31 January 2005. Michael's email address obscured.
To: "Danna Thompson" <dlthompson@verio.net> From: <jya@pipeline.com> Subject: FW: Cryptome.org [IDS-7575731] FWD: Abuse - Michael Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 18:18 -0700 Dear Danna Thompson, The purpose of providing Michael's email address was for persons to complain to him about his actions in censoring a blog he hosts, taking over the blog from its original founder without notifying the founder, masquerading as the original founder, and hiding his identity. See an account here: http://cryptome.org/dermot-hijack.htm We not that Michael did not explain to you his disreputable actions decribed in the Cryptome file above. In response to your notice we have today obscured Michael's email address in the Cryptome file he references. Michael had not previously asked us to do this. Regards, John Young ----- From: "Danna Thompson" <dlthompson@verio.net> To: <jya@pipeline.com> Subject: FW: Cryptome.org [IDS-7575731] FWD: Abuse - Michael Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 16:07:23 -0700 ATTN: John Young We received the following complaint. Please let us know if any action was taken to resolve this matter. Sincerely, Verio Inc. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 09:07:16 -0800 From: Michael <michael@xxxxdrive.com> To: abuse@secure.net Subject: Abuse - Michael To whom it may concern, A site that I believe is managed by your company, http://www.cryptome.org Has published my personal email contact without my consent, making it available for spam harvesting. The page is located here: http://www.cryptome.org/dermot-glue.htm I would appreciate it very much if you could have this removed as soon as possible. Thank you for your time Michael Cofounder http://www.blogdrive.com
16 January 2005.
This responds to Cryptome's invitation here: http://cryptome.org/dermot-hijack.htm
From: "Michael" <michael@xxxxdrive.com>
To: <jya@pipeline.com>
Subject: Glue
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 07:18:29 -0800
Hello,
My name is Michael. I’ve been recently made aware of some content found at your site. You might consider removing it, as it is incorrect. I am not that familiar with your site or its past content. I don’t know if you are the person masquerading as Dermot Ahern, but I feel at the very least you are advocating this deception. My response is in regard to your page:
http://cryptome.org/dermot-hijack.htm
Your words:
“hi-jacked blog”
“The site is now likely a sting run by the authorities”
My response:
Dude, are you on glue?
Do you even consider doing any research before publishing content to your site, or do you just make it up as you go?
Is any content on your site valid?
(These are rhetorical questions; you don’t have to answer them)
I will now waste some time and explain the recent chain of events. You will no doubt not understand this, as it is not filled with lies and deception, but we brave forward.
Important safety tip: Avoid sniffing glue while reading the following.
About a week and a half ago a person I refer to as not-so-bright came to Blogdrive.com and using a free email service signed up for a free blog account, requesting the URL “dundalk.” (He should’ve considered “dipshit”)
He placed these words at the top of the blog; “Dermot Aherns Dundalk Blog Page.”
Only it was all caps for the visually impaired. He used the author nick “Dermot Ahern.” In a feeble attempt at reflecting current news he began creating short child-like entries with bold oversized centered text, “Name terrorists, Name criminals, blah blah blah etc.” He also began to solicit visitors. The dregs of the online Universe showed up to demonstrate even shoddier grammar; new lows in punctuation.
Oh it was a great time, you had to be there! (Makes you wonder how they find their way to the Internet)
Needless to say the complaints and legal threats came flying into Blogdrive support.
(And I must say, there is nothing more pleasing than having to answer to such complaints, bred from a free account)
In turn the blog page was disabled. The free account holder emailed Blogdrive asking why - Again, not-so-bright. He was asked to remove all offending content and the blog would be re-enabled. Like the rest of the web, the Blogdrive Terms of Service Agreement prohibits the publication of names, addresses and contact information of unknowing parties. No duh! The blog was re-enabled. The free account holder began to create and delete content.
