and spread the gospel!

Through history, the church has done better in times of persecution and it will always.

2) There are a few who are weak in faith and perhaps new Christians, or they have lost their way and these will protest.. and when they do the media will always give them the microphone to broadcast their ignorance.

But so far the worst response I’ve heard from any Christian is that it’s silly. That’s it.

3) I personally wish that they had dropped the ‘probably’ and gone for something much stronger. I wish it DID say “THERE IS NO GOD”.. with it the slogan is very poor and really isn’t worthy to be considered an attack or something like that. (Also the excuse given to include “probably” has to be the weakest excuse I have ever heard- very stupid)

The proposer of this campaign – a Grauniad journalist – originally gave the reason that she had seen ‘probably’ used in another ad (see Carlsberg) and assumed it was for legal reasons. It’s not, it’s a nod to the British talent for understatement. Silly woman!

Must try harder.

Which was quickly refuted by a commenter called Aj:

The Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP) advised her that “the inclusion of the word ‘probably’ makes it less likely to cause offence, and therefore be in breach of the Advertising Code.”

Lots of people are getting this wrong, so here’s a quote. Lots of atheists don’t believe “there is no god”, they can only agree with statements like “there is probably no god, although I and others prefer “almost certainly” as it’s more accurate.

He went on to include a quote from Ariane Sherine (from a later article).

There’s another reason I’m keen on the “probably”: it means the slogan is more accurate, as even though there’s no scientific evidence at all for God’s existence, it’s also impossible to prove that God doesn’t exist (or that anything doesn’t).

Oh dear, how intellectually dishonest. He left me no choice but to quote the original article by Sherine in response:

“After that, I Googled Carlsberg and found this marketing site, which suggests that using the word “probably” at the start of the ad saved Carlsberg from litigation.” – Ariane Sherine, Atheists – Gimme Five, 20/06/08

Long before the article you quoted. They’ve given all manner of excuses since then.

And the Carlsberg Ad:

http://www.brandrepublic.com/Campaign/News/472122/Scandinavia-Great-nordic-conquerors/

“According to Jakob Knudsen, Carlsberg’s international brand director: “The Scandinavian understated sense of humour is an integral part of the brand’s DNA. If you take other premium Scandinavian brands such as Bang & Olufsen, they won’t tell you they’re the best. Instead, they let the quality speak for itself.”

Only America would produce, “King of Beers” or “World’s Finest” and market their products as the biggest, best, favourite, fastest, greatest etc…

This advertising (up until recently perhaps) would never work in the UK, but picture 2 blokes in a pub, one declares “This is the best lager I’ve ever tasted!”, the other, being British is likely to respond “I don’t think so, I think I’ve tasted better.” But if the first was to casually mention “This is probably the best lager I’ve ever tasted” then the other may likely agree with him “Probably.”

Typical MSM journalist, gets her research from an internet forum rather than the source.

Oddly, no-one then seemed interesting in arguing the point with me and just ignored my second comment completely. Not what you would expect from intellectually honest people but there you go.

Here’s a great quote from Lib Dem MP, Martin Turner:

Imagine that you saw any of the following advertisements:
“The speed camera probably isn’t loaded”
“You probably won’t die in a car crash”
“You probably did turn off the gas”
Telling someone that something probably won’t happen doesn’t stop them worrying about it. Quite the contrary. And, if the millions of lottery ticket buyers are anything to go by, telling someone that something they very much hope for is unlikely to happen does nothing to stop them hoping.
If “there’s probably no God” is the strongest statement that, on reflection, atheists dare to make in public, then they have moved a long way from the certainties implied in their name.

But my favourite quote on worry has to this:

“Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more important than food, and the body more important than clothes? Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they? Who of you by worrying can add a single hour to his life?” – Jesus

As well as beating The Grauniad to the post by almost 2000 years, there’s something rather more elegant, meaningful and poetic than “Now stop worrying and enjoy your life”, don’t you think (if you are being intellectually honest)?

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Posted in Apologetics, Doublespeak, Doublethink, Duh!, Laymans Theology, Londonland, Minitruth, Opinion, Propaganda, Quoteyness, The Love of Libel, Uncircumcised Philistines, V for Vendetta, Warring Memes | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments »

[Asinine] Bankrupt Millionaire: Indiana Who?

Posted by Lex Fear on June 26, 2008

Looks like another fool got into a legal letter flame war with The Pirate Bay… and lost… spectacularly.

