View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Sat Oct 19, 2019 6:52 pm




Reply to topic  [ 219 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 22  Next
Lomax v. WikiMedia Foundation, Inc. et al 
Author Message
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:20 am
Posts: 3491
Reply with quote
Thanks bad. I appreciate that.
It's so empty, because she needed extra care. Strange sue a small animal, because a kat of 1100 gram normal don't live long. The doctor had give here a few months, but what so special was was her brightens.
I think she compensated her handcap in that way.

And it is really sad, sad wikipediands use a picture of a forum to violent your privacy. And misuse emails you have send in good faith years ago. Because Vig is giving details free out of very personal mails.
In the beginning to me Wikipedia seems solide, because it looked solide. But now it appears people who seemed very relabel where not. Data out of personal emails is collectedly by Dutch wikipedians and shared with users of WP-EN. And in that way I am labelled as some psychiatric very unstable person, because that returns all the time. Every wikipedia sysop start after a short time with the most rediciles psychiatric diagnoses as arguments and make me to a person what is living in a psychiatric clinic. Or a racist. Ordraw other complete rediciles conclusions about me. After a short time it appears complete lunatics themself.

I fear this is the result of the wiki artificial intelligence. Just like I was botmatic declared dead I am botmatic diagnosis. By some medical bot what is just as mad as there legal bot.
I think Crow is right, better to look for a other hospital than Doc James his hospital, or better to look for a other legal office than Engelfriet his one. Because if you read Engelfriet his blog, the legal architect of WP-NL, it appears to be a complete lunatic too.
Because this bot nonsense is also used IRL, And that was the reason our sweet Katherine was telling us they are all professors and lawyers. Fuck yourself, idiot! You are just a tremendous fool, Katherine, just like the rest of your professors and lawyers. It is all rubbish.

_________________
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


Mon Apr 08, 2019 12:02 am
Profile

Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2017 5:55 pm
Posts: 85
Reply with quote
Graaf Statler wrote:
Thanks bad. I appreciate that.
It's so empty, because she needed extra care. Strange sue a small animal, because a kat of 1100 gram normal don't live long. The doctor had give here a few months, but what so special was was her brightens.
I think she compensated her handcap in that way.


You are special for giving her the love that kept her going for three years. She has the sweetest look on her face, and i'm sorry she's gone now. It takes a special kind of person to look after a disabled pet, and it's good to know that you loved her enough to do that for her. :]

My current kitty cat is 19, and one day (if i outlive her), i intend to goto the rescue and get the oldest, most wrecked cat they have, and shower it with love until the end. One of these days i will post pix of my "old gal", Kitty Love. Kitty Love lived to be almost 23. i got her for my 18th birthday in May 1986, and she lived until March 2009. She went blind and senile at approx. age 20, but i loved that cat ever bit as much at the end as i did when she was a kitten. :3


Mon Apr 08, 2019 5:12 am
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:20 am
Posts: 3491
Reply with quote
The strangest thing was, I had to help her with everything, she had developed a kind of "language". She was able with some moves of her head, some expression to make me exacte clear what she wanted. And have you ever, ever heard of a cat who loved a car trip to Switzerland, a stay in a hotel, an a trip back? She was exited! The best travel companion you can have.

I had expect a drama, but no, no, no. Even a stop in Germany by Mac Donald (I gave here here normal cat feet) was a little party. A handicapped cat of 1100 gram! Days later she was still exited! Such a weird cat.

_________________
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


Mon Apr 08, 2019 5:38 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:22 pm
Posts: 246
Reply with quote
CrowsNest wrote:
Corporation with proper legal advice:

A truthful statement cannot defame, therefore make sure you let a banned person know the reason they were banned, and make sure we can stand it up in court with reference to the legal contract we entered into with the user.
It is not entirely true that a "truthful stament cannot defame," because statements are meaningless outside of context, and context determines interpretation. In a civil case, mens rea is not required, one can harm another through an action even without intention to harm. The general principle, yes, a statement which is truthful cannot defame generally. But there are exceptions.
Consider the situation of a store that decides that it hates racists, say, in a very liberal town, and bans them from the store. To avoid confrontations in the store, it puts a sign on the door that So-and-So is banned, prohibiting from entering, and nobody is allowed to shop in the store on behalf of So-and-so or they are themselves violating the policy and may be banned. People know the policy and assume that So-and-So is a racist.

