Peter Coffin Sends Bogus Legal Threat to 8Chan? (UPDATED)

UPDATE: I was able to get in contact with attorney who allegedly sent the email below. He did not send this email and he is not representing Peter Coffin. Someone is impersonating the attorney online.

I'll post commentary later. The commentary will essentially mirror the response I made to Julien Blanc's lawyer.

> Date: January 28, 2015 at 11:42:29 AM GMT+8

> From: Greg Smith <gregsmithattorneyslc@gmail.com>
> To: admin@8chan.co
>
> CEASE AND DESIST
>
> [DATE]
>
> By Certified Mail
>
>
>
>
> Dear 8chan admin:
>
>      This law firm represents Peter Coffin. If you are represented by
> legal counsel, please direct this letter to your attorney immediately
> and have your attorney notify us of such representation.
>
>      You are hereby directed to
>
> CEASE AND DESIST ALL DEFAMATION OF
> PETER COFFIN’S CHARACTER AND REPUTATION.
>
>      Peter Coffin is an educated, respected professional in the
> community. He has spent years serving the community and building a
> positive reputation. Peter Coffin has learned that you have engaged in
> spreading false, destructive, and defamatory rumors about her.
>
>      Under Utah law, it is unlawful to engage in defamation of
> another’s character and reputation.  Defamation consists of
>
> (1)  a statement that tends to injure reputation;
> (2) communicated to another; and
> (3) that the speaker knew or should have known was false.
>
>      Your defamatory statements involved multiple webpages on your
> website spreading false lies regarding Peter Coffin and his family.
>
>      Accordingly, we demand that you (A) immediately cease and desist
> your unlawful defamation of Peter Coffin and (B) provide us with
> prompt written assurance within ten (10) days that you will cease and
> desist from further defamation of Peter Coffin’s character and
> reputation and (C) make an official public apology for the lies spread
> on your website, preferably on Twitte with the hashtag
> "#PETERCOFFINWASRIGHT" attached to said apology.
>
>      If you do not comply with this cease and desist demand within
> this time period, Peter Coffin is entitled to seek monetary damages
> and equitable relief for your defamation. In the event you fail to
> meet this demand, please be advised that Peter Coffin has asked us to
> communicate to you that she will pursue all available legal remedies,
> including seeking monetary damages, injunctive relief, and an order
> that you pay court costs and attorney’s fees.  Your liability and
> exposure under such legal action could be considerable.
>
>      Before taking these steps, however, my client wished to give you
> one opportunity to discontinue your illegal conduct by complying with
> this demand within ten (10) days.  Accordingly, please respomd with
> your decision in a timely fashion
>
[Name/Law Firm REDACTED]
>
>      I recommend that you consult with an attorney regarding this
> matter.  If you or your attorney have any questions, please contact me
> directly.
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
> [REDACTED] Attorney at law.
 
 
 
 
 

Mike Cernovich: Based Lawyer of GamerGate (Response)

"This, sadly, was not always the dichotomy — his blog, going back to 2004 as a law student, paints the picture of a far tamer, more reasonable man, interested in cases of authority figures abusing their stations, and where justice was denied to the weak." - Manfred Von Karma

How does someone go from a rather nice guy to, well, the man I have become. I'm actually a really nice guy in person, but let's assume, as the author of a recent expose on me does, that I am "perfectly sociopathic."

What happened? The key to understanding me is reading this article and following what has been done to liberals, feminists, and other nice people who post under the hashtag #GamerGate.

1. The author of the article did not email me for comment.

Before writing several thousand words on someone, why not send him or her an email for comment? But that's not how journalism is done these days.

Rather than have an open dialogue where people try understanding one another, you mine through a person's Tweets, take them out of context, and paint whatever monstrous picture you like.

By failing to give a person a chance to respond, you create people like me.

I have a choice. I could be sensible and reasonable. But lord save my soul if I make one errant Tweet or use the wrong terminology when discussing the most recent oppressed group of the day.

Rather than walk on egg shells, more people are stomping the eggs and laughing in your faces while we do it.

This is, again, a response to your conduct. When you treat people unfairly they have no interest in playing by any of your rules.

2. The author doesn't understand how hypocritical they look.

I recently had a YouTube debate when a man who, according to reports, laughed about the rapes committed by Gerald Arthur "Jerry" Sandusky. This fellow I debated would walk around the locker room with a hole in his butt area, calling himself a Sandusky victim.

That's some sick shit - and it's far worse than any my Tweets people cry about - and yet no one has called him out on that.

My criticis are insufferable hypocrites.

And their hypocrisy does not extend to me, a white man who can be attacked for any reason. This hypocrisy extends towards women.

While accusing me of harassment for writing about people on the Internet, they refuse to recognize what happened to Justine Sacco.

2a. Justice Sacco's story.

Justine Sacco is a hipster who had all of the right views. On her way to Africa, she made an ironic joke.

Going to Africa. Hope I don’t get AIDS. Just kidding. I’m white!”

See, Justice Sacco and the Self-Inflicted Perilds of Twitter.

