[27917] in Perl-Users-Digest
Perl-Users Digest, Issue: 9281 Volume: 10
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Sun Jun 11 03:10:14 2006
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 00:10:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: Perl-Users Digest <Perl-Users-Request@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU>
To: Perl-Users@ruby.OCE.ORST.EDU (Perl-Users Digest)
Perl-Users Digest Sun, 11 Jun 2006 Volume: 10 Number: 9281
Today's topics:
Re: Xah Lee network abuse <SeaFuncSpam@gmail.com>
Re: Xah Lee network abuse <max@alcyone.com>
Re: Xah Lee network abuse <flippa@flippac.org>
Re: Xah Lee network abuse <max@alcyone.com>
Re: Xah Lee network abuse <flippa@flippac.org>
Re: Xah Lee network abuse <mscottschilling@hotmail.com>
Re: Xah Lee network abuse <flippa@flippac.org>
Re: Xah Lee network abuse <jurgenex@hotmail.com>
Re: Xah Lee network abuse <mscottschilling@hotmail.com>
Re: Xah Lee network abuse <max@alcyone.com>
Re: Xah Lee network abuse <esmond.not.pitt@not.bigpond.com>
Re: Xah Lee network abuse <flippa@flippac.org>
Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 6 Apr 01) (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 10 Jun 2006 20:59:03 -0700
From: "Mallor" <SeaFuncSpam@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Xah Lee network abuse
Message-Id: <1149998343.493200.144990@h76g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
PofN wrote:
>
> Liar. You were never sorry when you troubled us with your posting
> excrements in the past, you are not sorry now.
>
> Liar. You are a net abuser, a kook and a troll. It has nothing to do
> with your writings and style. It has everything to do with your
> vialoation of netiquette, with you x-posting of off-topic messages,
> with your trolling and kookery.
>
> Liear. John asked people do do their duty as net citizens and to report
> a serial net abuser.
>
> Liar. Your whole usenet "career" is build around the posting of
> off-topic messages.
>
> Liar. You were getting out of hand for some time now.
>
> People know very well about you, Xah Lee, the serial newsgroup abuser,
> troll, liar, and kook.
>
> More lies.
>
> I appreciate the courage of John and friends to stand up against
> someone who is out of control. You are not even affraid off accusing
> John of a crime (harrasment) and starting a smear campaing on your web
> site. You have sunken so low that you are fast approaching the earth's
> metal core.
I know I'm coming late to the barbeque. In passing, I ask: do you have
an objective, impartial perspective on the subject of committing
crimes? Because libel is a crime. It all depends on whether what you
state about Xah is provably true or not. I haven't followed his posts,
but when I hear someone chanting "abuser, troll, liar, kook!" I really
wonder about the accuser. Anyways, I suppose it's all "sport" until
one of you gets the lawyers involved.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 21:09:53 -0700
From: Erik Max Francis <max@alcyone.com>
Subject: Re: Xah Lee network abuse
Message-Id: <bdqdnRiJa8YJChbZnZ2dnUVZ_tOdnZ2d@speakeasy.net>
Mallor wrote:
> I know I'm coming late to the barbeque. In passing, I ask: do you have
> an objective, impartial perspective on the subject of committing
> crimes? Because libel is a crime.
No, it is a tort.
--
Erik Max Francis && max@alcyone.com && http://www.alcyone.com/max/
San Jose, CA, USA && 37 20 N 121 53 W && AIM erikmaxfrancis
Bachelors have consciences, married men have wives.
-- H.L. Mencken
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 05:14:42 +0100
From: Philippa Cowderoy <flippa@flippac.org>
Subject: Re: Xah Lee network abuse
Message-Id: <Pine.WNT.4.61.0606110513500.1652@SLINKY>
On Sat, 10 Jun 2006, Erik Max Francis wrote:
> Mallor wrote:
>
> > I know I'm coming late to the barbeque. In passing, I ask: do you have
> > an objective, impartial perspective on the subject of committing
> > crimes? Because libel is a crime.
>
> No, it is a tort.
>
Rather a lot depends on which legal system you're in, for a start.
Including the standards of proof and who the onus is on.
--
flippa@flippac.org
Sometimes you gotta fight fire with fire. Most
of the time you just get burnt worse though.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 21:17:45 -0700
From: Erik Max Francis <max@alcyone.com>
Subject: Re: Xah Lee network abuse
Message-Id: <IJWdnXd57J3xBBbZnZ2dnUVZ_qqdnZ2d@speakeasy.net>
Philippa Cowderoy wrote:
> Rather a lot depends on which legal system you're in, for a start.
> Including the standards of proof and who the onus is on.
Oh, no doubt. But I don't think there's any modern legal system in
which it's a crime, rather than a tort. Is there?
Anyway, it's certainly a tort in all relevant jurisdictions here.
--
Erik Max Francis && max@alcyone.com && http://www.alcyone.com/max/
San Jose, CA, USA && 37 20 N 121 53 W && AIM erikmaxfrancis
Covenants without the sword are but words.
-- Camden
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 05:35:09 +0100
From: Philippa Cowderoy <flippa@flippac.org>
Subject: Re: Xah Lee network abuse
Message-Id: <Pine.WNT.4.61.0606110522400.1652@SLINKY>
On Sat, 10 Jun 2006, Erik Max Francis wrote:
> Philippa Cowderoy wrote:
>
> > Rather a lot depends on which legal system you're in, for a start. Including
> > the standards of proof and who the onus is on.
>
> Oh, no doubt. But I don't think there's any modern legal system in which it's
> a crime, rather than a tort. Is there?
>
I'm not aware of a current legal system where it's the case, but I don't
know the details of many of them.
--
flippa@flippac.org
A problem that's all in your head is still a problem.
