Posted this to Twitter: "Starting to get excited about the next phase. Need a timeline and some measurable goals. Time to ramp down with the exception of my blog."
I delete Twitter entries on a daily basis, but thought this was worth capturing here, since I intend to be relatively silent for the next two or three years as I work on a project I have in mind and have been piecing together. It doesn't seem like such a big idea to me anymore; just time-consuming.
There is one unpublished, incomplete post {on this blog} which I might release at some point. All depends on whether I have the time to finish it. We'll see.
Tuesday, July 3, 2007
Monday, June 25, 2007
Terra Nova Aftermath
In keeping with the general reason for creating this blog, I thought I'd wrap up the Terra Nova banning by pointing to a few relevant URL's and pointing out something I find interesting.
First off, for the sake of reference since I've not previously provided one, here's a link to the thread that started my little back-and-forth with Catherine A. Fitzpatrick (aka Prokofy Neva, etc):
It's basically useless now. It's unfortunate Tony Walsh over on Clickable Culture has decided to hide all the comments, but oh well. That's his decision, even if it makes no sense to me at this point.
Second, to bookend the relevant links, here's one to the rather tame rant by Catherine / Prokofy regarding our banning on Terra Nova where she takes some swings at the "eggheads" (but don't stay too long, it's nasty over there):
Now, because I think it's pretty interesting to see how the learned Terra Nova regulars are reacting (Catherine does get a few things right in that final rant), it's probably now worth pointing something out: it's pretty clear that Catherine intended to drag my name across as many blogs as she could in order to get me to back down. Including Terra Nova, if necessary.
Okay. So where is the basis for this assertion?
Follow along.
Start by taking a look at my previous entry - Link - where I list all the places (of which I'm aware; there are probably more) where Catherine / Prokofy is freaking out and using my name as much as possible. That's a lot of hatred being spewed in a short amount of time.
What's behind all that?
Well, Catherine lets it slip in a comment on the Second Life Herald where she talks about what needs to be done about people like me:
Only she was being careful.
I suspect she thought she was safe to rant on Clickable Culture and felt free to unleash her mouth over there, so when Tony banned us that probably came as a surprise (based on all the calls she put out for people to protest). I'm guessing she expected a warning, at least.
Well, the ban hammer wasn't lifted on CC. But on her blog she's safe, so she ranted there.
She's also safe to spew on the Second Life Herald, because Peter Ludlow / Urizenus Sklar is her guardian angel. Her insane rants, profanity, and aggressive towers of text are the ongoing car crash that gets people to surf to his website. Without Catherine A. Fitzgerald's crazed dialogue, the Herald is just another blog.
So she dragged my name onto the Herald.
What Catherine / Prokofy didn't want to do was get into it with me on sites she values: Raph's blog and Terra Nova. As much as she rails against them, she desperately needs their attention. Just look at her Twitter page; she engages anyone and everyone who has a "name" (e.g. Robert Scoble, Steve Rubel, Eric Rice, Jeff Barr, aso). There's probably some deep psychological thang going on here, but all I know is she's careful around them. She'll argue with them, but she treads much more lightly. You aren't going to see many comments like "you fucking retarded idiot" out of her on sites she values; and certainly nothing even close to that behavior, I imagine, when using her real life identity, Catherine A. Fitzpatrick the Russian translator.
So she avoided them and spit her venom where she could do so without concern (good example of Ms. Fitzpatrick's offensive behavior here: Link)
Only something must have gone wrong. You see, I bowed out. Here's the comment I made on the Herald thread:
Only I suspect she was so inflamed and worried I'd contacted the authorities* that she simply couldn't stop when I did bow out.
She wasn't ready to stop. She didn't want to stop. She hadn't done any damage to my reputation, and she needed to do some damage. So when the opportunity presented itself on Terra Nova, she decided to risk it:
So, in closing, what we have is someone who used Terra Nova as a means to attack me. Of course I knew that, but the lawyers of Terra Nova didn't; Dan Hunter, Associate Professor of Legal Studies and Business Ethics at Wharton, didn't. But that didn't stop him from taking action.
As the only perceptive person on TN, Candy, noted:
{*Note: I did, in fact, call the FBI and direct them to her blog; that was an interesting phone call to be sure}
First off, for the sake of reference since I've not previously provided one, here's a link to the thread that started my little back-and-forth with Catherine A. Fitzpatrick (aka Prokofy Neva, etc):
Clickable Culture: "Linden Lab Lays Down Law: Give Your ID, OR Give Up Adult Content"
It's basically useless now. It's unfortunate Tony Walsh over on Clickable Culture has decided to hide all the comments, but oh well. That's his decision, even if it makes no sense to me at this point.
