View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Thu Oct 17, 2019 2:30 pm




Reply to topic  [ 219 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22  Next
Lomax v. WikiMedia Foundation, Inc. et al 
Author Message
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2019 9:20 am
Posts: 269
Reply with quote
Updates [September 4]:

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov ... 0.30.1.pdf

TL;DR

1. PLAINTIFF FAILS TO PLAUSIBLY ALLEGE DEFAMATION

2. PLAINTIFF FAILS TO PLAUSIBLY ALLEGE CIVIL CONSPIRACY

3. PLAINTIFF’S INTENT TO REQUEST LEAVE TO FILE A FURTHER AMENDED
COMPLAINT IS IMPROPER AND FUTILE

4. For the reasons set forth above and in Wikimedia’s Motion to Dismiss, the Amended
Complaint should be dismissed with prejudice.


Thu Sep 12, 2019 12:49 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 4170
Reply with quote
For clarification, the above is from the WMF's expensive lawyers.

Whatever happens, it definitely seems like he is costing the Foundation serious money even at this early stage, which together with their own ill-conceived actions elsewhere, might make the legal services column in their yearly financials look pretty insane. Guy Macon eating his own face with rage insane.

And if they're not careful, even if they win, their desire for a prejudicial outcome could easily backfire with some serious negative publicity. A multi-million dollar corporation bankrupting the little guy when they won't even say why he was banned (indeed to defend their right to do so), is not a good look. I would have expected better from an organization that is basically run by PR people.

Certainly if dismissed, it seems Abd can plausibly say to the New York Times that he was banned for no reason at all, and if the WMF dare suggest anything different in the media, that is when this becomes the sort of case that a billionaire might want to take up on his behalf, and we reach the delicious prospect of a Gawker style extinction level threat, something they could only survive by making this a massive issue, revealing to the world how they really work.

Needless to say, Vigilant and his Wikipediocracy protectors will be mortified at all this doom and gloom for the WMF, and will be climbing into their Jones Day funded cheerleader outfits and giving it the full Wikipediocracy spirit to urge their team to victory.

HTD.


Thu Sep 12, 2019 2:01 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:20 am
Posts: 3472
Reply with quote
CrowsNest wrote:
And if they're not careful, even if they win, their desire for a prejudicial outcome could easily backfire with some serious negative publicity. A multi-million dollar corporation bankrupting the little guy when they won't even say why he was banned (indeed to defend their right to do so), is not a good look. I would have expected better from an organization that is basically run by PR people.

And THIS is what I fear the most of my whole wiki adventure.

Because I am of course mister crazy SanBan himself, I hope I don't have to explane why, my wiki story is shiny gold
I will be the target of the international press in that case, something where I as a extreem shy person not are waiting for. I am latterly a prince of darkness, let very little people in my life, prefer to be at home, will almost never live in a hotel, avoid often/always contact with people as many of you have experienced.

You will never see me on a meeting, a Wikimania should be a nightmare for me. My name is hidden on the internet, nothing you will find about me in Google except your guys wikishit. But what to do if I am asked in a TV show? 100% for sure I will nowhere appear without Ausma, a confidant of me. Because what has to be has to be, if it come to this point I have never chosen. Ik zal het niet uit de weg gaan na deze lange weg.

But trails? Don't fear, no. Not a single one.

_________________
Mijn blog. (In Dutch) of kom eens gezellig bij de Kolonel langs in Eerbeek.
En kijk eens hier, het "Verboden" lijstje van door mij aangemaakte artiklen.

. Image
.Winner of
The SanBan


Thu Sep 12, 2019 4:24 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:22 pm
Posts: 246
Reply with quote
CrowsNest wrote:
For clarification, the above is from the WMF's expensive lawyers.
The most expensive lawyers still work for the client, and unless the client asks them to do something clearly unethical, they will honor the client's choices. That Reply memorandum is a total piece of shit, redundant, unnecessary, and even if allowed, it will be moot, because precedent is very clear. If my pleading is inadequate, the court will provisionally grant the request for dismissal, but will allow amendment, and if amendment is allowed (which is very likely), the amendment will make the motion to dismiss moot. They will need to start over. While anything is possible, it is very unlikely that they will get an unconditional dismissal. JzG actually cited, on Wikipedia, a case that he seems to think indicates that my case is toast, when, in fact, it shows just the opposite, demonstrating what an idiot he is, as he has always been. Self-centered, self-serving, and aggressive. I'm looking at what he's written in various places about the case.