Sacco boarded her airplane, turned her telephone off, and prepared herself for a long flight.

Unknown to her, the hate mob had already formed.

No one (see point 1) asked her for comment. If they had, they'd have realized it was an ill-advised meta-commentary on how (in her view) white people view AIDS.

In Sacco's view, white people viewed AIDS as a black problem. Sacco was channelling the voice of the white people she hated. Sacco was one of the good guys!

Sam "Bring Back Bullying" Biddle started the hate mob. He was quickly joined by Anil Dash, who leaps at any opportunity to ruin lives. See, Moral Panics and the Death of Fun by Pax Dickinson.

Anil Dash used his 400,000 Twitter followers to terrorize a woman over a Tweet that was meant as an ironic joke.

A hashtag was created called #HasJustineLandedYet. Tens of thousands of people began threatening Sacco's livelihood and life. 

Before Ms. Sacco could land, the mob was salivating.

When Sacco lost her job, the mob rejoiced. When she found a new job, Sam Biddle tried forming a hate mob again to cost her the second job.

When you form hate mobs to attack some people while ignoring the misconduct committed by your own side, you're not impressing anyone.

Reasonable people see that double standard in action and are sickened by it. 

3. (Again!) The author doesn't understand how smug and hypocritical they look.

The assessment of the "debate" is amusing as the author clearly doesn't understand my intent. My intent going into the debate was:

  • Don't look like an asshole.
  • Let the other guy look like an asshole.

Could I have "out assholed the asshole"? Sure, but how would that have benefitted me or helped get the truth about #GamerGate out there?

Anyone who watches that video will see someone (me) trying to have a genuine conversation with someone. They'll watch the other guy smugly ignore and dismiss and run from any point I make.

When people say that GamerGate is made up of evil people, show them that video. When people say I am a violent sociopath, show them that video.

If people think I lost the debate or look like I was being bullied, great! 

My goal was to make my critics look like assholes. I succeeded. 

4. My critics have no respect for the rule of law.

The author of the piece is either a lawyer or someone who gets the law. No lawyer has said I have broken any laws or that my conduct does not fall well within the limits of acceptable speech by a lawyer. Von Karma concedes this point:

As has already been mentioned, Mike Cernovich is certainly smart. His methods of agitation are all perfectly legal, and perfectly sociopathic.

Since my conduct is legal, how does the author explain the following:

  • I have had State Bar called on me. Quinn, Kluwe, Harper, and the whole crew has linked to the State Bar phone number repeatedly. I have lost track actually.
  • I have had LAPD called on me. Nuance alert: The claim is  they didn't call the police directly; they reported me via CrimeStoppers! 
  • I have not broken any laws. Everything I have said has been well-within my First Amendment rights, so calling in "crime tips" about me is frivolous. 

Has Von Karma called out anyone for calling the police and making frivolous bar complaints against me?

Of course not!

5. My critics have no sense of decency or remorse.

Von Karma accuses me of harassment and other offenses (even while conceding I have broken no laws; how's that for cognitive dissonance?) because I hired a private investigator.

What Von Karma failed to report is that before retaining a PI I asked for an apology.

Before retaining a private investigator I asked Ms. Pless and Quinn for an apology for sharing my personal information with tens of thousands of people.

I didn't ask that anyone grovel or kiss my feet.

They are in their 20s. I understand people say stupid shit in the heat of the moment. No big deal, if the person says, "My bad. I misspoke." 

They mocked me. Fair enough. We all make choices in life.

Now they cry and expect me to care. I do not. 

6. The double standards my critics live by is sickening.

If I wrote an article about one of them giving their address and detailed pictures and telling people to call the police, what do you suppose they would say?

Yes, I understand that we live in a patriarchy and as such I have institutional privilege.

This means you can lie about me online, falsely accuse me of making rape threats, call the police (or CrimeStoppers!) on me when I've broken no law, and attack my livelihood by calling the State Bar (even though I've done nothing illegal or unethical).

Gut check time.

Do you realize how fucking insane that double standard sounds to reasonable people?

7. My critics are driving liberals away from them and towards the right.

Most people who post under the #GamerGate hashtag are liberals. They are free speech advocates and experienced Internet funposters.

They recognize that most of my Tweets are either jokes or that I take a true point and turn the volume way up to get a conversation going.

They have watched, in real-time, the following:

  • The media lied about GamerGate, falsely claiming that GamerGate is a campaign of harassment rather than a consumer revolt against unethical jouranlism.
  • Open season on nerds was declared.
  • Bullying of the neuroatypical was encouraged.
  • Wikipedia has been discredited.
  • Minories, women, trans, teens have been doxed and attacked.
  • The crap that happened to me and other men. (Which doesn't count, because patriarchy!)

You are validating everything I write about the evils of "social justice" and radical feminism. You declared open season on white men, rationalizing it by saying your'e "punching up."

Yet now you're attacking people who dare to be friends with white men.

Do you think that's fair, decent, or even tactically sound?

8. Stop being smug, dismissive, hypocritical assholes.

They say you should never take advice from your enemy, so you are welcome to dismiss this as concern trolling.