I’ve never heard of Indiana Gregg, but I sure as hell won’t be buying or downloading any music after reading her and her representatives ridiculous and embarrassing name-dropping bombing in their email.

“Having sat on cross parliamentary committees, resolved to regenerating music and culture in my country, i’m afraid you may just have picked the wrong person to cross swords with on this occasion.” Ian Morrow (courtesy of TPB)

Very stupid. Here’s the list of emails of the elites that Ian invokes to show how powerful and connected he is:

Ian Morrow <ian@gr8pop.net>
Alex.Salmond.msp@scottish.parliament.uk
Pauline McNeill <pauline.mcneill.msp@scottish.parliament.uk>
Barbara Orbison <BOrbison@orbison.com>
eugene.duffy@mirror.co.uk
Kenny.MacAskill.msp@scottish.parliament.uk
john dingwall <j.dingwall@dailyrecord.co.uk>
Jack.Mcconnell.msp@scottish.parliament.uk
Margo.MacDonald.msp@scottish.parliament.uk
Duncan McCrone <duncan.mccrone@mcps.co.uk>
Mick Blacklock <mick.blacklock@ppluk.com>
Robbie Miller <robbie.miller@jacobsonmiller.com>
alan.boyd@bbc.co.uk
phil <phil@gr8pop.net>
graham@gr8pop.net
Andy Harrower <andy.harrower@mcps-prs-alliance.co.uk>
Mark Taylor <mark.taylor@mcps-prs-alliance.co.uk>
Stanley Banks <stanley@wardlawbanks.com>
Paul Bedford <Paul.Bedford@ingeniousmedia.co.uk>
Veronica Tyrrell <Veronica.Tyrrell@scotent.co.uk>
George Falconer <george.falconer@scotent.co.uk>
Connie Howard <CHowardMus@aol.com>
thom hardwell <thomsongs1@yahoo.com>
jimdaddario@hotmail.com
Magnus Martinsson <martinsson@playgroundmusic.com>
<torgny@playgroundmusic.com>
David Philpott <davidphilpott@philpottreed.co.uk>
Christian Ulf Hansen <christian.ulf@virgin.net>
douglasmcfarlane@btinternet.com

Normally I’ll just read the legal threats, laugh and forget about it but this one is the most asinine and presumptious yet. Just for curiousity, I’ll be watching out for copywrong discussion by the Scottish Parliament and press articles from The Mirror, The Daily Record and The BBC on copywrong.

It will be interesting to see how much influence the small label, bankrupt millionaire, Indiana Gregg has over these groups, if any. I’m aslo interested in seeing if the Scottish Parliament works for the people or the corporates.

HT: Torrentfreak

Oh and BTW: Ian, copyright kills culture, it kills creativity. Would we have heard of Shakespeare if media companies had existed in the 17th Century to make sure that none of his plays were reproduced?

How much exposure has Indiana Gregg actually had as a result of sharing of her music between friends? (a: probably not much TPB can do for her – click on the link for irony-goodness)

As far as anyone who has an ounce of intellect is concerned, Bittorrent is the new radio. But then is that really free?

It wasn’t video that killed the radio star, it was his own record label.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Posted in Bad Company, Copywrong, Little Hitlers, Profiteering, Quoteyness, Technology, The Love of Libel, Uncircumcised Philistines, V for Vendetta, Wealth Creation, WhatTheyDontWantU2C | Leave a Comment »

Bigger Fish Eats Big Fish

Posted by Lex Fear on September 21, 2007

I don’t suppose anyone’s seen the irony in it yet? Tim Ireland of Bloggerheads published some unfavourable commentary about Russian tyrant millionaire Alisher Usmanov and his lawyers ordered the England based webhost to take it down.

What I find interesting is the reaction of those, friend and foe alike, to the take-down. Mostly political bloggers (and mostly self-titled ‘liberal’s) who have been accusing each other and tossing about libel threats for years. Most of these people were the first to put up those stupid ‘Find Lowde’ campaign buttons and bemoan her many ‘libelous’ blog posts.

Suddenly it’s all turned from empty threats, hollow accusations, angry rants and become a little bit more real and threatening hasn’t it? Perhaps those who are quick to shout libel will now consider what they are saying before they commit.

