In the matter of Herb Schildt: article renamed

Discussion in 'C Programming' started by spinoza1111, May 8, 2010.

  1. spinoza1111

    spinoza1111 Guest

    The "Herb Schildt" article has been renamed in a pretty sleazy move,
    since it's still materially a biography and still in material
    violation of BLP. This was due to the actions of a few brave
    individuals. Post your comments supporting the rename, and the removal
    of all biographical information that is not about his writing. Note
    that despite the fact that it was I who protected Wikipedia by
    alerting W to the BLP violation, I am being continually censored and
    vandalized by the Lanier-troll, thug and bully Barsoomian. This is
    while actionably libelous comments by Peter Seebach are allowed to
    stand;

    Seebach will be in need of a lawyer if this shit continues here or on
    wikipedia. He has no way of proving in a court of law or before an
    arbitration committee that I am a "pathological narcissist". However,
    I can certainly prove that he has no education in computer science and
    is an incompetent programmer.
    spinoza1111, May 8, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. In the matter of pathological narcissist Edward Nilges

    On Sat, 8 May 2010 05:23:30 -0700 (PDT), spinoza1111
    <> wrote:

    >Seebach will be in need of a lawyer if this shit continues here or on
    >wikipedia


    No he won't.

    > He has no way of proving in a court of law or before an
    >arbitration committee that I am a "pathological narcissist".


    Yes he does.

    But really, you've libelled Seebach a dozen times a day here for the
    last six months. You've threatened him or others with prosecution for
    various offences against your dignity every week or so, back into the
    prehistory of Usenet.
    That you imagine that anyone could take you seriously after that
    proves that you are in fact a pathological narcissist.

    Case closed.
    Colonel Harlan Sanders, May 8, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. spinoza1111

    Seebs Guest

    Re: In the matter of pathological narcissist Edward Nilges

    On 2010-05-08, Colonel Harlan Sanders <> wrote:
    > On Sat, 8 May 2010 05:23:30 -0700 (PDT), spinoza1111
    ><> wrote:
    >>Seebach will be in need of a lawyer if this shit continues here or on
    >>wikipedia


    > No he won't.


    And even if I did, I *have* a lawyer, who has already reviewed this stuff,
    and who would probably be willing to take a case on contingency, on the
    grounds that it would provide sufficient lulz to provide all the war stories
    that one could ever need to exchange with other lawyers.

    > But really, you've libelled Seebach a dozen times a day here for the
    > last six months.


    Only a dozen? He must be easing up.

    -s
    --
    Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed. Peter Seebach /
    http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!
    Seebs, May 8, 2010
    #3
  4. spinoza1111

    spinoza1111 Guest

    Re: In the matter of pathological narcissist Edward Nilges

    On May 8, 8:59 pm, Colonel Harlan Sanders <> wrote:
    > On Sat, 8 May 2010 05:23:30 -0700 (PDT), spinoza1111
    >
    > <> wrote:
    > >Seebach will be in need of a lawyer if this shit continues here or on
    > >wikipedia

    >
    >  No he won't.
    >
    > > He has no way of proving in a court of law or before an
    > >arbitration committee that I am a "pathological narcissist".

    >
    > Yes he does.
    >
    > But really, you've libelled Seebach a dozen times a day here for the
    > last six months. You've threatened him or others with prosecution for
    > various offences against your dignity every week or so, back into the
    > prehistory of Usenet.


    To "threaten with prosecution" is not libel. Libel is making false and
    malicious claims, or revealing secrets about another. I am not making
    a false claim when I claim that Peter Seebach is an incompetent
    programmer with no standing libeling Schildt, since he has repeatedly
    provided evidence on this newsgroup that he is. Furthermore, after
    failing to post a correct solution to a very simple problem (strlen)
    Seebach confessed that he isn't good at "this". He has also repeatedly
    confirmed that he has no academic preparation in CS.

    On the other hand, Seebach has called me a "kook", a "moron", and a
    "pathological narcissist" with no evidence whatsoever. This is libel.
    > That you imagine that anyone could take you seriously after that
    > proves that you are in fact a pathological narcissist.
    >
    > Case closed.
    spinoza1111, May 9, 2010
    #4
  5. spinoza1111

    spinoza1111 Guest

    Re: In the matter of pathological narcissist Edward Nilges

    On May 9, 2:05 am, Seebs <> wrote:
    > On 2010-05-08, Colonel Harlan Sanders <> wrote:
    >
    > > On Sat, 8 May 2010 05:23:30 -0700 (PDT), spinoza1111
    > ><> wrote:
    > >>Seebach will be in need of a lawyer if this shit continues here or on
    > >>wikipedia

    > >  No he won't.

    >
    > And even if I did, I *have* a lawyer, who has already reviewed this stuff,
    > and who would probably be willing to take a case on contingency, on the
    > grounds that it would provide sufficient lulz to provide all the war stories
    > that one could ever need to exchange with other lawyers.


    This is a threat. I look forward to responding to any lawsuit you care
    to file, Peter.

