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 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


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."


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.


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., 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

Does Sam Biddle, a Bully from Gawker Media, Abuse Animals?

Sam Biddle is a writer currently employed by Gawker Media. Sam Biddle was a nobody who rose to fame when he used his platform at Gawker to torment and terrorize people. He is famous for saying, "Bring back bullying."

("Bring Back Bullying." - Sam Biddle.)

Sam Biddle Bullying

Sam Biddle was challenged by lawyer Mike Cernovich to a friendly boxing match. The rules were highly civilized - mouth guards, large padded gloves, and head gear. Mike Cernovich was even willing to put up $10,000 for charity to incentivize Biddle to accept the boxing challenge.

Sam Biddle declined, proving he is only interested in harming those he perceives to be vulnerable.

The link between bullying and animal abuse.

In "Psychological profile of male and female animal abusers," researchers examined the connection between bullying and animal abuse. Their findings revealed:

This study had three purposes: to explore psychological characteristics of animal abusers (criminal thinking styles, empathy, and personality traits), to replicate previously reported results (past illegal actions, bullying behavior), and to examine potential gender differences. The self-reported animal abuser group was 29 college students who reported two or more incidents of animal abuse; controls were 29 college students matched on age and gender. Participants completed self-report measures of criminal thinking, illegal behaviors, bullying, empathy, and the five-factor personality traits. Results indicated animal abusers had more previous criminal behaviors, were more likely to bully, and had the highest scores on the power orientation criminal thinking scale. Abuser by gender interactions were detected; female animal abusers scored significantly higher on several measures of criminal thinking, were found to be more likely to bully, and exhibited lower scores on measures of perspective taking and empathy compared to female controls.

It is possible that Sam Biddle suffered early child abuse, and is as much a victim as a perpetrator. See, Animal abuse among preadolescents directly and indirectly victimized at school and at home. ("Animal abuse by preadolescents has been associated with their later family violence and/or criminal behaviour; less is known about animal abuse and concurrent experience of being a victim at home and/or school, or of contemporaneous aggression to peers.)

See also, Effects of Childhood Adversity on Bullying and Cruelty to Animals in the United States: Findings From a National Sample. ("The final models indicated that the cumulative burden of childhood adversities had strong effects on the increased likelihood of bullying behavior but not cruelty to animals.")

When we look into Sam Biddle, we see a very disturbed man. He may even be a sociopath, as he appears to lack empathy and compassion.

For example, in a lengthy discussion he had on animal abuse, he observed that animals, "have pain receptors, sure. but 'cruelty' exists in the mind of the tormentor, animals can never feel 'torment.'"

Is it true that animals cannot feel torment? Or is Sam Biddle unable to empathize with the animals he potentially tortures? I don't know that Sam Biddle tortures animals. I can only speculate. That said, bullies often commit acts of animal cruelty.

Given Biddle's remark that, "Kicking a dog isn't unethical," one has to ask these tough questions.

Biddle's pro-bullying remarks in addition to his views on animal welfare suggest he lacks empthy, that is, he does not have an ability to feel the pain and suffering other sentient beings endure.

Biddle further noted, "society shuns animal cruelty because it's upsetting and indicative of further psychosis, not because it's 'wrong.'"

He went on to note, "kicking a dog isn't unethical but it's in our interests as socialized beings to not do it."

Would you trust this man to babysit you children or watch your pet?

Sam BiddleI wouldn't trust Sam Biddle around any vulnerable person. I wouldn't trust him around a child, an animal, or a girl who had had too much to drink.

Indeed, Sam Biddle's good friend Max Read remarked, "ketamine would be QUITE a 'date-rape drug.'"

(Max Read shares his date rape drug tips with the world.)

Screen Shot 2014-11-19 at 2.09.28 AM

People are free to associate with the likes of Sam Biddle, to be sure. I would certainly be careful.

P.S. Ladies, watch those drinks when around Max and Sam!

Liz Pullen is a Social Media Manager who Mocks the Disabled

Liz Pullen is an online activist who describes herself in her Twitter bio as as, "Sociologist, Ethnographer. Vagabond scholar."

Her LinkedIN profile describes her as a "Social Media Analyst, Writer, Editor, Community Manager."

She is also an ableist, that is, someone who mocks the disabled and other persons who experience suffering.

Screen Shot 2014-11-18 at 1.35.12 AM

Liz Pullen is part of an online hate mob, let by a graduate student named Margaret Caroline Pless (an aspiring research scientist who is going to work in the medical field), and joined by David Futrelle. 

I am a controversial character and understand that people attack my views on the world. That is totally cool. Free speech!

Yet what Liz Pullen, Margaret Caroline Pless, and David Futrelle do is low down.

Together they congregate at a Twitter site designed to mock me.  

They do more than mock my past writings and views on the world.

They mock a serious medical condition I suffered from called Red Skin Syndrome.

(Go to ITSAN to learn more about Red Skin Syndrome.)

This is the "banner" for the Twitter profile designed to mock me. This is what Liz Pullen looked at when she made the conscious decision to join the hate mind.

(Isn't this funny?! Liz Pullen seems to enjoy it.)

Screen Shot 2014-11-18 at 12.54.41 AM


Liz Pulle, Margaret Pless, and David Futrelle have the right to mock me.

But is it cool for them to mock me for suffering from a serious medical condition that cost me countless dollars and several years of my life? 

Child also suffer from Red Skin Syndrome. You can see pictures at ITSAN's website. (ITSAN is a non-profit organization designed to help raise awareness about serious skin conditions.)

Liz Pullen seems to think it's fine to mock me, as she follows that Twitter profile. David Futrelle does as well. (I have screen caps proving they follow this account. UPDATE: See screen shots below.)