A lot of discussion has taken place recently over at Cecilieaux’s blog regarding a post he made on Felicity Jane Lowde. I think his summary is spot on, in his own commentary on the explosive response that took place:

“Someone blogs about you and you don’t like it? Ignore it or blog back. Someone e-mails you and you don’t want it? Delete it, filter it out and so on.
People who get riled about these things need to take a deep breath and repeat after me: “This is just a hobby.” Breathe in, breathe out. Repeat three times. Feels better, no?
What is it about computers that induces this kind of behavior?
I write pretty much the way I speak. Most of you would not like me and — surprise! — I probably would not like you.
But I sense that some of the nonsense posted here by the commenters goes way beyond what they are accustomed to saying to someone on the street. For example, how many commenters would really go around referring to women as “tits” in the presence of women capable of beating them up or, at a minimum, shaming them?
Nonetheless, thank you all for providing a window into cyberobsessions that I never imagined existed.
I’m sure also that American visitors were also enlightened as to the appalling lack of liberties in Britain — my sympathies. As you rise and I go to sleep, rest assured I will honor your U.S. constitutional right to rant. Let the circus continue.” – Elephant in the Blog

It’s nice to rely on something as a weapon till it’s used against you isn’t it?

 

UPDATE: Tim Worstall has published a list of bloggers who have commented on and criticised the actions of the Russian tyrant billionaire. Whilst I stand in solidarity against this libel action, if you want to see what I mean about irony, take some random links from that list and type in the following to google: “libel site:[url of blog]”. It won’t be long before you find some who have previously threatened libel action against fellow bloggers.

Posted in Blogidarity, Justice & Mercy, Little Hitlers, Londonland, Morals & Ethics, Opinion, Realpolitik, The Love of Libel, V for Vendetta | 31 Comments »

More UK Libel and Blogging

Posted by Lex Fear on September 8, 2007

Blogger Lord Matt has received 2 take-down letters from a Dr M G Notley, who he exposed for using bad SEO practices. Readers will remember LM from a previous post highlighting a legal battle with his council (which he successfully defended I can now add).

“Dr M G Notley really does not know a lost cause when he sees one.  He emailed me a while back and quite rudely accused me of not telling the truth in my article while at the same time proving firm evidence of what I was saying.  Not content with that he then has paid for solicitors to harass me for blogging about this man who (in my own opinion) is a charlton.

It is my opinion that he is a fool, a black hat SEO of the worst and stupidest kind and his folly is (also in my opinion) only compounded by the fact that he makes a loss carrying out business activities that I believe were only set up to promote his own books.  Activities that he claims cost his company money.

It is my intention to fight this take down notice as it is not only true but a warning to people that might be taken in but such (in my opinion) villainy.  I am going to request my fellow SEO experts of all skill levels to write a declaration post that states clearly and precisely that in your official opinion as SEOs if I was right or wrong and if right how so and if wrong but what degree. I am asking for this not because I want links particularly (use rel nofollow if it makes you feel better) but because it will be needed to protect the freedom of speech on the internet by bloggers.”

LM blogged his concern because the domain writerspromote.com is apparently “stuffed with keywords” and “begging to become black-listed”. It seems the keywords are gone, but the horrible table layout and huge scroll down gap between the content and the copyright notice at the bottom show evidence that there may have been something there.

It’s yet another example of a company that would rather sue to protect their presence on the internet, than change business practices, work for their reputation and therefore discredit any critics.

 

Posted in Bad Company, Little Hitlers, Pharisees, Profiteering, The Love of Libel | 3 Comments »

Is ‘Web Sheriff’ just a Cowboy Outfit?

Posted by Lex Fear on September 2, 2007

Here’s a hypothetical question.

Web Sheriff is some asslochen on the internets issuing ‘legal’ threats to fans of music bands who have put up tracks for listening and promoting said bands on their websites and blogs.

I did some checking and discovered the “web sheriff” was set up by a company called Entertainment Law Associates which claims to offer “Business Affairs & Management Consultancy”. They claim to offer some vague legal services, but sound more like agents than lawyers, and in fact, on their front page, they feature the disclaimer:

“ELA is not a law firm (and indeed it must be emphasised that we are not practising solicitors)”

Interesting, considering that Mr John Giacobbi a.k.a. self-proclaimed “Web Sheriff” claims to be “protecting your rights on the internet”. Just look at the media quotes on the front page of Web Sheriff’s website:

“Web Sheriff, an organisation that patrols against infringements of intellectual rights and reputations” Sunday Times

“Web Sheriff, which patrols the internet for illegal music recordings on behalf of record companies” The Guardian

“Web Sheriff, an agency that policies online piracy of copyrights and trademarks” Mail on Sunday

They sound more like Wikipedia definitions than rave reviews, don’t you think? In fact, delve deeper into the site and see the services the Sheriff offers:

“Internet Auditing”

For the rest of us, this means ‘googling’.