But.

Have you made room for the possibility that you share any responsibility for what happened and that continuing to deny any responsibility is driving more people into thinking and behaving as I do?

Maybe you should stop being assholes to people, stop forming hate mobs, stop trying to get people fired from jobs, and stop throwing huge fits when otherwise decent people make a mistake.

Or you can drive more people to act like me.

The choice is yours.

 


Swatting Resource Page: What is Swatting and How to Avoid a Swatting?

Swatting has been in the news a lot recently. Swatting results when a prank caller (or often someone who does not approve of your political activities and wants to censor you) calls 9-1-1, telling the dispather than there is an emergency.

Due to VOIP and other software, it's possible to spoof your phone number. When the hoaxer calls 9-1-1, it will appear as if the call is coming from inside your home.

Often police are given dire scenarios. In one case the police were told that a man was holding a wife and child hostage.

Police arrive, often with machine guns. Innocent people often die as police are often mistaken an intruders to the unsuspecting victims of the Swatting.

I was almost a victim of a Swatting. I was able to avoid being Swatted a I had studied this phenomena. To learn more about Swatting, check out these resources.

Resources on Swatting:

Swatting in the News:

Videos of Swattings:

Swatting often happens to gamers. Gamers will live stream themselves playing video games. This alerts pranksters to the location of the gamers. 

Some of these Swattings have been caught on video. One famous Swatting incident involved the videogame YouTube channel Kootra. 

While playing a video game a SWAT team emerged. Because cameras were on, the Swatting was caught live on camera. Click play to watch it unfold.

The Creatures (Kootra) got SWAT Raided (SWATTED) #FreeKootra2014

Livestreamers Getting "Swatted"? What is swatting?

Swatting: US gamers’ pranks see armed cops target their online enemies

Swatting: The Bottom Line

Swatting can have life-altering consequences for the victims (who may be shot in an accidental shooting) and the perpetrators (who if caught may spend life in prison).

If you fear you may be the victim of a Swatting, call your local law enforcement immediately to inform them of the threat.


GamerGate is Not Swatting Anyone (But Zoe Quinn Tried Getting Mike Cernovich Swatted)

Is it possible to be Swatted for writing about #Gamergate? Indeed it is. I was almost Swatted, but it wasn't by people who post in the hashtag #GamerGate. No. I was Swatted by people who have claimed, falsely, that #GamerGate is about harassment of women.

"doxing & hacking & SWATing tend to be a package deal." - Zoe Quinn

Zoe-Quinn-Swating-Cernovich

Zoe Quinn has claimed to be a victim of harassment. And yet it was Zoe Quinn who was central to a conspiracy to get me (Mike Cernovich) Swatted.

Why did Zoe Quinn want to get me Swatted for writing about #GamerGate?

I'm a lawyer with a strong interest in the First Amendment and free speech issues. My legal writing has appeared in legal encyclopedias and has been cited in dozens of scholarly articles as well as multiple federal court opinions.

When I found out that Zoe Quinn had obtained a restraining order that clearly violated the First Amendment, I decided to look into the case. 

Rather than allow me to write about legal issues, which I have done since 2004, Zoe Quinn tried censoring me in the most horrible of ways. Zoe Quinn tried getting me Swatted.

On October 22, 2014, a college student named Margaret Pless published an article listing my home address. Ms. Pless's post contained detailed street view images of my home.

Before publishing the dox, Margaret Pless discussed her plans with Zoe Quinn.

"I'm preparing an article about Cernovich for my own site; I'll link to it here once it's published. I'm holding it because Zoe Quinn says she wants to talk to me." - Margaret Pless a/k/a idledillettante

Margaret-pless-zoe-quinn-cernovich-swatting

In Internet parlance, Margaret Pless "doxed" me, that is, she widely disseminated my information. 

Once the dox was published, Zoe Quinn sprung into action. She immediately Tweeted out a link to the article to her 30,000 followers. Some of Quinn's followers included people who had made death threats against me in the past. Quinn is also friendly with a convicted woman beater.

Ms. Quinn said of the article that doxed me, "The best gg journalism continues to originate in blogs and storifies." (Archive link.)

Screen Shot 2015-01-04 at 6.22.35 PMRecognizing  Quinn posed a threat to my safety, I hired a private investigator to conduct a risk assessment.

After doxxing me, Zoe Quinn and one of her lovers, Alex Lifschitz, made veiled death threats against me.

Believing that the dox did not adequately intimidate me, Zoe Quinn and Alex Lifschitz, each went to Twitter asking for help. 

Lifschitz posted a series of Tweets that were designed to intimidate and scare me:

  • I guess what I'm saying is that this guy has gone from an annoyance to a credible threat. This is terrifying now. We need some help.
  • By "help," honestly, I don't know our options. We'd frankly like to feel safe. Now we have to look out for a spook on [Cernovich's] payroll.
  • And for someone who has already proven his willingness to release private details for spite, this is a massive, dangerous loose end.
  • Disbarment is not gonna stop this guy.