And this town is, naturally, what I would call fascist antiracist. I.e, they may call themselves antifascist, but are actually suppressive, and if someone is known or thought to be a racist, they suffer much harm. They get fired from their job or nobody will hire them, family members will reject them, their property is vandalized, they are attacked by thugs, etc. Or worse.

Now, did the store libel them? First of all, does it matter if the claim is true? It might, by the way, I'm not taking a specific position here. The elements here are that the ban posting will create an impression in the public, one which can lead to harm, and there is no appeal, and no evidence, other than what they privately considered.

If truth matters, then to protect themselves from a libel award, and because of the sign, they will need to establish truthfulness, not just of the fact of the ban, but of the need for it. If they banned people by lottery, that would not matter! It is quite clear that many believe that a Wikipedia ban indicates one very disruptive user, so dangerous as to attempt to protect all Wikipedians from him or her. So a WMF Office ban defames, in actuality.

But the publication itself is truthful! That is, I was actually banned, using the clumsy global lock tool (that also causes unnecessary harm, by the way.) It was the announcement that was libelous. The rest, the ban itself, was practically harmless. I didn't have any significant need to edit WMF wikis, and I remained able to rescue content when needed.

Quote:
Shady non-profit:

Guys, keep it all on the down-lo.

:roll:

Speculation about the reason for the ban is the source of the defamation, obviously. It is a direct result of the way the WMF chooses to administer the ban, obviously. They are legally responsible for the entirely foreseeable consequence of their actions, obviously.

Wikipedia Administrators are either incapable of unwilling to prevent such temptation to speculation happening on Wikipedia's own servers, and their Office account is nowhere to be seen either.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk ... Foundation?
My basic claim, yes.

There was more than speculation. The ban was immediately trumpeted as a huge victory by Oliver Smith, publishing the letter from the WMF on RatWiki.

Victory!

And then repeated in many places around the internet as proof of how disruptive Abd is. Did the WMF do anything to stop this? No, they would be violating their own policy if they comment on a bans. Does the notification mail they sent to warn Oliver Smith against publicizing the ban? No, of course not. (Darryl told Oliver that publication was not wise. Ah, what a pain it must be to have a lunatic brother! I know that the troll parallel to Oliver is Darryl because accounts clearly known and admitted to be Oliver, with substantial edits, never attacked by Darryl as socks until later -- if then -- commonly claimed out that I and others were attacking his "family," specifically "defending" a Darryl account.

Often he said "my brother," as well. They claim there is no evidence. Quite simply, they lie, lie again, and then lie some more.

Bottom line, the WMF could ban without publication, it would be trivial. They would obviously need to inform the user, privately. (were I an anonymous account, they could not do that, but I had email enabled everywhere.)


Mon Apr 08, 2019 4:47 pm
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:20 am
Posts: 3491
Reply with quote
Thanks for this explanation, Abd

Anyway, I support you where I can I I wish you got that 200.000 dollar for your medical care, your older day's etc. Because what WMF did with there Alexander bans was a rattenstreken. Just putting a knife in someone back in a very cowardly way, it makes me extreme, extreem angry. And now I see on Jimmytalk also from you is shared medical information what was not given by you.

And that's is the reason I support you and shall support you where I can. You have my legal declaration and offer to witness already.

I am a member of a old European intellectual-aristocratic family. My father was a in that time well know professor, my mentioned brother Jaap is a dentist, my brother Thomas has been a employer of Stibbe advocaten, a well known international law firm. The rest of the family has high positions in the Dutch society, My family name is extreem rare (thank you mister Hitler)
I am doxxed by a WP-NL sysop, what could bring me in danger. Defamation and slander is already proved, a law cause would take 5 minutes and would cost me.......nothing. Because this should be a state affair.
I did nothing wrong or controversial, was a good editor, and am even anti semitic insulted by both Edo and The Banner. I am year after year insulted by leading chapter members and humiliated.