“New Release Protection”

That means googling for a title before it’s released.

“On-line Rights Enforcement”

We write a threatening letter that we have no way of backing-up, apart from hiring real lawyers.

“On-line Rights Administration”

We show you how to set up a fan website.

Now for the hypothetical part…

A quick google round the internets will pull up lot’s of indexing services that list Web Sheriff in the ‘law’ category: here, here and here, even describing the Sheriff in terms of ‘legal enforcement’.

About 5 years ago (sorry, the only archive I could find in a short time) a prison officer narrowly escaped jail for sending fake legal letters. He faked the letters himself, threatening court action against the recipient. The letters were discovered to be fake after the recipient showed them to a real solicitor.

Since Web Sheriff is “not a law firm” and neither “practising solicitors”, presumably, letters written by Web Sheriff to someone sharing a music file on their website are also not legal letters. In fact, could it be argued that they are fake if they make certain claims or threaten legal action?

What would happen if someone was to take a letter written by Web Deputy, to their solicitor for clarification and that solicitor declared it to be a fake?

I don’t offer music tracks here, so I can’t test this hypothesis, however I would advise anyone who has recently received a letter from this pretender to immediately consult their solicitor and determine the legality of the letter in question (though, if I one day make enough money, I would gladly test this one).

Maybe we can get this Web Deviant hauled before the real Sheriffs office?

[—|—|—]

For a hilarious response to one of “Web Sheriff’s” threat letters (and ensuing dialogue), check out The Pirate Bay’s legal section.

 

Posted in Bad Company, Copywrong, Little Hitlers, Predatory Systems, Profiteering, Takeback, The Love of Libel | 1 Comment »

Ghost Master

Posted by Lex Fear on August 14, 2007

So I bought this game on Saturday for 97p from Tesco and I haven’t been able to stop playing it, which is why I haven’t blogged. I tend to only buy old games, (1) because they’re cheap, (2) because they’re guaranteed to be compatible with my newer system and (3) I like retro.

So I’ve begun testing wordpress for this blog, for compatibility with the existing content I have on the server. I’ve just had to purchase another database for the testing itself which is a bit annoying, but my plan is to have this temporary setup before I start surfing for a new web-host.

So far I found a real good sounding web-host which is compatible with the values of this site (and paranoia that one time something I publish will cause me to be shut down): nearlyfreespeech.net

You pay only for your server and bandwidth usage, they give you a private mailbox (so your own address is not revealed), a special phone and fax and a custom email address.

Here’s a statement on their FAQ (my bold emphasis):

“If you wish to host a controversial site in the US, it behooves you to know the law, particularly this one, and how to use it to your advantage in the event of a dispute. You should also be prepared for a downtime of some or all “allegedly infringing” material for a couple of weeks if the copyright owner wants to fight.

We adhere to the entire law very closely. We do not generally pull the plug on an entire site if, for example, someone claims that a single graphic is infringing. We do our best to remove only the content that the copyright owner specifically identifies as allegedly infringing. We allow and encourage the use of the “putback notification” process when material is incorrectly identified as infringing. But we do not automatically terminate a member’s service merely for receiving a complaint alleging infringement. (However, actually infringing someone’s copyright does violate our TACOS and will generally result in immediate termination.)

Keep in mind that while we aren’t lawyers, neither are we idiots. We can tell the difference between people harassing our members via the DMCA and cases where our service is genuinely being misused, and we can adjust our attitude accordingly. Fortunately, both of these cases are very rare.

Of course, not all complaints are DMCA complaints. We very much enjoy “I hate that site. I demand you take it down!” messages, of which we receive a very large number (from, ironically, a relatively small number of people). Other than pointing and laughing, however, we tend not to respond to such demands.”

Pretty awesome huh? Unfortunately they take payment in US$ so I need to contact them to discuss that, not sure what the risks are in terms of the exchange rate or how I’d go about paying.

If anyone knows of a UK equivalent, I would love to know. Lyc0s offer a pretty good service in terms of support and installation but something I read in .NET magazine recently by a Lyc0s executive caused me concern in how they would handle a copyright or libel complaint. As you can see I mention no names and have taken precaution to hide keywords!