As you can see, Liz Pullen and her friends have no decency or dignity.

How can these people claim to have any moral high ground or moral supremacy when basic human compassion seems beyond their understanding? How can they call anyone out for anything when they mock those who suffer from medical conditions that are physically and mentally disabling. (Nervous breakdowns are common for Red Skin Syndrome sufferers. I wasn't able to work for 6 weeks, as my sleep was disrupted and even moving hurt.)

They remain free to mock me. I remain free to call them out for their callousness and pitiable spirit.

UPDATE: Some people don't believe that Liz Pullen, Margaret Caroline Pless, and David Futrelle practice what is known as "ableism."

Here are the screen shots proving that they mock me not for my offensive views, but for a serious medical condition.

(Liz Pullen mocks those who suffer from serious medical conditions.)

Screen Shot 2014-11-18 at 1.02.31 AM

(David Futrelle discriminates against the disabled.)

Screen Shot 2014-11-18 at 1.02.04 AM


Maurice Pilosof and Owen Cook of Real Social Dynamics Censor Discussion of a Sexual Assault

Maurice Pilosof, Owen Cook, and Julien Blanc of Real Social Dynamics have real problems.

Maurice Pilosof is a lawyer representing Real Social Dynamics, which is owned by Owen Cook and employes Julien Blanc. RSD has been caught up in a sexaul assault scandal. In a video Julian Blanc filmed for RSD (and that Owen Cook approved), Blanc is seen committing sexual assault on a woman.

(Click play to learn sexual assault tips from Julien Blanc. Owen Cook approved of this video.)


The media has been spanking Owen Cook and Julian Blanc. Rather than respond to the media to share their story, Owen Cook has hidden in a bunker.

Owen is hiding out because he can't keep his story straight.

Owen Cook knew about Julien Blanc's sexual assault video.

Owen Cook wants to censor 8Chan because 8Chan contains screen captures that prove Owen Cook knew about Julien Cook's sexual assault video.

Before the drama went down Owen Cook posted on the Real Social Dynamics web forum:

It's like 100 or 200 people mad on the internet, similar to pick up hate.

The Japan video will have succeeded if it gets in the million view range. 

Julien's goal is something closer to what David Bond had, with proper news lol. 

(Click on the image for a full screen view.)

Owen Cook Julien Blanc sexual assault

Afraid of taking on the media or going on his public relations campaign, Owen Cook has retained a lawyer who may just find himself nominated for censorious asshat of the year.

Maurice Pilosof is attempting to censor websites that are critical of RSD. Mr. Pilosof sent a letter out to the owner of, a message board where users create and share content.

The owner of has posted the letter on his Twitter feed. The full letter is also reproduced below.

Mr. Pilosof's letter has all of the telltale signs of an attempt to censor. The letter, like all such empty threats from lawyers, throws out a bunch of legalese and mean-sounding threats. These letters are long on generalities and short on specifics.

RSD's letter has one intent only - to censor.

An attorney who understands free speech would laugh at this letter. Yet legal representation is expensive. Attorneys like Maurice Pilosof regularly send out threatening letters knowing that 99% of people will simply take a post down rather than assert their rights.

The owner of is not like most people. He will defend his rights. 

The letter from Mr. Pilosof is a joke for two reasons.

1. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act provides:

No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

The owner of did not publish the allegedly defamatory material. Therefore the owner is under no obligation to do anything to "correct the record." Nor is the owner of under an oligation to remove any allegedly defamatory posts.

2. The letter is a rambling mess of nonsense.

I'll explain in bracketed comments why letters like this should be ignored.

The letter from Maurice Pilosof reads:

The undersigned, the attorney of REAL SOCIAL DYNAMICS, INC., (“RSD”) hereby requests that the following posts be taken down: [Please learn about the Striessand Effect.]

The statements contained therein are untrue, private [so what?] and defamatory. [Attorney Pilosof does not identify what statements are defamatory.] Such information and statements were made to malicious [you mean maliciously?] injure RSD’s business. [Free speech is often hurtful. That doesn't matter. Julien Blanc is a public figure. This means you must show that any statements  were made with actual malice, that is, that the writer knew the statements were false at the time he made them.]

Further, they [define "they"] contain statements that are patently untrue. [Which statements are patently untrue? Identify each and every statement that you claim is patently untrue.]

The notion that some anonymous individual knows the equity structure of RSD a privately held company is ridiculous. [The anonymous individual might be a whistle blower. You don't know who is leaking information about the dangerous sexual predator Julien Blanc and his employer Owen Cook.] The attribution of ownership contained in the post is patently false. [Prove it.] This letter constitutes a demand for immediate takedown of such post. [Your takedown request is DENIED; see video below.]

All references to Japanese law in the post are without foundation and merit. [Identify each and every reference to Japanese law and show why those references are without foundation and merit.] The “anonymous” post is not from an official judicial body of the Japanese government. [Perhaps the statement is protected satire. Be more specific.] RSD can equivocally [do you mean unequivocally?] state that it nor any of its employees have been contacted by any judicial body in Japan. [Why should we trust the word of sexual predators?] In point of fact, neither RSD nor any of its employees are subject of any criminal proceeding. [Not yet, anyway.] The inaccurate and false statements contained are defamatory per se and need to be removed immediately. [I suggest you read this primer on defamation per se.]

I may be reached via email at or via phone to +1 310 652 0137. I have a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law. [This is DMCA legalese. Weren't you just talking about defamation per se?] The information in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed. [This is also DMCA legalese. Get you theory of the case straight, sir. What exactly are you claiming?]

Maurice Pilosof
Legal Counsel, Real Social Dynamics

(The owner of responds to Owen Cook's legal threats.)