Screen Shot 2015-01-04 at 6.26.52 PM

What sort of help was Lifschitz seeking? Clearly getting me in trouble with the State Bar was not what he wanted to have happen. What exactly was Lifschitz hoping one of his many Twitter followers would do to me?

Quinn herself recognizes, "doxing & hacking & SWATing tend to be a package deal." Quinn doxed me. What did she have planned next? 

When some suggested to Zoe Quinn that she try having me disbarred (for what, I don't know), she answered: 

  • "Disbarment takes years and it won't stop this freak."

Zoe-quinn-cernovich

Again, Quinn and Lifschitz did not believe that getting me disabarred was sufficient punishment for my "crime" of writing about the First Amendment.

As I had not (and still have not) committed any crimes, I could not be arrested. What were these people up to?

When read in isolation, these Tweets seem somewhat silly. In light of the dox, one cannot help but read them in a more ominous tone.

What do the experts say about Quinn's attempt to Swat me?

In addition to doxing me and soliciting help (while noting that disbarment isn't enough to stop me), Quinn also encouraged people to contact the State Bar of California on me. As I have done nothing unethical, her attempt to incite a mob to destroy by ability to practice law cannot be seen as anything other than cyberharassment.

Quinn's behavior is part of a course of conduct that an FBI expert on Swatting recognizes leads to Swatting.

I met personally with the nationwide experts on swatting in December 2011: the FBI office in Dallas, Texas. They told me that swatting is an extreme form of harassment — and that swatters typically combine swatting with other forms of harassment, including: complaining to the victim’s workplace, defaming the victim online, “Googlebombing” the victim, publishing the victim’s address online, filing phony reports of criminal activity by the victim, and so forth.

That is an interesting checklist, is it not?

How that checklist on Swatting apply to Quinn's pattern of behavior?

  • Complaining to the victim's workplace: Check, she called the State Bar on me.
  • Defaming the victim online: Check Quinn falsely accused me of several crimes, including harassment and stalking.
  • Googlebombing the victim: No.
  • Publishing the victim's address online: Check, Quinn doxed Cernovich.
  • Filining phony reports of criminal activity: Check, Quinn's co-conspiractor Margaret Pless called the LAPD on me and encouraged others to do the same.

Quinn's course of conduct hits five out of the six items on the Swatting checklist.

She could of course claim she didn't want to get me Swatted. That's the idea.

Quinn published my dox and requrests for help without asking anyone to actually Swat me. It's a clever strategy, is it not?

If I die, she is happy. But it's not her fault. 

She totally did not want to get me Swatted. She just doxed me because, well, because! And the "help" she wanted was, well, just help.

How dare you suggest she was up to no good!

I was almost Swatted for writing about GamerGate.

Again, I was not Swatted by people who are trying to reform journalism. I was almost Swatted by Zoe Quinn and others who have falsely claimed to be victims of harassment. 


How a Convicted Woman Beater Became a Foot Soldier for SJWs (UPDATE)

Robert "Bobby" Oliveira is everything my harshest critics imagine me to be. Where as I live a mild-mannered, drama-free lifestyle, Bobby Oliveira is a convicted criminal and woman beater who makes death threats online.

Bobby Oliveira came to my attention in early October, when he began threatening me online. Oliveira was upset that I supported #GamerGate, a consumer revolt opposing corruption in journalism.

He has made numerous threats against me and several women, including prominent feminist C.H. Sommers. 

I conducted a search of public records to assess the threat Mr. Oliveira may pose to me other vulnerable women. What I found will shock you.

UPDATE (March 11, 2015): Bobby Oliveira has made further threats against women, telling one woman, "I like doxxing people. I like hurting them after the doxxing more." 

Screen Shot 2015-03-11 at 4.40.03 AM

Oliveira is a convicted woman beater.

I had an investigation into Oliveira performed. Mr. Oliveira lived in Rhode Island. You can search for his court records here

His criminal history is extensive, including everything from violent crimes to stalking:

  • Case No. 61-2007-17959 - Violation of a No Contact Order
  • Case No. P2-1986-2105A - Possession of a Controlled Substance
  • Case No. 61-1995-03632 - Violation of a Protective Order
  • Case No. 62-2000-05720 - Possession of a Deadly Weapon
  • Case No. 62-2009-01109 - Violation of a Protective Order

In other words, Robert Oliveria has had multiple restraining orders taken out against him. He has violated various protective orders orders on repeated occassions.

Why is Anil Dash  friendly with such a man? 

One would think civilized people would have nothing to do with a serial stalker and woman beater like Robert Oliveira. One would be incorrect.

Robert Oliveira reached out to  people who don't like me very much - including Anil Dash  - and informed him of his efforts to silence and intimidate me and several women.

Anil Dash Robert Oliveira

Oliveria informs Anil Dash that he is going to start hurting people.

Oliveira told Dash about his attempt to silence and harass. (See Archive link.) 

Screen Shot 2014-12-28 at 10.58.20 PM

Rather than renounce Oliveria, Anil Dash simply told him to "stop CC'ing him" and to "go play somewhere else." (See Archive link.)