    >
    > > But really, you've libelled Seebach a dozen times a day here for the
    > > last six months.

    >
    > Only a dozen?  He must be easing up.
    >
    > -s
    > --
    > Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed.  Peter Seebach / ://www.seebs.net/log/<-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictureshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!
    spinoza1111, May 9, 2010
    #5
  6. spinoza1111

    Seebs Guest

    Re: In the matter of pathological narcissist Edward Nilges

    On 2010-05-09, Richard Heathfield <> wrote:
    > spinoza1111 wrote:
    >> On May 9, 2:05 am, Seebs <> wrote:
    >>> And even if I did, I *have* a lawyer, who has already reviewed this stuff,
    >>> and who would probably be willing to take a case on contingency, on the
    >>> grounds that it would provide sufficient lulz to provide all the war stories
    >>> that one could ever need to exchange with other lawyers.


    >> This is a threat. I look forward to responding to any lawsuit you care
    >> to file, Peter.


    > No, he isn't threatening you. He's saying that, in the vanishingly
    > improbable eventuality that *you* actually try to sue *him*, he's ready
    > for you. But he knows that won't happen, and so do we, and so do you.


    I would not have thought this needed to be clarified. It really was pretty
    clear -- Nilges was threatening to sue me, I pointed out that this would
    amuse me greatly and not significantly inconvenience me.

    Of course I am not planning to sue Nilges. There's nothing for me to
    sue for -- there is no way any judge would ever be convinced that anyone
    would have taken the various libels by Nilges seriously, which means
    there's no damages. I suppose in theory I could try to get an injunction,
    but why would I waste a court's time trying to make Nilges behave? It
    can't be done, and I think doing so would deprive the Internet of a great
    source of humor. I just wish he'd bring his stupid posturing somewhere
    where I could respond. :)

    -s
    --
    Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed. Peter Seebach /
    http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!
    Seebs, May 9, 2010
    #6
  7. spinoza1111

    spinoza1111 Guest

    Re: In the matter of pathological narcissist Edward Nilges

    On May 9, 3:22 pm, Seebs <> wrote:
    > On 2010-05-09, Richard Heathfield <> wrote:
    >
    > > spinoza1111 wrote:
    > >> On May 9, 2:05 am, Seebs <> wrote:
    > >>> And even if I did, I *have* a lawyer, who has already reviewed this stuff,
    > >>> and who would probably be willing to take a case on contingency, on the
    > >>> grounds that it would provide sufficient lulz to provide all the war stories
    > >>> that one could ever need to exchange with other lawyers.
    > >> This is a threat. I look forward to responding to any lawsuit you care
    > >> to file, Peter.

    > > No, he isn't threatening you. He's saying that, in the vanishingly
    > > improbable eventuality that *you* actually try to sue *him*, he's ready
    > > for you. But he knows that won't happen, and so do we, and so do you.

    >
    > I would not have thought this needed to be clarified.  It really was pretty
    > clear -- Nilges was threatening to sue me, I pointed out that this would
    > amuse me greatly and not significantly inconvenience me.


    If you were a grownup, you'd know that "threats to sue" are used often
    to invite to arbitrate at some lower level. For example, I asked you
    months ago to take our discussions offline and you refused like the
    frightened child you increasingly seem to be.

    I have escalated this matter. I started to use "foul language" to draw
    your and other readers' attention that it's worse to destroy a
    person's reputation than to invite another person to get fucked.

    I contacted John Markoff of the New York Times to pitch this story
    which I now fear includes for completeness and veracity the full story
    of your professional incompetence. I received a polite reply in which
    Markoff declined to follow up but confirmed that he has had his own
    issues with his wikipedia biography.

    I submitted a post describing this issue to Peter Neumann, the
    competent moderator of the ACM Forum on Risks to the Public, and he
    has accepted it. It now appears at http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/26.06.html#subj12,
    and shall shortly appear at the digest on Google Groups, where you may
    comment on it; however, your response will be moderated and Peter
    Neumann will, I predict, protect you from the consequences of your own
    foolishness by not permitting libel as opposed to the verifiable facts
    of your competence.

    My actions as a "banned" wikipedia editor have gotten the Herbert
    Schildt article removed as a biography of Schildt; it has been
    relabeled "Writings of Herbert Schildt" in the (vain) hope that this
    will indemnify it, as far as the law is concerned, from being a
    violation of BLP.


    >
    > Of course I am not planning to sue Nilges.  There's nothing for me to
    > sue for --


    You got that right. There's something to be said for living simply.

    > there is no way any judge would ever be convinced that anyone
    > would have taken the various libels by Nilges seriously, which means


    Actually, your inability to code a string replace of %p, your
    inability to code a strlen(), your inability to structure your use of
    switch(), your sloppiness in declaring a preprocessor variable and
    then not using it, is all a matter of permanent record. Your lack of
    any academic qualifications is also verifiable. Your ignorance of the
    use of the stack to explain runtime is on record.


