--Neelie Kroes (about Microsoft), February 27th, 2008
“A couple of years ago they mass-mailed colleagues, employers, a University President, ISPs and everyone else that can help in gagging me. I am not foolish enough to forget this, and I never will.”There is plenty of evidence to show that Microsoft Munchkins (paid PR people in disguise) continue to operate, to this date. But here I present a personal story, which developed over the past few days. I am adding supporting examples of similar stories that affected other people.
My unpleasant 'affairs' with Microsoft Munchkins go a long way back. A couple of years ago they mass-mailed colleagues, employers, a University President, ISPs and everyone else that can help in gagging me. I am not foolish enough to forget this, and I never will. There are many other tactics, including direct intimidation and widely-spread slander. I won't go into this in depth, but it's well recorded on the Web (and cannot be removed).
For several months the Microsoft Munchkins have said that my site served malware. They lied, but they spread this lie in many places and repeated the lie (c/f Big Lie).
A few months went by.
Now, someone did a 'dirty job', essentially hacking my site last week (the cause remains uncertain for the time being). This happened after many months of extremely high activity, with unsuccessful hacking attempts ranging from common probes around PHP-Nuke to other CMSs. It's a case of scanning for vulnerabilities. I noticed these attempts, but said nothing in public. Some people refuse to speak about such things, despite inquiries.
<Take with a grain of salt>
The Munchkins, whose history is too telling, noticed last week's hack almost immediately (within hours and before anybody else, including myself), which is suspicious.
In public, I get accused of knowing about this for months, which is a lie (see the paragraphs above once again). They repeatedly make this lie in various forums (and not just in USENET), then back/mod each other up (pseudo validation/audience). I could go into specifics and produce more evidence to show this. It would be time consuming.
Scott Douglas, a Munchkin, already makes accusations in public, under various pseudonyms. He claims bogus 'damages'. More libelous claims are made about this having gone on for months, which is a lie easy enough to disprove.
Gary Stewart, another Munchkin who has gone by the name "flatfish" for over a decade (as well as literally hundreds of other pseudonyms), says a case legal is made against me. It's possibly just an intimidation tactic, which I mentioned yesterday.
To sum up in simple terms the situation described above, I am suggesting that false accusations were made in order to be used later and make a legal case.
</Take with a grain of salt>
Does any of this ring a bell? To me it does.
The above should be taken with a grain of salt, but there is a lot of evidence to show it. Anonymous/pseudonymous characters will soon shout out "paranoia!" to bury or deplete from the messages, but if it's true, it means that Microsoft is unable to find dirt, so it's making some 'dirt' up. I already have at least one person spying on all my activities (digging up dirt, followed by publication) and it's somewhat reminiscent of this old report.
Microsoft Critics Assigned PR "Spooks"
San Jose Mercury technology reporter Dan Gilmore recently discovered he's been assigned a special "owner" at one of Microsoft's public relations firms, Waggener-Edstrom. These spin-masters are attached to troublesome journalists like Gilmore who have the temerity to write uncomplimentary articles about the company or its products.
The really irksome reporters, according to documents spirited from the Waggener-Edstrom offices, are also assigned "buddies" at Microsoft itself. John Dodge, the editor of PC Week, has a special buddy at Microsoft, and Mary Jo Foley at Smart Reseller, is the subject of a "Mary Jo six month plan.''
These "owners" and "buddies" are just there to "help" the journalists, of course. How dare we think otherwise?
Microsoft Sends Secret Dossier on Reporter, to Reporter
[...]
It also was strange to see just how many resources are aligned against me when I write a story about Microsoft.
Netscape hired me to represent their interests, and when I announced this, controversy ensued. Which is a nice way of saying that Microsoft went berserk; tried unsuccessfully to get me fired as co-editor, and then launched a vicious, deeply personal extended attack in which they tried to destroy my career and took lethal action against a small struggling company because my wife worked there. It was a sideshow of a sideshow of the great campaign to bury Netscape and I’m sure the executives have forgotten; but I haven’t.
As CIO of Massachusetts from February to November last year, Louis Gutierrez had to endure most of the brunt of Microsoft Corp.'s political wrath over a state policy calling for the adoption of the Open Document Format for Office Applications, or ODF -- a rival to the software vendor's Office Open XML file format.