Screen Shot 2014-12-28 at 10.53.58 PM

Anil Dash and Robert Oliveira.

Why hasn't Anil Dash renounced Mr. Oliveira? After all, Mr. Dash has told people to renounce me, under some sort of guilt-by-assocation argument. 

Screen Shot 2014-12-28 at 11.00.21 PM

Robert Oliveira is an actual stalker, criminal, and violent criminal. And yet Dash seems to be quiet about him. Why is that?

Why are others who oppose #GamerGate friendly with Mr. Oliveira?

Is Anil Dash hoping that Oliveira will kill me or otherwise harm me?

What do you think? Why is there such radio silence from the people who vocally oppose me simply because some of my Tweets have upset them?

Is a Twitter poster (that's me) morally worse than an actual stalker and woman beater?

Inquiring minds want to know.

UPDATE: Robert Oliveira claims he is not the same Robert Oliveira who was convicted of the below noted offenses. Mr. Oliveira writes:

Mr. Cernovich makes several claims which have basis in reality. You might notice the list of crimes. Those belong to other Robert Oliveira’s without my middle initial, “T”, and birthdate 7 April 1967.

In his rebuttal, Mr. Oliveira admits to conduct that would constitute domestic assault, admitting, "Yes, the night I got sober, I did knock a phone out of a woman’s hand."

There is no way for me to confirm that Mr. Oliveria is telling the truth. That said, I also give people the right to rebuttal, which is why comments are open. I also have no problem admitting when I am wrong. 

Absent obtaining a SSN, it will be up to the reader to decide for himself whether an admitted drug addict who stalks women online is telling the truth.

That said, I did check publicly available court records. I searched for one Robert Oliveira, who was born in 1967.

That Robert Oliveira was convicted of domestic assault. Maybe that Robert Oliveira beat up a family member rather than a woman. Who knows?

One Robert Oliveira who was born in 1967 was convicted of at least three offenses in the state of Rhode Island, including:

  • Simple Assault/Domestic - Case No. 21-2002-02326
  • Disorderly Conduct - Case No. 21-2001-02140 
  • Crank/Obscene Phone Calls (multiple counts) - Case No. 61-2002-04652

Screen Shot 2015-02-04 at 5.50.03 AM

I will leave it to the reader to determine whether the Robert Oliveira mentioned below is the same BobbyO1967 who has relentlessly stalked me and harassed multiple women online.

Of course, if Mr. Oliveira would like to post more information, he is welcome to post a comment explaining his conduct.


How Zoe Quinn and Margaret Pless Tried Getting Mike Cernovich Swatted

"doxing & hacking & SWATing tend to be a package deal." - Zoe Quinn

Several weeks ago I heard about an interesting case raising First Amendment issue. In that case, Zoe Quinn, an online agitator and professional panhandler sought to silence her ex-boyfriend for sharing his tale of emotional abuse.

Although relationship drama is nonsense I don't care about, something interesting happened. Zoe Quinn obtained a protective order against Eron Gjoni that prevented him from talking about her. At all.

The protective order seemed clearly unconstitutional. I obtained the court records to learn more. Since then my life has been permanently altered.

I have had:

  • The State Bar called on me.
  • The police have been called on me.
  • My home address and pictures of my home posted.
  • Threats about hacking my site were made.
  • False accusations that I have threatened women with rape were made.

How Doxing Leads to Swatting.

Although it's easy to dismiss the campaign of harassment against me as drama, Zoe Quinn and her co-conspirator Margaret Pless, a graduate student in New York, upped the ante. 

Margaret Pless posted pictures of my home address. Zoe Quinn, who had talked to Margaret Pless before posting the address, retweeted my home address and detailed pictures of my home to her over 30,000 Twitter followers.

Zoe Quinn

Zoe Quinn knew of the dox in advance.

After retweeted that "best journalism" to her 30,000+ plus followers, Zoe Quinn backtracked. She claimed she had no idea Margaret Pless doxed me. This is a lie.

On October 21, Margaret Pless posted the following comment to a blog dedicated to cyberstalking me. The comment read:

"I'm preparing an article about Cernovich for my own site....I'm holding it because Zoe Quinn says she wants to talk to me."

Margaret Pless

 

Why did Zoe Quinn and Margaret Pless post pictures of my home as well as my home address?

What good reason exists for posting not only the exact address where I reside but also pictures of my home? There is a good reason.

Zoe Quinn and Margaret Pless were trying to get me Swatted.

Oh, sure, they will say, "No way!"

They will act as if they are precious little snowflake who would do such a thing. What do the experts have to say?

What is Swatting?

Wikipedia notes:

Swatting is the act of tricking an emergency service (via such means as hoaxing a 9-1-1 dispatcher) into dispatching an emergency response based on the false report of an on-going critical incident. Episodes range from large to small, from the deployment of bomb squads, SWAT units and other police units and the concurrent evacuations of schools and businesses to a single fabricated police report meant to discredit an individual as a prank or personal vendetta. While it is a misdemeanor or a felony in the USA in and of itself to report any untruth to law enforcement, swatting can cause massive disruption to the civil order and the public peace by the hoaxed deployment of police and other civic resources such as ambulances and fire departments. The term derives from SWAT (Special Weapons and Tactics), a highly specialized type of police unit.