-
Second, to bookend the relevant links, here's one to the rather tame rant by Catherine / Prokofy regarding our banning on Terra Nova where she takes some swings at the "eggheads" (but don't stay too long, it's nasty over there):
Second Thoughts: "Terra Antiqua"
-
Now, because I think it's pretty interesting to see how the learned Terra Nova regulars are reacting (Catherine does get a few things right in that final rant), it's probably now worth pointing something out: it's pretty clear that Catherine intended to drag my name across as many blogs as she could in order to get me to back down. Including Terra Nova, if necessary.
Okay. So where is the basis for this assertion?
Follow along.
Start by taking a look at my previous entry - Link - where I list all the places (of which I'm aware; there are probably more) where Catherine / Prokofy is freaking out and using my name as much as possible. That's a lot of hatred being spewed in a short amount of time.
What's behind all that?
Well, Catherine lets it slip in a comment on the Second Life Herald where she talks about what needs to be done about people like me:
needs to be restrained by the only thing that can restrain someone like him who has no belief in God or anything higher than his own ego and coding abilities: the fear of ruin of his reputation by his peers. ( Link to comment of June 02, 2007 12:43 AM )So basically, she was already trying to spread my name around so that I'd back down for fear of having my real name associated with a distasteful topic.
Only she was being careful.
I suspect she thought she was safe to rant on Clickable Culture and felt free to unleash her mouth over there, so when Tony banned us that probably came as a surprise (based on all the calls she put out for people to protest). I'm guessing she expected a warning, at least.
Well, the ban hammer wasn't lifted on CC. But on her blog she's safe, so she ranted there.
She's also safe to spew on the Second Life Herald, because Peter Ludlow / Urizenus Sklar is her guardian angel. Her insane rants, profanity, and aggressive towers of text are the ongoing car crash that gets people to surf to his website. Without Catherine A. Fitzgerald's crazed dialogue, the Herald is just another blog.
So she dragged my name onto the Herald.
What Catherine / Prokofy didn't want to do was get into it with me on sites she values: Raph's blog and Terra Nova. As much as she rails against them, she desperately needs their attention. Just look at her Twitter page; she engages anyone and everyone who has a "name" (e.g. Robert Scoble, Steve Rubel, Eric Rice, Jeff Barr, aso). There's probably some deep psychological thang going on here, but all I know is she's careful around them. She'll argue with them, but she treads much more lightly. You aren't going to see many comments like "you fucking retarded idiot" out of her on sites she values; and certainly nothing even close to that behavior, I imagine, when using her real life identity, Catherine A. Fitzpatrick the Russian translator.
So she avoided them and spit her venom where she could do so without concern (good example of Ms. Fitzpatrick's offensive behavior here: Link)
Only something must have gone wrong. You see, I bowed out. Here's the comment I made on the Herald thread:
Well folks, my time on this issue is done. ( Link to comment of June 04, 2007 at 03:41 PM )That should have been it. She'd "succeeded". Done.
Only I suspect she was so inflamed and worried I'd contacted the authorities* that she simply couldn't stop when I did bow out.
She wasn't ready to stop. She didn't want to stop. She hadn't done any damage to my reputation, and she needed to do some damage. So when the opportunity presented itself on Terra Nova, she decided to risk it:
In fact, I've already been targeted by this troll -- Csven Concord (Link to comment of Jun 04, 2007 10:42:21 PM)
Note the timeframe.
I leave the debate on SLH at 03:41PM of June 4.
Catherine / Prokofy then does what is suggested by her earlier comment: she tries to drag my name somewhere else. Somewhere I can't as easily ignore.
Terra Nova at 10:42PM of June 4.
Had she not dragged my name onto Terra Nova I'd not have engaged her, and she knew that. She probably didn't expect me to ask that we both be temporarily banned, but I doubt she cared at that point.
-
I leave the debate on SLH at 03:41PM of June 4.
Catherine / Prokofy then does what is suggested by her earlier comment: she tries to drag my name somewhere else. Somewhere I can't as easily ignore.
Terra Nova at 10:42PM of June 4.