    > there's no damages.  I suppose in theory I could try to get an injunction,
    > but why would I waste a court's time trying to make Nilges behave?  It
    > can't be done, and I think doing so would deprive the Internet of a great
    > source of humor.  I just wish he'd bring his stupid posturing somewhere
    > where I could respond.  :)
    >
    > -s
    > --
    > Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed.  Peter Seebach / ://www.seebs.net/log/<-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictureshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!
    spinoza1111, May 9, 2010
    #7
  8. spinoza1111

    spinoza1111 Guest

    Re: In the matter of pathological narcissist Edward Nilges

    On May 9, 6:56 pm, "christian.bau" <>
    wrote:
    > On May 9, 2:41 am, spinoza1111 <> wrote:
    >
    > > On the other hand, Seebach has called me a "kook", a "moron", and a
    > > "pathological narcissist" with no evidence whatsoever. This is libel.

    >
    > Truth is an absolute response, and your posts on c.l.c provide ample
    > evidence.


    They wouldn't constitute this to a lawyer, because lawyers read at a
    higher level than mere computer programmers. Lawyers are able to
    disambiguate rants from essays.
    spinoza1111, May 9, 2010
    #8
  9. Re: In the matter of pathological narcissist Edward Nilges

    On Sat, 8 May 2010 18:41:42 -0700 (PDT), spinoza1111
    <> wrote:

    >On May 8, 8:59 pm, Colonel Harlan Sanders <> wrote:
    >> On Sat, 8 May 2010 05:23:30 -0700 (PDT), spinoza1111
    >>
    >> <> wrote:
    >> >Seebach will be in need of a lawyer if this shit continues here or on
    >> >wikipedia

    >>
    >>  No he won't.
    >>
    >> > He has no way of proving in a court of law or before an
    >> >arbitration committee that I am a "pathological narcissist".

    >>
    >> Yes he does.
    >>
    >> But really, you've libelled Seebach a dozen times a day here for the
    >> last six months. You've threatened him or others with prosecution for
    >> various offences against your dignity every week or so, back into the
    >> prehistory of Usenet.

    >
    >To "threaten with prosecution" is not libel.


    No, well spotted, I never said they were. But the hundreds of threats
    to prosecute you've made are evidence of your narcissism. Since only
    someone blinded to how pathetic this makes him appear could continue
    to make these empty threats.

    >Libel is making false and
    >malicious claims


    Which you do on a daily basis.


    >On the other hand, Seebach has called me a "kook", a "moron", and a
    >"pathological narcissist" with no evidence whatsoever


    Except your behaviour.
    Colonel Harlan Sanders, May 9, 2010
    #9
  10. spinoza1111

    James Harris Guest

    Re: In the matter of pathological narcissist Edward Nilges

    On 9 May, 12:44, spinoza1111 <> wrote:

    ....

    > My actions as a "banned" wikipedia editor have gotten the Herbert
    > Schildt article removed as a biography of Schildt; it has been
    > relabeled "Writings of Herbert Schildt" in the (vain) hope that this
    > will indemnify it, as far as the law is concerned, from being a
    > violation of BLP.


    A half-truth perhaps? You failed to say that the page was renamed
    unilaterally by one user and was subject to a proposal and vote to
    move it back....

    James
    James Harris, May 12, 2010
    #10
  11. spinoza1111

    Seebs Guest

    Re: In the matter of pathological narcissist Edward Nilges

    On 2010-05-12, James Harris <> wrote:
    > On 9 May, 12:44, spinoza1111 <> wrote:
    >> My actions as a "banned" wikipedia editor have gotten the Herbert
    >> Schildt article removed as a biography of Schildt; it has been
    >> relabeled "Writings of Herbert Schildt" in the (vain) hope that this
    >> will indemnify it, as far as the law is concerned, from being a
    >> violation of BLP.


    > A half-truth perhaps? You failed to say that the page was renamed
    > unilaterally by one user and was subject to a proposal and vote to
    > move it back....


    Which has now been done, because the page is in fact about the person
    (including his participation in a rock group), not mostly about his
    writings. So it's back to being a (small) biography, with detailed
    annotations and no actual violation of BLP. (Which would, in any
    event, not apply to an article which predated that policy.)

    This tireless crusade has also gotten the updated C:TCN a bunch of coverage
    via reddit, so I guess that's working.

    -s
    --
    Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed. Peter Seebach /
    http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!
    Seebs, May 12, 2010
    #11
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. spinoza1111

    In the matter of Herb Schildt

    spinoza1111, Sep 25, 2009, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    372
    Colonel Harlan Sanders
    Oct 5, 2009
  2. spinoza1111

    Re: In the matter of Herb Schildt

    spinoza1111, Dec 22, 2009, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    20
    Views:
    784
    spinoza1111
    Dec 26, 2009
  3. spinoza1111
    Replies:
    109
    Views:
    2,037
    David Thompson
    May 17, 2010
  4. spinoza1111
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    488
    Jens Thoms Toerring
    Apr 10, 2010
  5. spinoza1111
    Replies:
    137
    Views:
    2,097
    spinoza1111
    May 28, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page