That request to allow a Reply indicates to me that the WMF is desperate and demanded that Jones Day DO SOMETHING! I'm sure that Jones Day advised them that dismissal is unlikely (MTDs at this point only succeed if the plaintiff really has nothing at all or is utterly incompetent and fails to respond. The opinion can be seen on the internet that filing an MTD simply allows and encourages the plaintiff to improve their complaint. But it's a shot that can be taken at relatively low cost. Meaning a few thousand dollars per shot, probably. The proposed Reply shows that they believe that, without it, the court might reject the motion. So they needed to explain the law to the court, apparently not believing that the court would properly interpret the precedents on their own. And they needed to point out all kinds of irrelevant crap.

(Actually what the needed was to show the client that they were being sufficiently aggressive.)

Quote:
Whatever happens, it definitely seems like he is costing the Foundation serious money even at this early stage, which together with their own ill-conceived actions elsewhere, might make the legal services column in their yearly financials look pretty insane. Guy Macon eating his own face with rage insane.
. Yes. Looking at the discussion Guy Macon started.

Quote:
And if they're not careful, even if they win, their desire for a prejudicial outcome could easily backfire with some serious negative publicity. A multi-million dollar corporation bankrupting the little guy when they won't even say why he was banned (indeed to defend their right to do so), is not a good look. I would have expected better from an organization that is basically run by PR people.
I have not been bankrupted. If the case is dismissed, and if I believe the grounds for dismissal were defective, I'd appeal. There would then be costs which are chargeable in favor of the prevailing party. It's not clear at this point how much it would cost and I have not planned much for this contingency, because I do not expect an unfair dismissal. My stand, though, is that I'm responsible for what I do and don't do.

Quote:
Certainly if dismissed, it seems Abd can plausibly say to the New York Times that he was banned for no reason at all, and if the WMF dare suggest anything different in the media, that is when this becomes the sort of case that a billionaire might want to take up on his behalf, and we reach the delicious prospect of a Gawker style extinction level threat, something they could only survive by making this a massive issue, revealing to the world how they really work.
I actually know more than one billionaire. I have not asked them for any help on this affair, it has all been about cold fusion. (One actually helped me and the other offered help at one point, but it turned out I didn't need it then. If I need it, I'll ask.)

But ruining the WMF has never been my goal. Defending myself and others against deceptive defamation is long-term for me. The WMF allied itself with trolls, serving their purpose. Why? I don't know for sure. Malice? It's possible. Simple incompetence? Under some conditions that can legally be "malice," if due care is not taken

Quote:
Needless to say, Vigilant and his Wikipediocracy protectors will be mortified at all this doom and gloom for the WMF, and will be climbing into their Jones Day funded cheerleader outfits and giving it the full Wikipediocracy spirit to urge their team to victory.

HTD.
I do not believe that Jones Day has anything to do with those "cheerleaders." They are simply the usual social media trolls and haters and Kiwi Farms type anti-lolcows, the only difference being that some of them have been serious editors. Very few actually care about fact.


Fri Sep 13, 2019 6:05 am
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:22 pm
Posts: 246
Reply with quote
Anyone wrote:
Updates [September 4]:https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mad.207020/gov.uscourts.mad.207020.30.1.pdf

TL;DR
The refrain of those who will not learn, who expect others to do the heavy lifting to explain. If I were asking Anyone for a response, then it would be my responsibility to engage Anyone's attention. But I have not asked that. Nor did Jones Day ask for Anyone's attention, and we don't even know who Anyone is, so why should we or anyone care about what this user did not read? But the user did at least quote the section headers.

