On Dec 15 2009, 8:11*pm, didacticderivative
> wrote:
> United States Court, District of Maine. Case 2:09-cv-00213-DBH
>
> Project DoD, hosting company of the likes of Larry Sarner (voting
> machine scam artrist), Linda Rosa (she who followed Sarner into
> bankruptcy) and Jean Mercer (the psychologist who never treated a
> patient) lost their "landmark reverse DMCA" case.
>
> What are they going to do now, invent the iPigno, a device that
> refuses to read the works of Charles Sanders Peirce, Claude Levi-
> Strauss, and Stanislaw Lem?
>
> Attorneys Rufus Brown, Robert Mittel, and Tiffany Rad are
> reconsidering the wisdom of believing everything Christopher Mooney
> tells them…

For people who are actually interested in the facts of this case, the
documents are all available here. This should be of interest to people
on ARS, as it involves freedom of speech on the internet and details
harassment that has occurred. The case was only dismissed due to an
issue of jurisdiction, not because DoD was wrong. Documents can be
downloaded people can read about the facts of this case at:

https://chris.dod.net/?p=387

So yes, this particular battle has been lost but at least attention
has been brought to this important issue and the war for free speech
on the internet is far from over, rest assured.

Is this scienofag shit or anti-scienofag shit?

WOW! I don't ****ing care!

On Jan 4, 1:29*am, "XODDI" > wrote:
> Is this scienofag shit or anti-scienofag shit?
>
> WOW! I don't ****ing care!

No, this has nothing to do with Scientology. It has to do with abuses
of DMCA by certain psychologists who were criticized on the internet
and then filed bogus DMCA complaints against the website that posted
perfectly legal, fair use quotes. The lawsuit was only dismissed on a
jurisdictional issue, not because the DMCA complaints were found to be
valid because they weren't and the website remains up.

The court documents are posted on ARS and other places because I know
that many people on the usenet care about these sorts of issues. If
you don't, then feel free to ignore it.

"Zapanaz" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 16:26:14 -0500, "Gregory Hall" >
> wrote:
>
>>What about the many parody sites with the Pignotron you whined and
>>complained about and hollered abuse? You got those shut down just because
>>the squeaky wheel gets the grease. That is censorship pure. Poor wittle
>>Monica. Act like she's got her wittle feelings hurt so run to Daddy and
>>bawl
>>your wittle eyes out and get it made all better. You really ARE pathetic.
>>You never grew up.
>>
>>Your definition of abuse and harassment is paranoid delusional, victim
>>mentality pure and simple. How thick is your skin. Probably less than a
>>nanometer (less than one billionth of an inch - sort of like your reneging
>>on your one billion year contract.)
>
> sci.math and rec.food.cooking
>
> You're a massive crossposting troll and a moron.
>
> Like most massive crossposting trolls, the fact that you crosspost and
> troll kind of reflects that you realize that nobody really gives a
> crap what you have to say.
>
> So you'll do -anything- to draw attention to yourself.
>
>
> Pathetic.


Yes, about as pathetic as somebody who says he doesn't give a crap but then
take the time to type it and post it.

<original groups restored>

--
Gregory Hall

"Rev. 11D Meow!" > wrote in message
news
> On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 15:09:26 -0800, Zapanaz
> > wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 17:17:08 -0500, "Gregory Hall" >
>>wrote:
>>
>>>"Zapanaz" > wrote in message
...
>>
>>>> sci.math and rec.food.cooking
>>>>
>>>> You're a massive crossposting troll and a moron.
>>>>
>>>> Like most massive crossposting trolls, the fact that you crosspost and
>>>> troll kind of reflects that you realize that nobody really gives a
>>>> crap what you have to say.
>>>>
>>>> So you'll do -anything- to draw attention to yourself.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Pathetic.
>>>
>>>
>>>Yes, about as pathetic as somebody who says he doesn't give a crap but
>>>then
>>>take the time to type it and post it.
>>>
>>
>>I didn't say that.
>>
>>I said you were a crossposting moron and an attention whore.
>>
>>><original groups restored>
>>
>>Why is that, exactly? Why are you posting this to rec.food.cooking?
>>
>>Do you think somebody there would have some interest in it?
>>
>>Or do you just have a desperate and pathetic need to draw negative
>>attention to yourself?
>
> Gregory Hall is living in denial ever since Barbara Schwartz DENIED
> his romantic overtures.
>



I'm sure she'll have a change of heart any time now.