The Blog came to my attention. I reviewed the logs, and although the blog and its content did not merit the time of day, an entry made by someone using the nick “The Hunger” made me feel otherwise. I decided to offer a forum for those wishing to frequent a place addressing Dundalk issues. It could then be edited for grammar and moderated appropriately. I communicated this to the free account holder; asking him to provide category titles and descriptions.
Strange how some people gain this bizarre sense of entitlement the moment they go online.
The free account holder put on his wheeling-dealing hat and via email began insisting that I disclose the Dundalk site statistics to him for free. Or as he put it, “all I ask for is a figure on the total hits.” In return he would give us "free publicity". WhoopdeeSplatt, where do I sign up!
I reminded the free account holder that of the 130 thousand plus blogs at Blogdrive, it would be unfair of me to disclose traffic info to one free account holder and not to others.
I believe he began spending more time at another blog site outside of Blogdrive, as he had but one entry left on the Dundalk blog page directing visitors to its location. It is of course against our TOS to use a blog for the single purpose of redirecting visitors to another site; cyber squatting on the URL. The page was disabled again, being prepared for release. A number of people began requesting the use of this URL.
Although once excited about the forum idea and creating categories, the free account holder was unresponsive to the last requests made to him via email asking for forum categories. After being made aware, he did not correct the redirect issue. The last communication for response: “Please respond. I must have the info requested of you for the forum now. This window of opportunity is closing.” He did not respond or change the redirect entry. The URL was released. Within an hour of its release the Dundalk URL was taken by yet another free email subscriber using the nick “Boomer.”
A day or two later, the previous free account holder finally responded, accusing me of taking the blog URL. His words: “Michael, I see that you have a page up on my blogdrive site.” Although at this point he did not deserve a response, I told him I did not take the URL; that it was released to the public. Exact words: “I do not have a page up on your Blogdrive site. You had violated the TOS again. You didn't correct this. You were unresponsive to my last email to you. Many have requested use of this URL, not masquerading as Dermot Ahern. As with hundreds of our disabled Blog URLs, the Dundalk URL was made available to the public again.”
He continued his accusations while including, “For your information I would prefer to keep my identity confidential, but once again my name is Dermot Ahern, one of fourteen in our local phone directory.”
Yeah, and monkeys might fly out of my butt!
In my experience, I have learned that when a liar or someone who is practicing deception feels ensnared by their own actions, they immediately assume everyone else is lying as well.
He continues to badger me via email, and leaves comments at various locations on the web, not always using the Dermot nick.
There were other details to this story. None worth mentioning.
In regard to naming names,
Man, I’ve heard some dumb ideas before but this…this has got to be the dumbest.
Asking the general public to publish names and addresses of Terrorists and Criminals is obviously going to cause trouble; the dumbest of the dumb crawling out of their holes to point fingers at one another. Great concept, thumbs up!
Who was the Einstein that originated this idea? Surely not Dermot himself.
How many people have simply named a “suspected” felon, or an unfriendly acquaintance, or a bully who took their lunch money in the third grade?
These embarrassingly uneducated individuals go to the web; start typing away misinformed anonymous allegations using the worst grammar seen in history under what they feel is “Free speech” hoping that someone else will take the heat for their measures.
In response, who gets hit with the lawsuits resulting from “misinformed anonymous allegations”?
The penniless uneducated type-in-all-caps-can’t-spell-his-own-name-to-save-his-life poster? No!
The Blog author or web page creator? Hell no!
The host company of the site? Ding Ding Ding, we have a winner!
We have had to keep a battery of lawyers on call to deal with such issues.
So although asking “The People” to publish info on suspected criminals might seem like a novel concept, it is in reality the dumbest idea ever conceived.
For those posting the misinformed garbage screaming “Free speech” and “No censorship” I say this:
Until you own a set of servers, own a website, pay for the resources, be accountable for your own words - shut your flippin pie hole!
Since this recent Dundalk Blog incident, I have asked the current author “Boomer” to openly state that Dermot Ahern does not post to the Blog page.
I apologize for the length of this response.
May the glue sniffing resume!
Michael