Final statement on the Judith/Google affair
RudiL
and I will not reply to any further posts (provocative or otherwise)
on the matter.
For some time, like many others on this group, I have been both
annoyed and intrigued by the jms phenomenon, and often wondered what
sort of person, and for what sorts of reasons, would so happily
disrupt a group that they apparently had no real interest in.
Additionally, she has always hidden behind her anonymity to enable her
to behave really unpleasantly with no possible repercussions on her,
unlike people who do not hide their identity. She also has had no
compunction about publicising information she has found on the web or
elsewhere about other people e.g. photos of Guy, or names of Wm..'s
relatives and ex-girl-friends, and has also made vaguely threatening
remarks about them. Accordingly when information was given in the
group about Judith I used it to try and find out a bit more about her
partly to satisfy my curiosity, and to let her know that she was no
longer as invulnerable to scrutiny as she once was. I therefore let
her know publicly that it was easy to find information about her,
*assuming the information given in the group was correct*. However I
did not give the information out.
I actually thought the matter would essentially stop there, but in a
private email pretending to be from another poster who I trusted, she
found out the Google search term I had used. She then publicised this
search term herself (note *I did not*). This search was the obvious
conjunction of what little information was given in this group
(Judith's name, and that she used a wheelchair, with a uk added to
filter out American results). From what turns up there it is easy to
find more.
I have no idea why Judith published the search term, making it even
easier for people to find the information I did. Why would she do
this? I can only think of two scenarios:
1) The information discovered really is about her, and basically she
has just been foolish publicising it wider, or she thinks the cat is
out the bag and she wants to somehow try and turn this into a cyber-
stalking incident. It is not - I have not threatened her, or her
family, or written to her work, or anything like that. In fact I
haven't even publicised any information about her - just let her know
she may not be anonymous any longer and that all sorts of information
is available about her (like I expect it is for all of us), or
2) The information is not about her since the original information
used in the search may not have been reliable, in which case she is
trying to create trouble for the Judith Smith found by the search. I
hope this is not the case.
At all times I have been careful to state that various sorts of
information could be found *provided* the original information was
correct.
It is a pity that Judith publicised the search term. As I said it has
made it easy for people who otherwise might not have bothered to find
things out.
I was not a party to any emails mentioned by Trollsworth-le-troll, or
by Wm.. I have simply taken claims made in this group and used them to
try and find out who Judith was. I have at no time actually tried to
find out phone numbers, pictures, etc. These, and other information,
simply turn up in documents found when searching.
I did satisfy my curiosity. It didn't really answer the question of
why she does what she does - in fact it appears she may even be a good
person in real-life (assuming it is the correct Judith), which makes
it even odder that she behaves like she does here. On the other hand
it may not be right person. Anyway I have no further interest in
Judith's identity.
*If* Judith's real identity has been found (and it is a big "if" given
the games Judith likes to play so we can't know for sure what is
correct and what isn't) then I hope she will moderate her attacks on
other people a little since if people know who you are they can
complain.
I shall now say nothing more about this. I am also cross-posting this
to unnc as there is another thread about this there. I hope this will
not lead to a long thread.
Rudi
Ace
wrote:
>This is my final statement
Again?
spindrift
> On Thu, 8 Oct 2009 02:18:23 -0700 (PDT), RudiL <rudilu...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >This is my final statement
>
> Again?
Who gives a fuck about any of this? Anyone can see judith is as mad as
a lorry, why get sucked in to her insanity?
Fuck me, this is like a load of teenage girls having a spat and
passing notes saying "I hate you!"
Mr Benn
"spindrift" <newt...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e928171a-4824-4f2c...@s6g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
------------------------------
Totally agree. It's pathetic behaviour. Some people have yet to grow up.
Mike P
100% agree with you, it is utterly, utterly pathetic. Grow up for
fucks sake!!
Mike P
Roger Thorpe
and then using it in an attempt to pass yourself off as them crosses a line.
The impersonated might not be troubled enough to do anything much about
it but they might hope for an apology.
--
Roger Thorpe
...Wait a minute, It's stopped raining/
Guys are swimming, guys are sailing.....
Toom Tabard
wrote:
> Mr Benn wrote:
> > "spindrift" <newty...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:e928171a-4824-4f2c...@s6g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
> > On Oct 8, 10:54 am, Ace <b.rog...@ifrance.com> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 8 Oct 2009 02:18:23 -0700 (PDT), RudiL <rudilu...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >>> This is my final statement
> >> Again?
>
> > Who gives a fuck about any of this? Anyone can see judith is as mad as
> > a lorry, why get sucked in to her insanity?
>
> > Fuck me, this is like a load of teenage girls having a spat and
> > passing notes saying "I hate you!"
> > ------------------------------
> > Totally agree. It's pathetic behaviour. Some people have yet to grow up.
>
> Well.... I think that creating a hotmail account in someone else's name
> and then using it in an attempt to pass yourself off as them crosses a line.
> The impersonated might not be troubled enough to do anything much about
> it but they might hope for an apology.
>
But there is the prior issue of someone taking it upon themselves to
check up on someone who chooses to post anonymously, alerting them to
the potential of the information they have, and then being willing to
release the information on how it can be done to someone they believe
to be a third party...
Toom
Just zis Guy, you know?
> But there is the prior issue of someone taking it upon themselves to
> check up on someone who chooses to post anonymously, alerting them to
> the potential of the information they have, and then being willing to
> release the information on how it can be done to someone they believe
> to be a third party...
Given that the "third party" was in this case the purported victim
masquerading as a trusted third party, your point is moot. Getting
the information required misrepresentation of a kind which violates
the terms of service of many reputable ISPs.
--
Guy
Toom Tabard
wrote:
Where did I say or imply otherwise? I merely point out a matter of
balance.
Toom
Just zis Guy, you know?
<to...@tabard.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>> > But there is the prior issue of someone taking it upon themselves to
>> > check up on someone who chooses to post anonymously, alerting them to
>> > the potential of the information they have, and then being willing to
>> > release the information on how it can be done to someone they believe
>> > to be a third party...
>>
>> Given that the "third party" was in this case the purported victim
>> masquerading as a trusted third party, your point is moot. �Getting
>> the information required misrepresentation of a kind which violates
>> the terms of service of many reputable ISPs.
>
>Where did I say or imply otherwise? I merely point out a matter of
>balance.
As a matter of balance, the purported victim has spent a year and many
thousands of posts launching personal attacks, making creepy and
stalkerish comments and generally attempting to destroy a group whose
sin was proving it wrong. As a matter of balance, the proportion of
creepy comments about the troll judith is no more than 0.1% of the
number of creepy comments /by/ the troll judith under its various
nyms. As a point of balance, one might fairly point out that sauce
for the goose is sauce for the gander. As a point of balance one
might also point out that when the group made clear that the exchange
was distasteful, this was met with rapid agreement and apparent
cessation. As a matter of balance one might point out that this is in
stark contrast to the troll judith, who appears to take such comments
as confirmation that the line of trolling is hurtful and therefore
ramps it up even further.
Balance is of questionable value in the case of someone like judith
who is playing the part of an unblaanced individual.
(Enough balance - Ed.)
Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/