<groups restored>

--
Gregory Hall

On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 16:42:39 -0800, Zapanaz
> wrote:

>On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 18:28:31 -0500, "Gregory Hall" >
>wrote:
>
>>
>><groups restored> because one Monica Pignotti cross-posted to all these
>>groups and all I did was reply to her post.
>>Message-ID:
>
>>
>>
>> I don't believe in culling groups out of a discussion thread - that's
>>censorship. Go ply your censorship someplace else please.
>
>Not posting a scientology thread to rec.food.cooking, where it's
>obviously completely irrelevant, is censorship?
>
>When you had your brain surgically removed, did you get a lot of
>headaches afterwards? I've heard that can be a side-effect.


WORD!

"High Mistress Inquisitor Pisces" > wrote in message
...
<snippage>
>
> By your same arguement I can interrupt your favorite televison show
> and brutally ass**** a blow up jesus doll with a huge glowing purple
> strap on that was dipped in grade jelly whilst singing the national
> anthem and replacing every other word with Gregory Hall loves the cock
> and if you complain you are censoring my freespeech.
>
> After all culling inappropriate content off your favorite channel is
> not something you belive in right?


Too bad some people, when they participate in Usenet discussion, feel they
must check their brains at the door.

Monica Pignotti posted this post:

Message-ID:
>

To the following groups:

Newsgroups:
alt.religion.scientology,sci.math,misc.legal,alt.s lack,rec.food.cooking

It is her right to post to whatever groups she feels appropriate for her
thread. You are setting yourself up as judge, jury and executioner by
arbitrarily trying to control in which groups follow-ups to her original
post appear. You are a net-nanny. You are pathetic.

You are totally ignorant on Usenet protocol and are in the wrong with
respect to Usenet standard operating procedure. You are a closed-minded,
ignorant and insufferable moron. Stop your whining and try getting a clue
for once.

<groups restored>

--
Gregory Hall

On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 09:39:51 -0500, "Gregory Hall" > wrote:

>"High Mistress Inquisitor Pisces" > wrote in message
...
><snippage>
>>
>> By your same arguement I can interrupt your favorite televison show
>> and brutally ass**** a blow up jesus doll with a huge glowing purple
>> strap on that was dipped in grade jelly whilst singing the national
>> anthem and replacing every other word with Gregory Hall loves the cock
>> and if you complain you are censoring my freespeech.
>>
>> After all culling inappropriate content off your favorite channel is
>> not something you belive in right?
>
>
>Too bad some people, when they participate in Usenet discussion, feel they
>must check their brains at the door.

You two take this bullshit tirade to an appropriate newsgroup.

"Zapanaz" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 09:39:51 -0500, "Gregory Hall" >
> wrote:
>
>>Monica Pignotti posted this post:
>>
>>Message-ID:
>
>>
>>To the following groups:
>>
>>Newsgroups:
>>alt.religion.scientology,sci.math,misc.legal,alt .slack,rec.food.cooking
>>
>>It is her right to post to whatever groups she feels appropriate for her
>>thread. You are setting yourself up as judge, jury and executioner by
>>arbitrarily trying to control in which groups follow-ups to her original
>>post appear. You are a net-nanny. You are pathetic.
>>
>>You are totally ignorant on Usenet protocol and are in the wrong with
>>respect to Usenet standard operating procedure. You are a closed-minded,
>>ignorant and insufferable moron. Stop your whining and try getting a clue
>>for once.
>>
>><groups restored>
>
> Not posting a scientology thread to rec.food.cooking, where it's
> obviously completely irrelevant, is censorship?
>
> When you had your brain surgically removed, did you get a lot of
> headaches afterwards? I've heard that can be a side-effect.
>


Nothing forces people who aren't interested to read the post. Duh! If the
subject line indicates that the post has nothing to do with cooking food,
for example, why would they bother opening the post? But, there might be
some who are interested after seeing the subject line and they might wish to
follow the thread. When assholes such as yourself keep culling groups it
makes it difficult for them to follow the thread. Get a clue and stop trying
to be a net nanny. If you don't want to see my posts then use a filter.
Moron!

<original groups restored>

--
Gregory Hall