Had she not dragged my name onto Terra Nova I'd not have engaged her, and she knew that. She probably didn't expect me to ask that we both be temporarily banned, but I doubt she cared at that point.
-
So, in closing, what we have is someone who used Terra Nova as a means to attack me. Of course I knew that, but the lawyers of Terra Nova didn't; Dan Hunter, Associate Professor of Legal Studies and Business Ethics at Wharton, didn't. But that didn't stop him from taking action.
As the only perceptive person on TN, Candy, noted:
I think removing the quantitative limit on word counts and the removal of bad apples are both a step in the right direction.At the same time, those actions essentially validated the assertions made in the earlier heated posts (okay, rants) from the recent banees. - Link
I agree with Catherine on one thing at least: Terra Nova has become increasingly irrelevant, for me at least. And when only one individual recognizes something is off and speaks up, it doesn't say much for the rest, afaic.
{*Note: I did, in fact, call the FBI and direct them to her blog; that was an interesting phone call to be sure}
Sunday, June 24, 2007
Prokofy Neva Banned from Terra Nova
While preparing a response, I found that both Catherine Fitzpatrick (aka Prokofy Neva) and I have been banned from Terra Nova. I, of course, have no problems with that, but it will be very interesting to see how Catherine/Prokofy reacts.
The funny part is that my last comment actually contains none of my own words; it's two quotes from Prokofy and nothing more. Check it out - Link.
I guess just quoting someone was enough to put Dan Hunter over the edge (though from some of his posts on Terra Nova I guess a few people would venture he was close to it already). Here's the fateful post - Link.
Anyway, because I couldn't post my comment on TN, I'll do that below. Here's the thread - Link - and I was replying to this comment - Link.
-
Candy said:"This forum is public only in the sense that you can make a fool out of yourself to however many people read the blog"
Unless of course you demand everyone use your virtual world name... while providing both your real and virtual names to media outlets whenever you see fit. Then that potentially soiled reputation isn't attached to the person operating the puppet.
I'd argue that if
Some topics are touchy. Who wants to be associated with any conversations regarding topics like virtual pedophilia? Unless of course you have an avatar to front for you. Then you can use foul language, make false accusations, and treat opinions as facts in order to bully everyone into silence.
Then the issue isn't "undesired disclosure"; it's about controlled disclosure.
As far as I'm concerned, if someone is going to enter their words into the "public record", that individual should own them. Not the funny name picked from available options while registering for some company's virtual world application, but the real person sitting at the keyboard deciding which words to type.
-
Now stay tuned for what I expect to be a monster whinescraper.
As I told someone earlier, I'm learning more than I expected from this little episode. That will be put to good use, I'm sure.
The funny part is that my last comment actually contains none of my own words; it's two quotes from Prokofy and nothing more. Check it out - Link.
I guess just quoting someone was enough to put Dan Hunter over the edge (though from some of his posts on Terra Nova I guess a few people would venture he was close to it already). Here's the fateful post - Link.
Anyway, because I couldn't post my comment on TN, I'll do that below. Here's the thread - Link - and I was replying to this comment - Link.
-
Candy said:"This forum is public only in the sense that you can make a fool out of yourself to however many people read the blog"
Unless of course you demand everyone use your virtual world name... while providing both your real and virtual names to media outlets whenever you see fit. Then that potentially soiled reputation isn't attached to the person operating the puppet.
I'd argue that if
It's a public record. It's an archive. It's history-in-the-making because this field is so innovative and revolutionary with far-reaching consequences - Linkthen there's a conflict between that position - of ensuring all the "facts" are in order and proper attribution given - and complaining that
someone drags in a RL name so as to try to harass with undesired disclosure - Link-
Some topics are touchy. Who wants to be associated with any conversations regarding topics like virtual pedophilia? Unless of course you have an avatar to front for you. Then you can use foul language, make false accusations, and treat opinions as facts in order to bully everyone into silence.
Then the issue isn't "undesired disclosure"; it's about controlled disclosure.
As far as I'm concerned, if someone is going to enter their words into the "public record", that individual should own them. Not the funny name picked from available options while registering for some company's virtual world application, but the real person sitting at the keyboard deciding which words to type.
-
Now stay tuned for what I expect to be a monster whinescraper.
As I told someone earlier, I'm learning more than I expected from this little episode. That will be put to good use, I'm sure.