See you on the new blog…

Posted in Metablog, Morals & Ethics, Takeback, The Love of Libel | Leave a Comment »

Holiday Hiatus

Posted by Lex Fear on July 29, 2007

Munich (37) Alex Fear and the Mrs are officially on holiday for 2 weeks from tomorrow, so the blogging will be light. We’re actually looking for new flat to rent but we may just skip to the beach if the sun keeps (or catch a cheap ‘environMENTALly unfriendly’ flight away for a few days).

In the meantime, any time I get at the ‘puter will be devoted to testing a new CMS and thinking the best way to go about transferring this to a WordPress blog (domain name/content). Look forward to changes, and better organisation of the resources (devoted to social action etc).

In the meantime, click on one of the labels below to read through some previous topics.

Posted in Absolute Power, Apologetics, Bad Company, Bank Robbers, Copland, Copywrong, Duh!, Fallible Design, Financial Terrorism, Global Alarming, Ha-has, Housing Market Myths, Justice & Mercy, Laymans Theology, Little Hitlers, Londonland, Morals & Ethics, Opinion, Pharisees, Predatory Systems, Profiteering, Propaganda, Property Market, Realpolitik, Religion & Science, Takeback, Technology, The Love of Libel, The Purpose Missing Church, The Religious Wrong, Tick-Box Culture, Uncircumcised Philistines, V for Vendetta, Video, Wealth Creation, WhatTheyDontWantU2C, Xenophobia | Leave a Comment »

Where’s The Love? Alfred the Cake

Posted by Lex Fear on July 26, 2007

inboxTroll-bashing time again. The anonymous commenter ‘Alfred the Cake’ has been banned from this website. It seems the Cake was beginning to develop an unhealthy obsession with the blog so I’m taking preventative action.

I have an idea of who it possibly might be, given away by the idioms and colloquialisms employed, however I do not wish to continue to casting pearls before swine. Therefore AOL user ACCB4266.ipt.aol.com, has had their IP address 172.203.66.102 blocked from this server, and will have to find another computer if they want to read this. Might I suggest a broadband connection too, saves waiting for the images to load.

The nonsense began in this post. Now I will gladly debate with anyone who has an intelligent criticism of something I’ve written, as witnessed in a number of times on this blog. I will even allow myself to be proved wrong and make corrections as in this post, for example. However, I’ll only tolerate insults as long as an argument has merit. Once it’s devolved into childish babbling, name-calling and goading, no-one is going to learn anything from the experience.

It doesn’t take a genius to point out the irony displayed by ‘the Cake’ when ‘defending’ a victim based on the actions of a persecutor, by replicating the actions of that said persecutor. It’s not about defending victims at all, it’s more to do with the cult of celebrity.

So here’s the new comments policy anyhow:

  • Baited comments that include lines such as “And no WAY will you let this one through – it makes you look bad!”, “Dish it out, but you can’t take it…” or in anyway reference ‘free speech’, will be treated as a bare-faced attempt to get the comment published. They will be rejected without a second thought. The aim of this is to encourage critics to actually present a good, reasoned argument.
  • Comments that simply link to some article without one word from the author have the appearance of comment spam. Comment spam will be rejected.
  • If you run out of good counter arguments, admit it rather than resorting to insults. If this happens your comments may be rejected.
  • Criticism is welcomed, but must stay in context. Criticism of my post on environMENTALISM should stay in the remit of environMENTALISM and in the comments of that post. Carrying your bile into the next post on a completely different topic, or turning the argument into a personal attack, will get your comment rejected and unpublished.

Below are some tips on style and form when writing comments:

  • Don’t say something like “I’ll leave you and your titchy traffic site alone. You don’t deserve my time…” then come back the next day to spend half an hour on posting another poison-filled rant, it comes across slightly inconsistent.
  • Saying things along the lines of “If you’re going to trash victims who write about their experiences, then what about fair comment on Christians who advertise their piety?” only elevates your troll-like status, since it shows you’ve not taken the time to actually read the blog.
  • Don’t expect to offer criticism without my own or someone else’s rebuttal, then get all pissy about it.
  • Do, reveal your identity (or at least online identity) if you expect to be taken seriously.
  • If you post a reasonable comment and it didn’t get accepted right away, it is because I am away from my computer sometimes for long periods of time. Not because I am trying to shutdown dissenters.
  • If you disagree on a point of theology, or political opinion then offer your interpretation, knowledge or source, don’t just declare your credentials and expect everyone to be wowed to silence. Penis size means nothing if you don’t know what to do with it.