Quinn: Almost to a person, to anybody involved or who knows about the ODF issue, they attributed the story to Microsoft, right, wrong or otherwise. Senator Pacheco may be a bully but I do not believe he is disingenious and would stoop to such a tactic. Senator Pacheco and Secretary Galvin's office remain very heavily influenced by the Microsoft money and its lobbyist machine, as witnessed by their playbook and words, in my opinion.
The hijacking of Shareaza.com is a complex story with many twists and turns. Here is the story of Shareaza from its open source GPL roots, to the hostile takeover and where the project is today, directly from those at the heart of the news - the real Shareaza community. The fight for Shareaza has only just begun.
[...]
The French (RIAA) Connection
[...]
A Dump for Ill-Gotten Gains
[...]
Threats of C&D
As you can imagine, the members of the Shareaza community were rather upset about all of this and set up a new website with user forums. After two users made some offhand remarks about a distributed denial of service attack...
[...]
A Tangled Web
[...]
Making The Takeover Official
[...]
The Danger Posed To Open Source Software
Unless we are able to prevent the trademark being granted and regain control of the domain, our project will die. It really is as simple as that.
Lawyers and Fraud ( Mar 16, 2008, 19:20:16 ) Lawyers and fraud. Nothing new there.
The courts are all messed up in Europe (and America) and have been since before the fall of Rome. The project may need to rename itself. It won't be the first one that has had to do that. It wouldn't be the last one either.
The lawyer claiming trademark in the US might be laying his client open to fraud charges, but you'd need a lot of money to pursue it.
Just another case of 'Innocent Until Proven Broke'. Standard legal procedure. Happens all the time in the Corporate world.
disgusting ( Mar 16, 2008, 15:15:20 )
Dam Shameful and these are the people that are supposed to be championing Intellectual Property and copyright for the creators and artists, disgusting.
Comments
Victor Soliz
2008-03-17 15:27:09
Roy Bixler
2008-03-17 16:03:37
Roy Schestowitz
2008-03-17 20:48:36
See the remarks here, specifically:
"Along similar lines, I spotted the other day one method how Microsoft boosters within GNOME are able to affect Ubuntu: They can camp on bug reports and mark them repeatedly ‘invalid’ that way the report never shows up in any RSS feeds or for that matter any normal or advanced searches. One has to specifically search for invalid bugs to find it and at that level of specificity one probably already has the URL and bug number."
"My general complaint about Google News falls into the same category. It’s not just a matter of Microsoft gaming the system, pro-ODF or anti-OOXML articles just don’t make it into Google News regardless of the publisher."
Victor Soliz
2008-03-24 04:57:46
Now I am sure about it.
I spent enough time on brainstorm to notice a pattern. There's an user name who is always either behind or supporting terrible brainstorm entries. If you find in a random entry you suddenly find a rant about how Linux fails, it is the 'A' guy. If you find a brainstorm about how ubuntu must read the whole GetTheFacts page to learn how to do OS correctly, the 'A' guy posted it.
If you find a brainstorm about prematurely supporting Silverlight or OOXML, either 'A' is the author or a commenter saying "Yes, we need to stop lying to ourselves, we lost!".
It is ridiculous already, this 'A' dude keeps flooding that site, I have decided not to post his whole user name to avoid feeding him.
Roy Schestowitz
2008-03-24 05:08:32
Then there's Slashdot. I no longer read that site, but E-mails I receive claim that this site is being 'hijacked' as well. Paranoia? Maybe when it happens a few times. When it becomes a widespread pattern and people openly admit being shills, that's a separate thing altogether.
twitter
2008-08-15 01:09:42
Roy Schestowitz
2008-08-15 01:33:38
twitter
2008-10-25 16:02:41
bob
2008-10-25 17:34:25
LandofWind
2008-10-25 17:53:31
twitter
2008-10-29 04:23:01
twitter
2008-10-29 04:24:24
G. Michaels
2008-10-30 06:33:42
http://slashdot.org/~SockDisclosure/journal/214377
But hey, it's all for a good cause. All dirty tactics and systematic dishonesty are allowed. twitter is one of the good guys. The bad guys are terrorists and must be attacked at all costs, ethic$ and value$ be damned.
Note: writer of this comment adds absolutely nothing but stalking and personal attacks against readers, as documented here.
twitter
2008-10-31 02:01:49
twitter
2008-12-03 01:42:54
Attacks on a Video Game Reviewer who tried to bring his Xbox with him when he moved.
G. Michaels
2008-12-03 02:28:21
Note: writer of this comment adds absolutely nothing but stalking and personal attacks against readers, as documented here.