Thursday, June 7, 2007
Metaversed - A Final Comment
A couple of weeks ago I posted a comment over on Metaversed, a somewhat recent addition to the virtual world blog crop. The post, by Onder Skall, was rather poorly informed (Linked below). Onder didn't appreciate my pointing out that he was wrong in his assertions.
I'm not sure why*, but since then s/he has volunteered opinions about me based - it seems - on this extraordinarily short exchange.
Today I came across a similarly poor blog entry (Link) and, as my name was dropped in an impolite way, decided to respond. As I expect such comments will either be censored or manipulated, I'm documenting it here:
---
"The thing about Prokofy Neva is that he's both brilliant and completely unafraid to criticize."
And an excellent example of this brilliance would be this classic quote:
-
"There are those who have delighted in goading Prokofy to get him banned from various places (I'm looking in your direction Csven and Christiano 'n co.)."
Let's set the record straight since you're making the same amateurish mistake you made previously (Why I Hate "Virtual Thirst" - Link)
This started a couple of weeks ago on Clickable Culture as I recounted on Terra Nova:
Meanwhile, Prokofy launched into a series of arguably libelous attacks that either were entirely about me or included me:
May 30: on her blog - "Breaking Clickable Culture"
Jun 01: Second Life Herald - "Fear and Loathing in Second Life: The New Sex and Violence Policy"
Jun 02: on her blog again - "You will probably be in jail for the next 3 to 6 years"
Jun 02: and yet obsessively again on her blog - "Uncultured Clickability"
Jun 03: and then because she couldn't stop foaming at the mouth, on Terra Nova - "Prokofy Neva's comment"
and although I announced to everyone that I was leaving the debate on the Second Life Herald, she continued to throw my name around, and continues even now to continue ranting on Terra Nova... where I earlier asked that we both be temporarily banned so as not to drag that community and its blog down into the mud where Prokofy operates. No doubt she's goading me into replying in hopes that we do get banned so she can play the sympathy card with people like you.
And let's be clear, I've only used Prokofy's real name on a couple of occasions; a name which she herself freely allows to be printed in the mainstream press (whose attention she pursues) while others remain anonymous and identified only by their SL names.
Meanwhile, she goes digging deep into my personal life in order to make this kind of sickening insinuation:
Care to explain to me how she knows I have no children? You won't find that on my blog. Or on the portfolio sites to which I link. Or on my LinkedIn profile. Or documented anywhere inside Second Life since the time I registered.
No. She had to go digging deep for something to use. And when all she found was that, she did her very best to spread her slime on it.
Is this... thing... what you consider a "brilliant" individual worthy of respect? someone who admits to being witness to real child pornography in Second Life - who admitted to doing nothing and claiming she merely "forgot" about it all?
Wow. I don't believe I've ever seen standards so amazingly low as to endorse someone who admits to apathy in the face of real child pornography.
Given the above unprovoked attacks initiated by her on Clickable Culture and my own lack of blog posts attacking her, you make yourself look badly uninformed to the actual circumstances... again.
You do a disservice to the Metaversed blog and I can see it's obviously no longer worth reading if it allows your participation.
Feel free to respond, Onder; I won't bother to reply here again. I only hope 57 Miles has the good sense to demand better than this in the future.
---
* I know why now. Catherine / Prokofy went to bat for Caleb / Onder in a spat with Dan Hunter over on Terra Nova.
I'm not sure why*, but since then s/he has volunteered opinions about me based - it seems - on this extraordinarily short exchange.
Today I came across a similarly poor blog entry (Link) and, as my name was dropped in an impolite way, decided to respond. As I expect such comments will either be censored or manipulated, I'm documenting it here:
---
"The thing about Prokofy Neva is that he's both brilliant and completely unafraid to criticize."
And an excellent example of this brilliance would be this classic quote:
"A statement I believe to be true *is* a fact until it is *disproven*."
-
"There are those who have delighted in goading Prokofy to get him banned from various places (I'm looking in your direction Csven and Christiano 'n co.)."
Let's set the record straight since you're making the same amateurish mistake you made previously (Why I Hate "Virtual Thirst" - Link)
This started a couple of weeks ago on Clickable Culture as I recounted on Terra Nova:
First, I agreed with Prokofy's comments on Clickable Culture. Then I volunteered that if we can't get our real life laws - even within the U.S. - to align, then an international service like Second Life was going to "be a mess".Since you are obviously unaware, we were both banned from a blog we both commented on for years.