How do I know Zoe Quinn and Margaret Pless wanted to get me Swatted?

I was able to avoid the Swatting because I saw something far worse happened to a Los Angeles District Attorney who writes under the name "Patterico."

Patterico almost lost his life after a Swatting incident, and he began researching Swatting. His research revealed the following:

I met personally with the nationwide experts on swatting in December 2011: the FBI office in Dallas, Texas. They told me that swatting is an extreme form of harassment — and that swatters typically combine swatting with other forms of harassment, including: complaining to the victim’s workplace, defaming the victim online, “Googlebombing” the victim, publishing the victim’s address online, filing phony reports of criminal activity by the victim, and so forth.

Does that sound familiar? If not, let me refresh your memory:

Margaret Caroline Pless posted my information online. This included my personal home address as well as pictures of my home.

Zoe Quinn has encouraged her followers to report me to the State Bar, which is their only way to complain to my workplace, as I am self-employed.

Before publishing the article, Margaret Pless spoke to Zoe Quinn. ("I'm holding it because Zoe Quinn says she wants to talk to me.")

Zoe Quinn a/k/a Chelsea Van Valkenburg called this "good journalism," and shared my address and pictures of my home with her 30,000+ Twitter followers.

Margaret Pless encouraged her blog readers to call the LAPD on me, even though I have not committed any crimes. 

Margaret Pless called the police on me.

Randi Harper, a drug addict who has been in jail, falsely accused me of making rape threats.

There has been a non-stop campaign of harassment against me, including calling me a stalker, harasser of women, and a rapist. 

Zoe Quinn's harassment and doxing of me is verifiable.

The abuse I faced is real and verifiable.

Unlike the threats Zoe Quinn claims to have faced, I have been falsely accused of crimes and doxed by the actual account of Zoe Quinn, Margaret Pless, and Randi Harper.

This doesn't make me a helpless victim. It is what it is.

Yet when the media refuses to acknowlege that I have been a victim (by their standards) of harassment, doxing, and a potential Swatting, we know that there is a serious problem with ethics in journalism.

UPDATE: Zoe Quinn has all but confessed to trying to get Mike Cernovich Swatted.

On January 3, 2015, it seems Ms. Quinn's guilty conscience got the best of her. She published to her Twitter timeline: "doxing & hacking & SWATing tend to be a package deal."

As Ms. Quinn and Ms. Pless doxed Mike Cernovich, posting detailed images of his home and publishing that information to 30,000+ people, one doesn't need to draw too many inferences to conclude that their intent was to get Cernovich Swatted.

Zoe-Quinn-Swating-Cernovich


PZ Myers Alleged Rape Victim Speaks Out!

PZ Myers was accused of rape by a student. Myers claims the rape allegation is false. Yet rather than call the police to perform a rape kit and conduct a thorough investigatin, Myers used his institutional power and privilege to silence the girl. Read more about PZ Myers treatment of an alleged rape victim.

PZ Myers rape victim was never heard. I have training in psychodrama, a technique that allows a person to develop empathy with and tell the story of victims:

Psychodrama is an action method, often used as a psychotherapy, in which clients use spontaneous dramatization, role playing and dramatic self-presentation to investigate and gain insight into their lives. Developed by Jacob L. Moreno, M.D. (1889–1974) psychodrama includes elements of theater, often conducted on a stage where props can be used. By closely recreating real-life situations, and acting them out in the present, clients have the opportunity to evaluate their behavior and more deeply understand a particular situation in their lives.

In fact, I attended psychodrama courses taught by none other than famed lawyer Gerry Spence. The course was also supervised and taught by psychologists.

PZ Myers rape allegation offers a great insight into the challenges of rape cases. They are he-said-she-said. PZ Myers has told his story. 

Myers' version of the story concerning his alleged rape is self-serving.

Every sentence he types is framed to make him appear sympathetic and to discredit the alleged rape victim.

It is time for the alleged victim to be heard!

Using  psychodramatic techniques, I will tell the story of PZ Myers' alleged rape victim, as best as I can. (I have not spoken to the alleged victim. Rather, I am imagining and channeling what she might have felt, said, and experienced.) TRIGGER WARNING: This will be very disturbing.

His alleged victim might begin: 

I went to Professor PZ Myers' office to discuss a serious matter. I was shaking when I confronted him. I told him he had raped me. 

I wasn't sure what exactly to expect. Looking at a rapist eye-to-eye is chilling. PZ has the eyes of a predator. He has the smirk of a man who knows he can commit crimes with impunity.

When I told him he had raped me, I had hoped for an apology. Maybe he would call the police or turn himself in. Instead, he stormed out of the office. He had a student come in to hold me hostage.

I was so afraid. I didn't know what to do. The student didn't want to let me leave. She kept stalling for time. I didn't feel like I could leave.

