Name: The Troll Wars - Shadowproof
Brand: shadowproof.com
SKU: shadowproof-com-10442
Availability: OnlineOnly

critic

The Troll Wars - Shadowproof

preview

Socrates hints that the MSM is looking at his story. Maybe the media will take a looksee, but maybe not. A discerning writer may detect enough hiv (high irony value). But its doubtful that many will understand the inside beisbol enough to connect all the dots, especially given the nature of journalism to present both sides as equivalencies when they have a poor grasp of the subject matter.Typically, people on both sides of a story will spin their telltale routine misrepresentations. This “balanced reporting” tends to become whipped by the back /forth and too/fro into a fine souffle of convolution.Many, many other people are sick of all the convoluted nonsense from all sides, including from inside the clever box.They no longer even participate in civic life, except anonymously, over the internet.There may in fact be an astonishingly large number of people, many of whom maintain their own blogs, from which they spew unreedemably nihilistic bile and bitterly cynical, satirical derision all over their parallel, online universes. Indeed, I may even be considered one such, by some. While at times it seems that more of what goes on occurs in separate rabbit holes over the internet rather than in reality, once in a great, great while these contradictory environments do collide, albeit awkwardly.&nbsp;In teh State of Maryland, apparently, we have a court decision rendered, if the quote in Socrates recent dairy is complete, accurate and not cherry-picked, which indicates that his was a case that granted plaintiff protection via a permanent injunction against some unspecified damage to “business relations” as a result of someone from Massachusetts exercising his free speech in a way that may be legally characterised as&nbsp;torturous tortuous or defamatory. Furthermore, it appears that the injunction was issued without judicially establishing whether Socrates did, in fact, previously engage in such conduct to warrant the injuction. Or are we, the lazy readers who demand having our homework done for us, missing crucial bits and pieces of data?&nbsp;&nbsp;Judge Jordan did not say I could no longer blog on Brett Kimberlin, the case, etc.. In fact, he stressed because he values freedom of speech, he couldn’t order that.Judge Richard E. Jordan:Ordered: that the Defendant is hereby enjoined permanently from engaging in tortuous conduct constituting defamation of or interference with business relations of the Plaintiff.Currently, there are certain characters, some anonymous and some who are considered “online journalists” or “online political activists” who are working hard to cast accusatory aspersions on Socrates’ character by posting snippets of court documents, certain private emails, even cherry-picked parts of the audiotape of Socrates’ court statement, which has since been yanked from YouTube.(Since Socrates has not approved linking to his real name, I must abstain from providing the relevant links–sorry, he won’t let me do your homework for you)There appears to be open warfare underway between a right wing troll named Breitbart and his media empire versus a veritable phalanx of left wing trolls, who have drawn battle lines in the sand. One gets the feeling that these are all online tabloid types, or political hustlers and one gets the feeling of needing to thoroughly shower frequently after spending very much time at all in any of their respective blogging habitats. One posted something about Socrates on Daily Kos. Another has posted intimate Socratic details across several blogs. And further, as is habitual among real trolls, they are going after each other as vociferously as they are after Breitbart, Socrates and Vinnie Patterico, the apparatchik legal gunsel who helped publicise Socrates’ Kimberlin schtick on his blog in the first place.Anthony Weiner also figures prominently into the picture somehow. Unfortunately, I am working very hard to remain completely uncontaminated by any further brain images whatsoever regarding Anthony Weiner, so if you are interested in learning how he figures prominently into this story, you will have to go elsewhere to find out. Sorry.As far as I can see, Socrates is merely the terrain upon which a larger, ideological tabloid battle is being promoted by these vaguely semi-unknown gamer warriours inside a small, insular world that exists mainly in a vacuum.Not to say that Socrates himself didn’t suffer from some lapses in judgment. He should have contested the case, that much is clear but, let’s face it, he’s just a poor nobody without the funds to transport himself across several states and back a few times simply to attend mandatory scheduled court appearances in a legal case about nothing, much less be able to appoint competent legal counsel to represent him over nothing.This provides a clear example of how the legal system is unfairly stacked in favour of the people who have the most resources available to file and plead lawsuits, especially ones worth only a hundred bucks in damages, plus court costs.And, I refrain from passing any judgment at all on the legitimacy of plaintiff’s business relations. To my untrained, naked eye they seem entirely legal. If one believes that he can convince a judge or jury that someone’s internet speech has tortuously damaged his business relations than he possess the right, as an American citizen, to have his day in court, and I will defend to my death his right to do so.Or wtf.However, I also observe that plaintiff’s case against Socrates resulted in a default judgment that can definitely be labelled as “pro-business.”Some organisations that collect donations for specific causes are organised as “not for profit” under section 501 (C), however these organisations are usually limited in the types of political activity in which they can engage.Many reputable 501 (c) charitable organisations voluntarily provide their IRS returns, which detail where they spent the donated money they received. In any event, the IRS information of 501 (c) organisations is generally accessible for public inspection.“Not for Profit” simply means that the enterprise is exempt from paying corporate income taxes. It is also possible, under certain conditions, that donations are tax deductible gifts to charity.“Not for Profit” does not guarantee or imply that all of the money, or even most of the money, is being used for the purposes the organisation advertised to solicit donations. “Not for profits” still have revenues and expenses, which may include such items as salaries, benefits, travel and entertainment reimbursement and any number of other legitimate, tax deductible business expenses.Anyway, there is also no requirement that organisations that solicit donations be chartered as “not for profit.” The donations to “for profit” organisations are simply treated as revenue for tax purposes. In fact, many, maybe most blogs seeking your donations are not charitable or 501 (c) organisations but are privately-held companies or sole proprietorships, meaning their stock is not available for sale on a public stock exchange. Privately-held business entities are not required to make public their financial statements.Unable to legally succeed in getting Socrates shut down and kicked offline, several, mostly anonymous or semi-anonymous characters are now trying to discredit him after the fact, a very curious undertaking, considering that Socrates is still just a “nobody” even after his name has been revealed and spread across several parallel digital universes.The sheer amount, if not the calibre, of the spin being spun is downright comical.Witness the list of usernames supposedly all socks of Soc, many recognisable as participants here at the Camp that we all know belong to distinctly different, other people.Well, I mean we do know that, don’t we?A serious question all of us who are online participants should ask ourselves and each other constantly: from where does our information originate, what were the motivations behind its origin, and how does our own complicity impact the spillway where ideologies intersect?How much of “our” message comes to us pre-cooked through the medium?&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Shadowproof is a financially independent news organization. All of our funding comes from small donations made by readers like you.We use your donations to hire freelance writers and cover our operating costs. Monthly membership subscriptions give us the stability we need to make plans while ensuring our organization does not depend on grants or major funders. If you like what you read, support our writers with a donation today.&nbsp;

Socrates hints that the MSM is looking at his story. Maybe the media will take a looksee, but maybe not. A discerning writer may detect enough hiv (high irony value). But its doubtful that many will understand the inside beisbol enough to connect all the dots, especially given the nature of journalism to present both sides as equivalencies when they have a poor grasp of the subject matter.Typically, people on both sides of a story will spin their telltale routine misrepresentations. This “balanced reporting” tends to become whipped by the back /forth and too/fro into a fine souffle of...

public

donkeytale

Reader-supported journalism dedicated to exposing abuses of power in business and government. Founded by @kgosztola & @bsonenstein.

The Troll Wars - Shadowproof

No article scores yet.

CRITIC REVIEWS

PUBLIC REVIEWS