Brain damage is but one form of mind damage.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 04:40:39 GMT
From: "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Xah Lee network abuse
Message-Id: <b9Nig.145951$F_3.110900@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>
"Mallor" <SeaFuncSpam@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1149998343.493200.144990@h76g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> I know I'm coming late to the barbeque. In passing, I ask: do you have
> an objective, impartial perspective on the subject of committing
> crimes? Because libel is a crime. It all depends on whether what you
> state about Xah is provably true or not.
I'm not aware of any definition of libel that includes "making statements
that are not provably true".
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 05:50:00 +0100
From: Philippa Cowderoy <flippa@flippac.org>
Subject: Re: Xah Lee network abuse
Message-Id: <Pine.WNT.4.61.0606110548540.1652@SLINKY>
On Sun, 11 Jun 2006, Mike Schilling wrote:
> I'm not aware of any definition of libel that includes "making statements
> that are not provably true".
>
I believe UK law uses one that's close to it.
--
flippa@flippac.org
Society does not owe people jobs.
Society owes it to itself to find people jobs.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 05:40:30 GMT
From: "Jürgen Exner" <jurgenex@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Xah Lee network abuse
Message-Id: <i1Oig.409$OL2.96@trnddc06>
Mallor wrote:
> I know I'm coming late to the barbeque.
That's why you are missing the history
> In passing, I ask: do you
> have an objective, impartial perspective on the subject of committing
> crimes? Because libel is a crime. It all depends on whether what you
> state about Xah is provably true or not. I haven't followed his
> posts,
Had you done so, then you wouldn't ask this question.
jue
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 06:05:22 GMT
From: "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Xah Lee network abuse
Message-Id: <CoOig.113949$dW3.83047@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>
"Philippa Cowderoy" <flippa@flippac.org> wrote in message
news:Pine.WNT.4.61.0606110548540.1652@SLINKY...
> On Sun, 11 Jun 2006, Mike Schilling wrote:
>
>> I'm not aware of any definition of libel that includes "making statements
>> that are not provably true".
>>
>
> I believe UK law uses one that's close to it.
If I were to write, say, that Tony Blair's tax policy will lead to higher
deficits, I could be convicted of libel? Even if that's true, it's not a
priori provable.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 23:14:21 -0700
From: Erik Max Francis <max@alcyone.com>
Subject: Re: Xah Lee network abuse
Message-Id: <qKmdnUvjhOZZKRbZnZ2dnUVZ_r-dnZ2d@speakeasy.net>
Mike Schilling wrote:
> If I were to write, say, that Tony Blair's tax policy will lead to higher
> deficits, I could be convicted of libel? Even if that's true, it's not a
> priori provable.
I think what he was getting at is that, unlike many jurisdictions,
writing something factually true is _not_ in and of itself a defense
against a libel suit in the UK.
As for the reverse side of the issue, in jurisdictions where it _is_ a
defense, if one were to accuse him of being a pedophile but couldn't
prove it, that would certainly be an actionable offense.
--
Erik Max Francis && max@alcyone.com && http://www.alcyone.com/max/
San Jose, CA, USA && 37 20 N 121 53 W && AIM erikmaxfrancis
Twenty-four hours a day, three-hundred sixty-five days a year as
Secretary of Defense, I lived the Cold War. -- Robert S. McNamara
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 06:51:29 GMT
From: EJP <esmond.not.pitt@not.bigpond.com>
Subject: Re: Xah Lee network abuse
Message-Id: <R3Pig.7092$ap3.4210@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
Philippa Cowderoy wrote:
> I'm not aware of a current legal system where it's the case, but I don't
> know the details of many of them.
Many states have criminal as well as civil libel.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slander_and_libel
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 07:57:04 +0100
From: Philippa Cowderoy <flippa@flippac.org>
Subject: Re: Xah Lee network abuse
Message-Id: <Pine.WNT.4.61.0606110754070.1652@SLINKY>
On Sat, 10 Jun 2006, Erik Max Francis wrote:
> Mike Schilling wrote:
>
> > If I were to write, say, that Tony Blair's tax policy will lead to higher
> > deficits, I could be convicted of libel? Even if that's true, it's not a
> > priori provable.
>
> I think what he was getting at is that, unlike many jurisdictions, writing
> something factually true is _not_ in and of itself a defense against a libel
> suit in the UK.
>
It is. However, the onus is on the defendant to show that it's true,
rather than on the claimant to show that it's false. I assume the "he"
refers to Brandon?
--
flippa@flippac.org
A problem that's all in your head is still a problem.
Brain damage is but one form of mind damage.
------------------------------
Date: 6 Apr 2001 21:33:47 GMT (Last modified)
From: Perl-Users-Request@ruby.oce.orst.edu (Perl-Users-Digest Admin)
Subject: Digest Administrivia (Last modified: 6 Apr 01)
Message-Id: <null>
Administrivia:
#The Perl-Users Digest is a retransmission of the USENET newsgroup
#comp.lang.perl.misc. For subscription or unsubscription requests, send
#the single line:
#
# subscribe perl-users
#or:
# unsubscribe perl-users
#
#to almanac@ruby.oce.orst.edu.
NOTE: due to the current flood of worm email banging on ruby, the smtp
server on ruby has been shut off until further notice.
To submit articles to comp.lang.perl.announce, send your article to
clpa@perl.com.
#To request back copies (available for a week or so), send your request
#to almanac@ruby.oce.orst.edu with the command "send perl-users x.y",
#where x is the volume number and y is the issue number.
#For other requests pertaining to the digest, send mail to
#perl-users-request@ruby.oce.orst.edu. Do not waste your time or mine
#sending perl questions to the -request address, I don't have time to
#answer them even if I did know the answer.
------------------------------
End of Perl-Users Digest V10 Issue 9281
***************************************