1. PLAINTIFF FAILS TO PLAUSIBLY ALLEGE DEFAMATION

2. PLAINTIFF FAILS TO PLAUSIBLY ALLEGE CIVIL CONSPIRACY

They are asking for dismissal with prejudice and no opportunity to amend. From ample precedent, they will not get that, so why do they ask for it? It's dilatory and unlikely to impress the judge, and I could ask for a hearing, and then I get to work my magic in presence. What they may get if the pleadings are actually inadequate is that the judge will create a deadline by which I must amend the complaint, or it will be dismissed. That's usually three weeks, and I can ask for more time. Looking at actual dismissals, the plaintiff did not request or file amendment timely.

To answer my question, my suspicion is that they filed it because they advised the client that the motion to dismiss might fail, and then the case goes into discovery, and the WMF demanded that the DO SOMETHING! They are Jones Day and I'm sure they gave good advice to the client, and I suspect the client is not taking the advice. (Which I think would have been, very early on, to negotiate and settle. That is what good attorneys almost always advise. A clients often have some other agenda and ignore that advice, which is their right. Jones Day would never admit what they privately advise. Nor could I get discovery on that, under any condition I can imagine.)

3. PLAINTIFF’S INTENT TO REQUEST LEAVE TO FILE A FURTHER AMENDED
COMPLAINT IS IMPROPER AND FUTILE

This is truly hilarious. The waste the time of the court complaining that I have an "improper and futile intention." I can request to file anything, and if "improper," the court will reject it. In this case, I have postponed filing a Second Amended Complaint to avoid complicating the record and causing further expense for the WMF, because a SAC would make the MTD moot without ever coming to a determination on the basic questions about the allegedly deficient pleadings. So I prefer to wait. They have a case they cite which is radically different. Yes, there is an impropriety in my AC. I added defendants without the permission of the court. That is why they have not been served, though the court has not taken notice of this yet. In order to draft and request to file a SAC, I need to take other actions first that have not been completed. It's a process and it takes time. And I have requested the advice of the court "if appropriate."

My purpose has been to keep the process, with a complex case involving many defendants and the WMF, as simple as possible. If I file an SAC which is the same as the AC on the points the WMF attacks, and if the court agrees with an MTD, then I would need to file a Third Amended Complaint (and this would clearly be in order). Deja Vu all over again.

See my [http://coldfusioncommunity.net/wp-content/uploads/31-0.pdf Opposition] to the Request. The full docket is here.


4. For the reasons set forth above and in Wikimedia’s Motion to Dismiss, the Amended
Complaint should be dismissed with prejudice.[/quote]

Dismissal with prejudice and with denial of right to amend, is extreme and quite unlikely. But the claque has been cheering! Those lawyers have blown the case out of the water! He was such a fool to file pro se!

(In fact, I've already been reimbursed for my filing fees and a little more. It's time it takes, that's all, and I spend my time on whatever and learn from it. Always. So far.)

It was such a relief to be banned from Wikipedia (at JzG's instigation, by the way), and I had already almost entirely abandoned Wikiversity as unsafe, which it proved to be later. Wiki disease. Writing elsewhere is (1) much more fun, Quora is fantastic and I get more page views than I ever got on Wikiversity, and people actually support my expenses on the blog. Why in the world would I want (as these trolls imagine) to go back to that Island of Fly-Lords?


Fri Sep 13, 2019 6:40 am
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2019 9:20 am
Posts: 269
Reply with quote
Abd wrote:
Anyone wrote:
Updates [September 4]:https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mad.207020/gov.uscourts.mad.207020.30.1.pdf

TL;DR
The refrain of those who will not learn, who expect others to do the heavy lifting to explain. If I were asking Anyone for a response, then it would be my responsibility to engage Anyone's attention. But I have not asked that. Nor did Jones Day ask for Anyone's attention, and we don't even know who Anyone is, so why should we or anyone care about what this user did not read?

Abdul -- you're obviously a delicate little sweetie. But what you've overlooked is the possibility that some people just don't give a toss about you or your shit.

No hard feelings. I'm just not the kind of man who wastes time checking out paupers.


Fri Sep 13, 2019 6:25 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:20 am
Posts: 3472
Reply with quote
Anyone wrote:
[
Abdul -- you're obviously a delicate little sweetie. But what you've overlooked is the possibility that some people just don't give a toss about you or your shit.

No hard feelings. I'm just not the kind of man who wastes time checking out paupers.