PZ Myers returned. He did not have a police detective with him. Rather, he dragged me into his boss's office.

I was horrified. Was I about to be expelled? 

They badgered me until I recanted my accusation. They said the problem would "go away" if I took it all back.

I claimed the rape accusation against PZ Myers was a lie to avoid getting expelled from school.

I was robbed of justice.

-----

What really happened? Is PZ Myers a rapist?

There is no way to tell. PZ Myers did not inform the police of the allegation. No criminal investigation was conducted. There is no witness statement describing the alleged rape.

The rape accusation was all handled "in house" in a tidy, convenient way.

Here is what he did. These are his own words:

A female student came into my lab when I was alone, unhappy about an exam grade, and openly threatened me — by going public with a story about a completely nonexistent sexual encounter right there. Zoom, I was right out the door at that instant; asked a female grad student in the lab next door to sit with the student for a bit, and went straight to the chair of the department to explain the situation. I had to work fast, because I knew that if it turned into a he-said-she-said story, it wouldn’t matter that she was lying, it could get dragged out into an investigation that would easily destroy my career, no matter that I was innocent. I was in a total panic, knowing full well how damaging that kind of accusation can be. Fortunately, I’d done the right thing by blowing it all wide open at the first hint of a threat, and getting witnesses on the spot.

-----

What really happened in the PZ Myers he-said-she-said rape allegation? The truth may never be known.

 


The SJW Dangerous Sexual Predator List

There has been much hemming and hawing online about the IGDA blacklist. Many have misrepreseted my position. They are falsely claiming that I said someone could sue for being blocked on Twitter, or could be sued because they were named as a member of some group. I said nothing of the sort.

I have never said anyone can sue for being blocked on Twitter. That would be a madness. Blocklists are legal and even ethical. I wish people would "block" me on Twitter rather than come to my Twitter page, read my Tweets, and then claim I'm harassing them. (How I harass people by writing about them and not to them escapes my comprehension.)

I have never said that anyone could sue because they were part of a group that was defamed. That would be madness, as group defamation claims are untenable. 

If IGDA had simply said, "Here's a blocklist someone wrote in order to target what she views as online harassment," OK. Whatever. That'd be a bit sleazy, but such is life.

That is not what happened. Here is what happened:

1. IGDA linked to a list that contained a person's real name.

A young trans person (among other vulnerable people) was characterized as a harasser by IGDA. They have reached out to me, as they fear they may suffer harm for being labelled as someone who commits harassment. 

Their actual real names were posted on the list. They hadn't posted on Twitter in ages. In one case, the person had never posted on Twitter.

If IGDA had simply linked to the blocklist, whatever. It would have been scummy and unfair to thousands of people. Such is life. (There is considerable evidence suggesting that IGDA had a role in creating the list. Let's leave that aside for now.)

Yet IGDA has implied that vulnerable people are part of an Internet hate mob. Again, the list IGDA linked to identified people by name.

2. IGDA characterized the blocklist as a collection of names of online harassers. 

IGDA's described the blocklist as being, "A Twitter tool to block some of the worst offenders in the recent waves of harassment."

IGDA chose to characterize the list as containing "some of the worst offenders." That was a choice IGDA made.

The characterization was also false, as the blocklist maker herself called the people on the list "sheep" rather than harassers.

3. "It's only some of the worst offenders!"

IGDA and its supporters are now claiming IGDA is off the hook because the list did not claim that everyone was an offender.

Let's set the legal issues aside for now. I am interested in hearing how far the SJWs want to take their arguments.

Here is a thought experiment:

  • Take a list of registered sex offenders.
  • Add every SJWs name to the list.
  • Put at the top of the list, "This list contains some of the most dangerous sexual predators."

Would they be OK with that?

Again, forget the legal issues. Does anyone seriously think that's ethical behavior?

After all, no one would be saying anyone in particular is a dangerous sexual predator. Rather, the list actually would contain some of the most dangerous sexual predators, and a whole lot of people who have never so much as had a speeding ticket.

Would creating such a list be OK? 

I do not believe so.

That list and the characterization of it imply that each person named is a sexual predator. That "some of the worst offenders" language is a slippery and dishonest way to avoid being held accountable.

Enough with this guilt-by-assocation bullshit.

If someone wants to debate, let's debate the issues rather than attack  people or try claiming people are "guilty" because they follow someone on Twitter.


International Game Developers Association (IGDA) and Defamation

1. Sometime within the past 48 hours, the International Game Developers Association, through its agent Kate Edwards, linked to and widely publicized what it called an "Online Harassment Resource."

(Kate Edwards of IGDA Tweeted out a message falsely accusing thousands of people of a crime.)

Kate Edwards IGDA

2. This "Online Harassment Resource," which was published on the IGDA's website, linked to a blocklist created by Randi Harper, a young lady has been in jail at least three times and may have a drug problem. Randi Harper has also falsely accused at least one man of a serious crime. 

