In reply to the
following American Power blog comment at the post "(O)CT(O)PUS = CYBER-BULLY" (reprinted below):
The comment:
Donald Douglas said...
PrivatePigg:
Here's Repsac3:
"Donald posted his employer info himself. The college has a website, and anyone willing to look can find Donald's public page--or the public page of his department head."
Don't be fooled by this dodge. Repsac3's information is public:
W. James Casper
Repsac3 has no claim to anonymity. It took me a second to find it on Google, so what you're seeing here is Repsac3's evasion on the issue at hand.
This is a red herring, and moral cowardice, which is what we usually get from Reppy.
I'm not going around posting people's information in a campaign of intimidation. Indeed, the only reason I even used Repsac3's real name is to see how much he likes it, and apparently not so much. And therein lies your double standard.
Repsac3 and (O)CT(O)PUS are making explicit threats that if I don't stop blogging about their nihilism they'll contact my employees and initiate a lawsut. Obviously, this is the only sense of power they can have over me, since they're unable to make an argument more compelling than those I've made against them; they are so incapable of winning a battle of wits and ideas that they'll in fact seek to suppress those ideas. Naturally, I'm showing the world that these are just awful, horrible people, and Repsac3's defense of himself is pathetic. It's evasion and obfuscation.
Repsac3 built a blog to smear and snark and vilify me and American Power. Why? Because, like David Denby indicates, their goal is to attack and ridicule to cause pain and sow fear, even death. It's not a joke here or a laugh there. It's a project of diabolical vengeance. I'm being libeled right now, as a worthless lying dog, a right-wing freak, a cut-and-paste neocon robot.
I can handle debate like this, clearly, but this has gone on to harassment. The phone numbers for President Eloy Oakley or Executive VP of Academic Affairs Donald Berz are not on my department's website or on my personal information page. There's no reason to post them other than to intimidate me.
This is why you blog anonymously, PrivatePigg, and I don't blame you. But don't be fooled by Repsac3's attempt at moral equivalence. There isn't any. He's not an anonymous blogger, and he's said so himself above:
"For awhile I was very careful, but in the last year or so I've let my guard down a bit."
That's putting it mildly. He let down his guard all the way by posting his name online. Repsac3's a dishonest, vile man out to slander others and stifle debate. The current post is a record of their deeds in case of legal action. -= Donald Douglas - February 17, 2009, 3:26 AM comment (AmPow blog time)
---
And
my reply:
Here's Repsac3:
"Donald posted his employer info himself. The college has a website, and anyone willing to look can find Donald's public page--or the public page of his department head."
Don't be fooled by this dodge. Repsac3's information is public.
I'm pretty sure I said as much, Donald... Both from older and newer info, one can find either of us if one looks... If you're now arguing that this makes it alright to offer such things maliciously, I'm not with you. It wasn't right for (O)ct(o) to do what he did, and it wasn't right for you to do what you did... It's one thing when one releases one's own information, but another when it is offered by a third party... That was my point. I still wonder what yours is...
Repsac3 has no claim to anonymity. It took me a second to find it on Google, so what you're seeing here is Repsac3's evasion on the issue at hand.
Neither of us has any claim to anonymity, Donald. Anonymity isn't the issue. Maliciousness is the issue. It isn't for (O)ct(o) or for you to decide how & where to release another person's info without their consent. And once one asks the question why either of you chose to do so, things get even more sticky.
This is a red herring, and moral cowardice, which is what we usually get from Reppy.
Pray tell, what is the red herring here, Donald? What is the issue I'm avoiding?
I'm not going around posting people's information in a campaign of intimidation. Indeed, the only reason I even used Repsac3's real name is to see how much he likes it, and apparently not so much. And therein lies your double standard.
Considering I said as much not two hours earlier, in a comment you pretty obviously read, your malicious little experiment might've easily been avoided, no? (And should I hunt on back into the archives for the previous time or two when you've done the same, or would you have a snappy answer explaining your reasoning behind those, as well?)
Repsac3 and (O)CT(O)PUS are making explicit threats that if I don't stop blogging about their nihilism they'll contact my employees and initiate a lawsut.
Donnie... Baby... You're lying. I have never made any such threat, and you know it.
Go ahead. Quote my threat. Link to it. Prove what you say, or admit you cannot. (as though you would ever do either...) You're making it up, Donald.
The closest thing to a threat I've ever made is to tell you that as long as you keep acting the fool, I was going to keep laughing at you. Neither of us have stopped, so far.