Alex Voss, resected MEP of the CDU, supported by Frans Timmermans, the second man in the powerful EU, and not the leader of a third world country as Vig claimed , has put them down as liars and people who are undermining the European democracy.

I yes, I am really Martin and yes, I know Mr Ausma very wel and have informed him about the situation.
Europe is indeed about the Byzantine Empire as Poet mentioned, and is exacte what they has expired till now with there Julia Reda revolution.. So I am untouchable for them living in a state what will heavy protect me in any way. The arm of my state reach deep in America as showed in the "discussion" with Vig, I have given the evidences. Personal info of me and you, medical info given in confidence is spread, so in short, so I am the one with the atomic weapon in my hand, something WMF is for sure very aware of with there top lawyers.

Quote:
As suggested by others, I can't really comment on ongoing legal matters. I should also add that in general, for routine legal matters, they are handled by our very competent legal staff and don't necessarily rise to the level requiring board attention.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 13:11, 8 April 2019 (UTC)


Jimbotalk

Well, Jimmy how very competent your legal staffthat is is someting time will learn. And for the rest it is wise to keep yourself neutral, a staredown is not necessary, it is not a boxing game.

_________________
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


Mon Apr 08, 2019 11:39 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 4176
Reply with quote
Can we just take a minute remind people who think Abd is going to get crushed by the WMF's Legal Eagles, they are the same people who wrote this...

https://wikimediafoundation.org/2019/04 ... hat-means/

That's written by Jacob Rogers, Senior Legal Counsel, and Allison Davenport, Technology Law and Policy Fellow.

In their learned opinion, it's fine for WMF servers to contain defamation in article histories because to remove it would somehow encourage people to go looking for it, and mean it was more likely someone would unwittingly reinsert the defamation.

Let that sink in. Their argument is that they should not have to take proactive measures even in a case where a court has already found their activities to be defamatory, because somehow if they did so their cult's influence on the world is such that this would passively increase the chances of the defamation reoccurring. And they can think of no way around that. They see nothing in their power that they can do to stop it. It took a second court judgement to compel them to do the right thing.

Note that they apparently wrote that blog post without having fully availed themselves of the actual facts of what happened, as in what was actually even on their servers.

These people would be incredibly easy to embarrass in front of a judge. This is almost enough evidence on its own, to show beyond a reasonable doubt that their institutional attitude to defamation is precisely the opposite of what it should be.

If any part of Abd's case argues the WMF makes decisions with legal implications on the victims of their cult from a position of ignorance, irresponsibility and even arrogance, well, who would be daft enough to argue he's going to lose, and lose badly?


Mon Apr 15, 2019 12:04 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:20 am
Posts: 3491
Reply with quote
What is very important in the Dutch legal system is een belangenafweging.

There is a lot to find about belangenafweging, belangen afweging.

Germany has something similar. Interessenjurisprudenz, The German wiki has even a article about it.

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interessenjurisprudenz

Belang = interests
afwegen = weigh up

interessen=Interests
jurisprudenz=jurisprudence

And again Google translate is not able to give a proper translation! The continental European country's have again something tricky in there legal system. A weight up of interests. Well, the reputation of the good professor is of course much more important than the interest of the Wikipedians. And deformation is even a crime, so this law cause was impossible to win for The Foundation. Impossible!

What a waisting of donor money again! Jacob Rogers, Senior Legal Counsel, and Allison Davenport, Technology Law and Policy Fellow are just prutsers. Just like Gerlach. And again is the donor money burned in the fire place, complete spoiled, just like with the Brussels advocating group of Romaine.
Donor money where people have to work for hard, have give in there goodness, and what happens with that money? They spoil it to all kind in advanced lost law cases and other complete legal nonsense like that article13 nonsens. They simple don't know the European legal system and the European political system either. They know nothing about it. And I am afraid in front of a judge they simple don't know what to say too. They have given themself all kinds of high tittles based on really nothing. Senior Legal Counsel, CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation, the founder of Wikipedia, Safety and Tust with James Alexander, it is all based on nothing. Embarrassing is the right word, Crow. Or shameful. Or shameless!