3. The blocklist itself never claimed that anyone on the list had actually harassed anyone. Rather, the blocklist automatically generated a list based on whether or not the person followed two out of nine people deemed by this jailbird to be a bad person.

(The blocklist clearly states that it does not target online harassment.)

Screen Shot 2014-11-21 at 11.02.46 PM

4. The International Game Developers Association linked to the blocklist, calling it: "A Twitter tool to block some of the worst offenders in the recent waves of harassment."

(IGDA's website falsely accused thousands of people of a crime.)

Screen Shot 2014-11-21 at 11.00.30 PM

5. Many of these "worst offenders in the recent waves of harassment" have not posted a single Tweet. A person who has never posted a Tweet cannot in any sense be characterized as an online harasser. 

6. IGDA's action is so beyond the pale that I can't even wrap my head around it. IGDA has even falsely accused some of its own members of harassment.

(The Chairman of IGDA Puerto Rico was falsely labelled an online harasser.)

Screen Shot 2014-11-21 at 11.29.44 PM

7. Group defamation is not actionable. That is, you can't sue if a person says, "GamerGate is evil." IGDA does not criticize an entire group of people. Rather, it links to a blocklist, characterizing each member as an online harasser. 

8. Each and every person who has been included on the blocklist is, according to IGDA, "the worst offender[] in the recent waves of harassment." That is, each and every person on that blocklist has been  accused by IGDA of committing harassment, a crime in most states.

9. This is so Kafkesque that I can't believe IGDA has defamed thousands of people, falsely labelling them "some of the worst offenders in the recent waves of harassment."

10. I have been in touch with a client who IGDA has lied about. I will be in touch with IGDA's legal department soon. Even if there is not a legal cause of action, this is a major public relations blunder by IGDA and should be Streisand Effected far and wide.

Post your comments below!

UPDATE: Evidencing its consciousness of guilt, IGDA has updated its site without comment. IGDA has yet to issue an apology.

The link to the blocklist originally read: "A Twitter tool to block some of the worst offenders in the recent wave of harassment."

The link to the blocklist now reads: "A third-party Twitter tool developed to quickly mass block some of the worst offenders in the recent wave of harassment and also accounts that follow those offenders."

(Picture courtesy of a Twitter user.)

IGDA Blocklist change

IGDA knows it has lied about thousands of people, damaging their reputations. This is unacceptable conduct, and IGDA's behind-the-scenes scheming only puts another nail in its coffin.

Do not make the cover up worse than the crime, IGDA. You screwed up. Make it right. 


Does Randi Harper FreeBSDGirl Have a Criminal Record?

Randi Harper posts on Twitter and elsewhere online as "FreeBSDGirl." About a month or so ago, Ms. Harper made some false accusations against me. She claimed I was harassing or threatening her. I had never heard of the pretty young lady.

I thus hired a private investigator to begin looking into Randi Harper's alleged criminal background. After all, one must be careful these days and know who they are dealing with. Making false threats against me evidences instability. I have to be able to defend myself vigorously against any and all accusations.

 This is becoming a bit of a hassle. However, in this day an age, a woman's false word can get a man sent to prison. A man who is falsely accused of immoral or illegal behavior needs to hire a private investigator or otherwise find out who is lying about him.

According to a website called Encyclopedia Dramatica, Randi Harper (NSFW) has a criminal record.

I decided to look into the allegations against Mr. Harper. Georgia.Arrests.org, a website that posts public arrest records confirms that Randi Harper has been in jail. 

Screen Shot 2014-11-21 at 11.19.14 PM

 

(Is this Randi Harper's mug shot? Yes, it is!)

Randi Harper

The alleged mug shot seems consistent with mug shots I have seen. In this picture, Ms. Harper is wearing clothing similar to what inmates in jail wear. She also looks very unhappy in the picture. I am still awaiting confirmation.

When I mentioned my investigation into Ms. Harper, bringing up her alleged arrest record, she freaked out.

According to a story appearing in the newspaper The Citizen (here), a "Randi Lee Harper" was arrested in Fayette County, Georgia for failure to appear in court. What was the underlying charge that this "Randi Lee Harper" failed to appear in court to face?

There have been rumors that Ms. Harper has been involved in drug use. I have been unable to confirm those humors, however, and will give Ms. Harper the benefit of the doubt in the meantime.

I was unable to confirm whether that "Randi Lee Harper" mentioned in the story was FreeBSDGirl. Her reaction suggests that indeed it was the same Randi Haper.

Otherwise, why would she have been so upset to learn I am asking questions and looking into her background?

Randi Harper formed an Internet hate mob in an effort to ban me from Twitter. 

What did I do to offend Randi Harper? According to her: "He's posting legal information online in an attempt to intimidate and harass people."

Although my intent was not to harass Ms. Harper, I have to wonder if she did not indeed confirm she has an arrest record. Otherwise, why would she be so upset? 

My investigation is ongoing. If you have any relevant information or links, please post them in the comments below.

UPDATE: In response to my commentary about her, Randi Harper has falsely accused me of making rape threats against her. This is clearly an unstable woman. Deal with her at your own peril.

Randi Harper rape