Obviously, this is the only sense of power they can have over me, since they're unable to make an argument more compelling than those I've made against them; they are so incapable of winning a battle of wits and ideas that they'll in fact seek to suppress those ideas.
Again with the tell... Never with the show... Stop claiming victory, and start showing the victories, Donald...
Naturally, I'm showing the world that these are just awful, horrible people, and Repsac3's defense of himself is pathetic. It's evasion and obfuscation.
It looks to me like alot of questioning from me, and no answers from you... But ymmv...
Repsac3 built a blog to smear and snark and vilify me and American Power. Why?
Because you're a funny character, Donald. You claim to "
take down" all these "
nihilists"--the definition of which appears to be "
doesn't agree with me," based on common usage, here--and I got to wondering whether all these folks on your "enemies" list had anything in common, and whether any of them had ever gotten a straight answer out of you as to why they fit any definition of nihilist. (I know I certainly haven't--and I must've asked a good 25-30 times--between day one and today.)
Because of your constant use of the word and your equally constant refusal to coherently explain it, it's become a joke around the leftwing blogesphere. YOU have become a joke around the leftwing blogesphere. I intended for
American Nihilist to be a one off joke on the silly "
nihilist" meme you created. I sent invites to all the "
nihilsts" I could find, thinking we'd all just have a quick laugh at the expense of the silly little meme, & that'd be it... But some of 'em wanted to sign up, and once they did, and started writing--in character--it became something better than the one off joke I intended... You've caused alot of people to want to laugh at you, Donald. You've not made many friends over here in "
nihilist, enemy" territory...
Because, like David Denby indicates, their goal is to attack and ridicule to cause pain and sow fear, even death. It's not a joke here or a laugh there. It's a project of diabolical vengeance. I'm being libeled right now, as a worthless lying dog, a right-wing freak, a cut-and-paste neocon robot.
Gee... You really are a drama queen, aren't you?
You do tend to be a cut-n-paste neocon robot, but it's a part of your charm.
Donald, you're reaping what you've sewn. Everyone who writes for AmNi, and many of the people who read it, have been slandered by you here. Almost as many have had you over on their sites with one line versions of your schtick here. They're laughing because they get the joke, and they get the joke because they've seen you in action.
I can handle debate like this, clearly, but this has gone on to harassment. The phone numbers for President Eloy Oakley or Executive VP of Academic Affairs Donald Berz are not on my department's website or on my personal information page.
They are both on the website of the college though, aren't they? Doesn't that make them "
public information," just like my name? Or do you want to have that cake & eat it, too... (It's wrong when (O)ct(o) posts public info, but fine when Donald posts public info... Mmmm... Yummy double standard icing...)
There's no reason to post them other than to intimidate me.
No, I'm pretty sure the college wasn't thinking of you at all when it posted them, Donald...
Now, (O)ct(o). on the other hand... (But then, one might say the same about you... Pot, meet kettle.) I say both of you were wrong... What say you, Donald?
This is why you blog anonymously, PrivatePigg, and I don't blame you. But don't be fooled by Repsac3's attempt at moral equivalence. There isn't any. He's not an anonymous blogger, and he's said so himself above:
"For awhile I was very careful, but in the last year or so I've let my guard down a bit."
I never said I was an anonymous blogger, Donald. (In fact, I'm pretty sure that was you who said that, in your original post.) I said I prefer not to use my real name on blogs.
Then--& I submit,
BASED on my saying that--you chose to use it... Not good, Donnie. Too much of your character showing through, there...
That's putting it mildly. He let down his guard all the way by posting his name online.
If that is your standard, then you have nothing to complain about as regards these guys from your college. Just like my name, the information is on a public website where anyone can find it.
Personally, I think you should set the bar higher, and say that individuals have the right to disclose or hide their own information as they see fit, but that third parties do not, but to do so, you'd have to admit personal fault, and I've never seen you do any such thing.
Repsac3's a dishonest, vile man out to slander others and stifle debate.
The fact that I keep coming here asking the same unanswered questions is evidence of the lie in those words... Man up, Donald. Stop telling people what to think about me, and start providing evidence of your allegations. If childish names & unsubstantiated labels and theories about my motivations is all you have, fine. But if you ever intend to "
take me down," you're going to have to do better than that...
---
Comment posted
February 17, 2009 4:59 AM (AmPow blog time)
.gif)