Because he is absolute a a delicate little sweetie I say it in a more friendly way.
Abd, non of us is planning or interested in trails. O, for sure I can start tomorrow a much more destructive trail then you can and sue alll kind of people and probably I win them all and yes, I can pay them, and yes, a top lawyer is my confidant.
But so many times I have already to anyone guaranteed no trails from my site. And I keep my word and everyone can keep my word.
No trails because that is what is written in the ToU of the Foundation I have agreed with.

So, maybe it is better to keep your updates for Dysk's Discord.

_________________
Mijn blog. (In Dutch) of kom eens gezellig bij de Kolonel langs in Eerbeek.
En kijk eens hier, het "Verboden" lijstje van door mij aangemaakte artiklen.

. Image
.Winner of
The SanBan


Sat Sep 14, 2019 8:57 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:22 pm
Posts: 246
Reply with quote
Anyone wrote:
Abd wrote:
Anyone wrote:
Updates [September 4]:https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mad.207020/gov.uscourts.mad.207020.30.1.pdf

TL;DR
The refrain of those who will not learn, who expect others to do the heavy lifting to explain. If I were asking Anyone for a response, then it would be my responsibility to engage Anyone's attention. But I have not asked that. Nor did Jones Day ask for Anyone's attention, and we don't even know who Anyone is, so why should we or anyone care about what this user did not read?

Abdul -- you're obviously a delicate little sweetie. But what you've overlooked is the possibility that some people just don't give a toss about you or your shit.

No hard feelings. I'm just not the kind of man who wastes time checking out paupers.


But Anyone does waste his time responding, providing nothing of value, and nobody cares what he feels or doesn't. He's like the troll on Wikipediocracy who would respond to a long post by quoting the entire thing, and then at the bottom, tl;dr. As if anyone cares what he didn't read, but with terminal rudeness for the readership.


Sat Sep 14, 2019 4:04 pm
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:22 pm
Posts: 246
Reply with quote
Graaf Statler wrote:
Anyone wrote:
[
Abdul -- you're obviously a delicate little sweetie. But what you've overlooked is the possibility that some people just don't give a toss about you or your shit.

No hard feelings. I'm just not the kind of man who wastes time checking out paupers.

Because he is absolute a a delicate little sweetie I say it in a more friendly way.
Abd, non of us is planning or interested in trails. O, for sure I can start tomorrow a much more destructive trail then you can and sue alll kind of people and probably I win them all and yes, I can pay them, and yes, a top lawyer is my confidant.
But so many times I have already to anyone guaranteed no trails from my site. And I keep my word and everyone can keep my word.
No trails because that is what is written in the ToU of the Foundation I have agreed with.

So, maybe it is better to keep your updates for Dysk's Discord.

This is a public discussion of the lawsuit. I did not start it, and others are commenting, so I will comment from time to time. I have not violated the ToU and the ToU does not prohibit a lawsuit for defamation by the Foundation, which is not covered by the ToU. Nor have I violated the ToU by editing WMF Wikis after being office banned.

The Discord server is private and the lawsuit (and my blog and this discussion) are public. I see no justification for hiding this information. If I had an attorney, I'd listen to the person and respect the advice. But I don't, and at this point I benefit from discussion, even from comments by assholes. Any volunteers to serve as counsel, formally or informally?


Sat Sep 14, 2019 4:11 pm
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:20 am
Posts: 3472
Reply with quote
That is fine, but don't be upset if it is taken for grant by us, that's all.
And what I said about the ToU is about my situation, not about yours. Because IF I should sue, what I don't do as I have promised many times, I should sue the Dutch chapter and it's members. Not WMF, why? What did they do wrong to me?
The Dutch chapter members did, the free loaders there, that is what I very easy can proof and did in the past years with hard evidences, but not WMF!

_________________
Mijn blog. (In Dutch) of kom eens gezellig bij de Kolonel langs in Eerbeek.
En kijk eens hier, het "Verboden" lijstje van door mij aangemaakte artiklen.

. Image
.Winner of
The SanBan


Sun Sep 15, 2019 12:16 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 219 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Strelnikov and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group ColorizeIt.
Designed by ST Software.