I cited the common example of the disparity between the voting age, the age when a person can sign up for military service (without parental consent), and the age when a person can *purchase* alcohol (as opposed to *consuming* it, which varies from state-to-state).
Prokofy ignored the point and instead jumped on the thought that the Feds could be regulating a state's "drinking age"; calling me "nuts" to suggest that the Feds could exert their will on the states in this way. I pointed out that there was a National Drinking Age Act and that it did "effectively" force the states into compliance. I also emphasized that I used the word "purchased" in acknowledgment that the Federal law does *not* set an age for *consumption*.
As most of you can imagine, Prokofy argued non-stop; unwilling to concede she'd made a minor mistake. I decided not to give in to the bullying she's used on many other forums and for which she's been more than once banned.
Meanwhile, Prokofy launched into a series of arguably libelous attacks that either were entirely about me or included me:
May 30: on her blog - "Breaking Clickable Culture"
Jun 01: Second Life Herald - "Fear and Loathing in Second Life: The New Sex and Violence Policy"
Jun 02: on her blog again - "You will probably be in jail for the next 3 to 6 years"
Jun 02: and yet obsessively again on her blog - "Uncultured Clickability"
Jun 03: and then because she couldn't stop foaming at the mouth, on Terra Nova - "Prokofy Neva's comment"
and although I announced to everyone that I was leaving the debate on the Second Life Herald, she continued to throw my name around, and continues even now to continue ranting on Terra Nova... where I earlier asked that we both be temporarily banned so as not to drag that community and its blog down into the mud where Prokofy operates. No doubt she's goading me into replying in hopes that we do get banned so she can play the sympathy card with people like you.
And let's be clear, I've only used Prokofy's real name on a couple of occasions; a name which she herself freely allows to be printed in the mainstream press (whose attention she pursues) while others remain anonymous and identified only by their SL names.
Meanwhile, she goes digging deep into my personal life in order to make this kind of sickening insinuation:
If csven is finding that one of the ways he can conceal and rationalize and justify his curious indulgence of simulated child molestation is by trying to zealousl go after RL porn purveyors, um, I suggest he's a poor candidate for this social task, given...his indulgence of the virtual and his disbelief in its connection to the real.
A man who desires to indulge in the simulated may become overzealous about prosecuting the real, so it seems. It seems a common tactic used by pedophiles, turning the tables, arguing against opponents by accusing them of the same offense, and so on. All pretty despicable.
I often find that people who have no RL children become the most zealous and accusatory about matters involving children, in ways that are really suspect and odd. - Second Life Herald comment
Care to explain to me how she knows I have no children? You won't find that on my blog. Or on the portfolio sites to which I link. Or on my LinkedIn profile. Or documented anywhere inside Second Life since the time I registered.
No. She had to go digging deep for something to use. And when all she found was that, she did her very best to spread her slime on it.
Is this... thing... what you consider a "brilliant" individual worthy of respect? someone who admits to being witness to real child pornography in Second Life - who admitted to doing nothing and claiming she merely "forgot" about it all?
Wow. I don't believe I've ever seen standards so amazingly low as to endorse someone who admits to apathy in the face of real child pornography.
Given the above unprovoked attacks initiated by her on Clickable Culture and my own lack of blog posts attacking her, you make yourself look badly uninformed to the actual circumstances... again.
You do a disservice to the Metaversed blog and I can see it's obviously no longer worth reading if it allows your participation.
Feel free to respond, Onder; I won't bother to reply here again. I only hope 57 Miles has the good sense to demand better than this in the future.
---
* I know why now. Catherine / Prokofy went to bat for Caleb / Onder in a spat with Dan Hunter over on Terra Nova.
Welcome to Second Perspective
I created this blog for one simple reason: to be able to occasionally document a second perspective to the frequent issues and exchanges which occur online regarding Second Life. I maintain a regular blog elsewhere, however, as there are people who prefer to use consistently foul language and disgusting insinuations even when their real life identities are known, I decided to keep that filth separate from that blog and instead post my replies to those people here.
This blog may not be updated regularly. I don't have time to engage every crusading worm. However, there are short stretches of time when I sometimes engage in online debate with such individuals. And because they're not beyond libel and slander, this is the place I intend to air those things for everyone's review.
Csven Concord
This blog may not be updated regularly. I don't have time to engage every crusading worm. However, there are short stretches of time when I sometimes engage in online debate with such individuals. And because they're not beyond libel and slander, this is the place I intend to air those things for everyone's review.
Csven Concord
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)