_________________
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


Mon Apr 15, 2019 1:19 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2018 2:14 am
Posts: 372
Reply with quote
Excuse me one moment as I gloat. 8-)
CrowsNest wrote:
Can we just take a minute remind people who think Abd is going to get crushed by the WMF's Legal Eagles, they are the same people who wrote this...

https://wikimediafoundation.org/2019/04 ... hat-means/

[...]

Note that they apparently wrote that blog post without having fully availed themselves of the actual facts of what happened, as in what was actually even on their servers.

[...]


Of course this blog post was published many months after the WMF posted the legal documents of the case itself on their website, and said documents included a lot of detail about exactly what the offending content was and why it was a problem. The eventual blog post doesn't match up very well with the actual facts or judgment of the case, but I guess it's either not meant to be that accurate, or maybe they had an agenda that disagreed with the truth.

Attachment:
screenshot-from-2019-04-13-12-.png
screenshot-from-2019-04-13-12-.png [ 65.09 KiB | Viewed 501 times ]

Keeping the public informed, as always. ;)

_________________
De facto globally banned on all Wikimedia sites. Editor of The Wiki Cabal. find me on the Wikipediocracy Discord.


Mon Apr 15, 2019 10:45 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:20 am
Posts: 3491
Reply with quote
Dysklyver wrote:
The eventual blog post doesn't match up very well with the actual facts or judgment of the case, but I guess it's either not meant to be that accurate, or maybe they had an agenda that disagreed with the truth.

Attachment:
screenshot-from-2019-04-13-12-.png

Keeping the public informed, as always. ;)

Of course that shitty WMF blogpost had a agenda. They are like the technicians in the Chernobyl disaster, because there actions get weirder and weirder to hold the algorithms under control. Algorithm trolling is a really very interesting phenomena.
Just fuck the algorithms, and see what a interesting, briljant person you are. Kick the other down, and fuck yourself up! Not even able to write a shopping list, but look what a top editor I am. Look what a perfect and skilled legal team we have, but in fact I am a green grocer. Don't tell the others! Just by saying, just by claiming what you predict you are your wiki star is rising higher and higher. The Dutch NRC? What a shit newspaper, I finished my newspaper subscription, What a shit newspaper, the wrote something negative about Wikipedia! Dingedong, and there the algorithm go down! Because wikipedians are speaking, the fucktchekers of this world!

And that Graaf Staler? What a lier. What a troll. What a nitwit. What a fool. Our brave and skilled Arbitrage Commission will solve the problem Statler. And otherwise we still have our skilled Meta stewards to organise a fox hunting. Or our skilled cheeseburger expert James Alexander, even Hillary Clinton liked his twitter.

Well, just give them rope. Pirate flags in the air, Julia Reda in front of the parade, and there they go. Ready to to conquer the Europarlement, with Romaine=>Wikimedia and Dimi, the "political scientist" and there perfect and skilled legal team will support them. And Katherine Maher as a cheerleader flying all over the world with as only result a tremendous carbon footprint. A pity only they had no idea where it all was about.

Undermining the democracy, telling lies, governing by shitstorm, my god. I really hope nobody of that level ever say such things about me, the highest leaders of the EU.
No Dysk, I stay who and what I am. Ik blijf heel dicht bij mijzelf, en integerheid is niet te koop. They all can fuck themself or each other with there trollopedia, I don't care. As long as they leave me alone, what was the clear message last time. Leave me alone, don't try to pull me in your wikishit. Get lost with it. Because that is what it is, wikishit.

_________________
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


Mon Apr 15, 2019 11:37 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 4176
Reply with quote
Dysklyver wrote:
The eventual blog post doesn't match up very well with the actual facts or judgment of the case, but I guess it's either not meant to be that accurate, or maybe they had an agenda that disagreed with the truth.
Exactament.

To reiterate.......written by Jacob Rogers, Senior Legal Counsel, and Allison Davenport, Technology Law and Policy Fellow.


Mon Apr 15, 2019 11:56 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 219 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 22  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


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.