Series parts:

1. Operation Mole — Part I — The Person Working to Kill GNU and to Kill Linux From the Inside
2. Operation Mole — Part II — The Evolution of Matthew J Garrett's Vast Army of Online Sockpuppets, Hiding Criminal Activities Behind the Tor Network
3. Operation Mole — Part III — Sabotaging Communities and Defaming People, Just Like the Sabotage of Linux and Deliberate Distortion of 'Security' (Giving Control to Microsoft)
4. Operation Mole — Part IV — Does Matthew J. Garrett's Antisemitism Tell Us Anything About His Motivation in Trying to Cancel Richard Stallman?
5. YOU ARE HERE ☞ The Fall of a Man is a Woman (Matthew J Garrett Foolishly Unmasks Himself, Tying Himself to Crimes)

Summary: Now that everyone can see the chronic lying and the sockpuppets legion of the man who helped Microsoft "kill" Linux (and BSD) we need to step back and remind people why this matters a lot

TODAY my wife published her fourth part about how she was abused by sockpuppets of Matthew J Garrett, who has also attacked BSD and GNU/Linux users since 2012, i.e. over a decade ago. The series that we promised a month ago will likely continue until next year as it'll connect to what happened at Sirius 'Open Source'. The series will focus primarily on the army of trolls created and manned by Garrett, but before we get to that I want to remind people why it impacts them, too. Not only many victims of defamation by Garrett should be interested; all GNU/Linux and BSD users are impacted by things that he did and still does for Microsoft.

At this point it should be crystal clear that not only did Garrett lie about the sockpuppets^*. He quite likely uses the same tactics against other people and projects. To what extent? One can only guess and the victims deserve to know. Rianne has ample proof that she presented today and more proof was presented by her before (in previous parts from Rianne). Garrett used many people as political props and exploited renowned projects to advance this agenda, always claiming (in vain) to be the victim. This grotesque inversion of narratives must be exposed.

"The guy is a pathological liar and a manipulative narcissist."Rianne's article shows that he lied repetitively, so other people/projects subjected to the same abuse should expect him to have lied to them too. In IRC, in E-mails, and even in the post (snail mail that he sent to us). The guy is a pathological liar and a manipulative narcissist. He's emotionally unstable by his own admission (e.g. a couple of days ago). While it's most visible in IRC, one can perceive the same in other platforms, but that's not the subject of my post.

Rianne is technical (over a decade working in technology and, unlike Garrett, actually has a university degree in Computer Science), but she is not so familiar with the technical sabotage done by Garrett. To avert the Gell-Mann amnesia effect (e.g. how UEFI 'secure' boot was suppoedlyt inevitable and "there was no other way") I shall explain again today what it was all about. We'll also cover the subject in future videos and articles, such as this one from 3 days ago.

"He was defaming loads and loads of people."Back in 2012 I wrote many articles about Red Hat (Garrett's employer at the time) pushing restricted boot. I criticised Red Hat repeatedly for this and did not personify the matter. A long time later it turned out that the person doing it was a fervent Microsoft apologist (whom Microsoft would later attempt to hire). But as he kept losing the technical and legal argument he tried to leverage some bogus framing wherein he's a "justice warrior" and everyone who opposes his work is an evil bigot. That was a decade ago. That's when an already-sociopathic crazy Garrett (see his old homepage for evidence) seemed to be behaving like the stereotypical attention-deflecting drone. Knowing that he was already seeking professional help for his mental issues, I tried to focus purely on the technical and legal aspect. He, on the other hand, tried to portray everyone who disagreed with him (on purely technical matters) as a rapist, rape apologist, or something to that effect. He was defaming loads and loads of people. Prior to that he had already taken aim at several other people, including Bruce Perens (OSI and Debian). It's a diversionary tool. Beware gross misuse of the label "ableist"; he does this all the time.

"Rather than wasting time and thought interacting with him (and thus rewarding his behavior)," one person told me, a better approach was needed. "CoCs [Codes of Conduct] discredit themselves [...] as per articles from years ago about SELF (Southeast Linux Fest)."

Revisit this gem about Southeast Linux Fest and its defence against threats of violence over CoCs. It actually escalated to this.

"We saw similar tactics from systemd boosters and Bruce Perens talked about these tactics with great concern. Technical considerations were discarded in favour of shooting the messengers (critics of systemd)."Regarding threats of or insinuations of violence, we already saw plenty of that from Garrett; he's a sociopath and his violent rhetorics are documented in the wiki. However, all that is a distraction from what originally matters. Ladies and gents, don't forget the real damage that was done by him on behalf of Microsoft regarding "secure boot"; all his noise is a distraction on their behalf away from UEFI and "secure boot". We saw similar tactics from systemd boosters and Bruce Perens talked about these tactics with great concern. Technical considerations were discarded in favour of shooting the messengers (critics of systemd).

As one reader recently told us: "So if you can remember, every article mentioning him ought to mention or link to the info about UEFI and how harmful it became (after years of warning)."

In short, he's trying to make it personal but it is about UEFI. He's trying to claim that opponents of Microsoft being in control of Linux users are horrible people and that this is somehow an act of CoC violation.

"At some point we certainly need to make concise text/templates to remind people of this horrible person's attack on Linux, even if to only contextualise it."If we re-used the opening of the wiki page as much as possible (the wiki has a purposeful duality), it would serve to remind people of the real issues at stake, but at this point Garrett is already committing actual crimes, so it's not just a matter of "debating". "Given the fuss he makes to distract is in direct proportion to the importance," as one reader said, "of the UEFi message or warning," getting back on topic is imperative.

At some point we certainly need to make concise text/templates to remind people of this horrible person's attack on Linux, even if to only contextualise it. As in IRC it became very blatant too, he's a Microsoft shill 100% of the time. And that's the sort of person that Debian listens to?

"As mentioned before," the reader stressed, "he is trying to turn it into a personal thing to discredit the process and more importantly for his handlers distract from UEFI and his involvement in it.

"I will try to cover this issue no more than once per week, and whenever I do I will remind people -- every single time -- why it impacts them."In short, we need to remind ourselves of the real issue here, which goes beyond the aggressive attack on our IRC network (this goes 3 years back; he's a serial abuser). In a sense, the work discredits the person and the person discredits the work. If all this Microsoft advocacy comes from yet another "drpizza" (pedophile who planted articles for Microsoft for many years), the public needs to know. If he uses many sockpuppets to defame people, then the victims of defamation deserve to know. And again, in the words of the reader, "reminding the readers their stake -- that crazy Garrett stuck them with restricted boot -- helps get them engaged in the outcome more quickly and directly."

I will try to cover this issue no more than once per week, and whenever I do I will remind people -- every single time -- why it impacts them. Garrett is just another Microsoft mole like "drpizza"; his fate too can be similar [1, 2, 3]. ⬆ ________ ^* From his point of view, it would be utterly foolish to keep lying about the matter. Adding more lies to previous lies is pointless. It's just self-harming and costs money (stamps at the very least).