On other matters…

Uh huh, the forum has been a failure so far, which I was prepared for. I guess I didn’t pimp it enough, but I’m actually thinking of doing another make-over of the website. The forum will soon disappear, I’m considering experimenting with Xoops content management system, either shifting this over to a WordPress blog (which offers better management) or even disenfranchising the blog from the site, back to Blogger or WordPress hosting. I’m also thinking of moving or changing the domain to a new web-host. I’ll try to make any changes as smooth as possible but don’t be surprised if the blog vanishes temporarily.

I do hope that at some point in the future I can remove comment moderation, I really want to move on to other topics…

Posted in Blogidarity, Little Hitlers, Pharisees, The Love of Libel, V for Vendetta | 2 Comments »

The Water In North London

Posted by Lex Fear on July 19, 2007

C

Controversial
Putting myself up for a Northsquad hit again.

It’s been hard to ignore the volume of pageviews I’ve had from “Felicity Jane Lowde” searches. I blogged on the Rachel North stalking saga back in May, and it generated the most comments I’ve ever had for a post. I’ve had links from other bloggers who, like me, took a step back and tried to see the issues from a rational viewpoint.

Sure Lowde may have been locked up and she may be in need of psychiatric care, but the fact that she is the ‘loser’ in this scenario, doesn’t actually improve my opinion of Rachel North or her supporters one bit. In fact, I’ve been surprised by how judgmental and vitriolic these self-labeled ‘liberal’ bloggers really have been towards the mentally ill. In response to one attack blog, they ganged up and created multiple attack blogs. In response to nasty comments, they made nasty comments. I don’t see the difference except that Lowde is behind bars and they are not.

I put comment moderation on this blog, when I started to get into a circular argument with a troll and it was successful in silencing the troll without silencing those that chose to voice reasonable disagreement. Which means I did not need to report anyone to the police for harassment.

Since there is still so much interest about this, I thought I’d take the initiative to try and compose a list of those blogs that have offered thoughtful analysis. If I link you below and it generates you unwanted attention, please let me know and I’ll remove the link immediately (of course if you want me to add yours, likewise get in touch). Here is a list, in no particular order, of blogs that have not been drawn into mob-mentality:

Drowning and Other Fragments

Tim Worstall
Isadub
Living With The Conspiracy 24-7
Famous For 15 Megapixels
Vandaweb
Duff & Nonsense
Libel Lawyers London (links to a good article by Craig H)
Ronpanasonic
The Policemans Blog
Mike Powers Not A Blog
Southpawpunch

It’s a sad fact that with the onset of web 2.0 making it easier for idiots to publish online, that a growing number now see it as a publicity extension, rather than the great technical and informational revolution that it is.

Take for example, Brian Retkin, who I’d never heard of before (but now his recent actions have allowed me to form an opinion of him), who is suing Google for… wait for it… linking to websites that have defamed him!

“Lawyers for Dotworlds, which registers distinctive domain names, have sent Google what lawyers call a “letter before action”.

Mr Renton, 48, the company’s managing director, of Wembley, north London, said he would sue if Google did not take down the links about his company posted anonymously. “Based on what I know today, I am determined to go ahead with this,” he added.” – The Telegraph

And guess where Mr Renton is from? … North London! Something in the water, perhaps?

It’s time to seriously consider the nature and the future of the internet, because free information is under threat. Perhaps a change in the law is required, but if the world continues to allow bloggers and web-publishers to be taken to court for publishing their own opinions or thoughts then we can kiss the internet as we know it goodbye.

We’re one step away from a law companies setting up “No Win No Fee” sites for anyone who feels they have been libeled, defamed or had their feelings hurt.

Long live FJL’s blog! Not because it’s right or wrong, but because it’s an opinion, a record, and it exists.

We should not modify the past in order to fit the present.

EDIT (After a quick thought): I wonder how much revenue/incoming links Google generates for Mr Retkins site, dotworlds.net? If he is successful in his idiotic lawsuit, couldn’t Google just remove all links to any material mentioning dotworlds.net and therefore render his site ignored and obsolete?

That would be awesome… c’mon Google, your motto is “don’t be evil” now teach an evildoer a lesson!

UPDATE: Southpawpunch emails…

Alex
I see that you have listed some blogs that mention  the Lowde/North affair
You may like to consider my post –
[added above]

(towards the end)
This post generated complaint emails from North.

Posted in Blogidarity, Justice & Mercy, Londonland, Metablog, Opinion, Pharisees, Propaganda, Realpolitik, The Love of Libel, V for Vendetta | 19 Comments »