Re: visi.com - NM - lies - slander

[pfg@cs.rmit.edu.au (Paul Francis Gilbert)]

toddpw@ugcs.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel) writes:

>pfg@cs.rmit.edu.au (Paul Francis Gilbert) writes:

>>Considering the length of time he's been using the visi account to post
>>slanderous material (and I'll point out once again, that 1) slander is
>>illegal, 2) Nathan knows it's illegal, 3) he doesn't give a shit) without

>Translation:
Translation:

>    1) various people think that what Nathan says is slander
1) You don't think Nathan is slandering, so you're refusing to at least
listen to evidence to the contrary? Let's face it... someone who routinely
calls people names like "Rubywanker" or "Turkey" should make even the most
skeptical person wonder what kind of character he is.

>    2) nathan knows that court-proven slander is indeed illegal

Well, without dispariging Nathan (and god knows he does a good job himself
;-)), I'd tend to doubt if he *really* understands the legalities he's always
preaching about, but the argument I'll presume he does.

>    3) nathan doesn't give a shit, because he knows that he could defend
>	himself against the slander charge, and that various people have
>	given him flak about slander for years but never managed to sue

Come on, he can't can't even talk his way out of the newsgroup discussions.
Take his reply to the same article... he said "it isn't slander if it's
true", then went on to slander Rubywand again, without posting any evidence.
Let's face it... I can't remember Nathan *ever* posting bona-fide evidence.
The closest he's come to it that I can recall is the whole 4D sound saga
(and didn't he originally claim that the claim was "5D" sound?)... and
that was about Tom... he's never shown the slightest evidence that Rubywand
is a pirate. In fact, I'm holding my breath for Nathan to start accusing
Rubywand of being a druggie ;-)

I think his real attitude is that no-one will ever bother to take him so
seriously as to launch legal procedings against him, so he really doesn't
give a shit who he flames or slanders, and on what flimsy to non-existant
evidence he uses. It's like jaywalking... illegal, but everyone does it
because they know the police aren't going to bother catching them and giving
them tickets. As Nathan's so found of saying "Just because you can do it,
doesn't mean it's not illegal." ;-)


>>you, as the system admin doing anything about it, would make even the
>>greenest newbie suspect that there's some sort of "back-scraching" between
>>you two, or at least an agreement to turn the blind eye.

>Feel free to think that if it makes you happy.

I will, since I pride myself on my ability to take in both sides of an
argument and reach an objective conclusion. And 100 flames by Nathan against
Tom, Rubywand, or whoever he hates this week, isn't going to sway me in
one direction or the other (even though I'd really be tempted to sway against
him). Who was it who said "Yell out something loud enough, and enough times,
and eventually people will think it's true?". Nathan seems to be a big
subscriber to that thoery. ;-)

>What most of the Anti-Nathan people (and even Nathan himself) need to
>realize is that when somebody else's "facts" disagree with your facts,
>OF COURSE both of you think the other is a liar and a slanderer.
>Both.

Huh?? No, I certainly don't. There is a *big* *BIG* difference in my
mind between difference of opinion and slander. There is a major difference
between reaching different conclusions from different information, but quite
another thing to start making public statements about a person's character
based on nothing more than a personal dislike and no hard facts.

For example, I could call Nathan a slanderer. I can base my judgement of
his character to things like "TurkeyShoot", his "Rubywanker" threads, his
accusations of piracy, and basically every post he's made for the last
few years. That, my friend, is *evidence*. I could also present the article
Rubywand wrote, mentioning the copy of Appleworks on Asimov that Nathan
seems to have latched onto to form his Rubywand/pirate association, and
demonstrate that contrary to Nathan's opinion, Rubywand was not in fact
promoting the piracy of Appleworks and/or advocating piracy in general.
That... is *evidence*, and it makes the crucial distinction.
 
>I don't care how much time you have spent proving your case to yourself.
>I don't care how many times the "other guy" has misread what you said.
>I don't even care how many external sources you've personally verified.
>The guy you're arguing with believes he has done the same.

Isn't that a bit of a contradiction... you say that difference of opinion
exist of facts, but you don't really care what the facts are?

>But how can you still disagree then?

>SHIT HAPPENS.

That's gotta be one of the great axioms of the world ;-)
Why? Shit happens.

>There's a reason stuffy academic people list tons of sources in their
>writing, so that practically everything they say is taken from someone
>else's work. It's so you can go chase down the things you think are
>bogus and cross-examine them directly.

Exactly.

>The reason people here keep getting into arguments is that they let too
>much of their viewpoints depend on "facts" that they can't prove. Things
>are always sketchy when the only available record is personal anecdote.
>But you _have_ to chase things down, or at least qualify them based on
>whether there exists a motive for distortion. Otherwise disagreements
>will never be resolved, and local wars will continue indefinitely.

Precisely. And that's my major beef with Nathan... he *never* provides
facts. He just goes off and makes stupid games like "Turkeyshoot", or spends
his time starting a new flame thread each day. And that's why a slander
charge can be brought again, if anyone could be bothered enough. He's
defaming the public character of a person without any evidence. Even if
he's right (and the day Nathan is right about something, the world will
end ;-)) the onus is on him, making the accusation to provide *evidence*.

>Todd Whitesel
>toddpw @ ugcs.caltech.edu

--
Paul Gilbert           | pfg@yallara.cs.rmit.edu.au (The DreamMaster)
Bach App Sci, Bach Eng | The opinions expressed are my own, all my own, and
Year 5, RMIT Melbourne | as such will contain no references to small furry
Australia	       | creatures from Alpha Centauri.