Key statistics about reader interaction with the PatrickPretty.com Blog have plunged dramatically during the past 30 days.
Comments posted by readers during the 30-day statistical snapshot have decreased markedly from 10.2 per day to 3.8 per day. Meanwhile, the number of words in comments has fallen more than 1,000 — from an average of 1,462 per thread to just 431.
The drop-off coincides with the holiday season, a period in which readers may have less time to interact with the Blog. It also coincides with a harassment campaign being conducted on YouTube against the Blog by the cyberstalker “unclefesta26.”
Some readers have expressed a reluctance to share their comments, citing concerns that “unclefesta26” would nuisance them on YouTube.
The 30-day snapshot suggests “unclefesta26” is contributing to a significant decay in reader interaction and having a chilling effect on speech. “unclefesta26” has dialed up his cyberstalking campaign against the Blog and some of its readers during the period.
In a new video today, “unclefesta26” heckled posters who congratulated the Blog for surpassing the 500-post milestone in the past year.
“Some of his posts are simple one- or two-liners,” unclefesta26 said about the Blog.
There are few — if any — one- or two-line posts on the PatrickPretty.com Blog. The Blog has produced 380,258 words — enough to fill two or even three novels — between Dec. 18, 2008, and Dec. 18, 2009. The average post length during the 12-month period was 751 words, the typical length of a newspaper column.
During the past 30 days, the Blog has produced 38,396 words, an average of 738 words per post. Since December 18, 2008, the Blog has published 740,010 words from readers — almost three-quarters of a million words from the Blog’s audience.
All of the content on the Blog’s main page and in its archive is free. “unclefesta26,” who has been banned by multiple websites for chronic nuisancing and once used the handle “Hugh Jorgan” on one, has repeatedly railed against the Blog for publishing advertisements and offering a paid product for $27. A Family License that accommodates six users is available for $47.
The PatrickPretty.com Blog averages 42.2 article-length posts per month — all free. Between the Blog and its readers, PatrickPretty.com has published more than 1.12 million words in the past 12 months — all free.
In addition to researching, writing, reporting and providing a forum for readers, PatrickPretty.com manages maintenance of the Blog. The Blog has received 17,480 spam communications since December 2008, while also receiving and reading thousands of legitimate communications from readers. Many of the communications from readers require return correspondence.
PatrickPretty.com has received numerous communications from readers whose lives have been affected by Ponzi schemes. The Blog has become an important resource to them.
“unclefesta26” was blocked from posting on the Blog in June 2009 for posing a chronic maintenance problem. He responded by pilloying the Blog on YouTube, sending the Blog a message to “Enjoy!” his work. In November, upon the Blog’s release of a paid information product, “unclefesta26” dialed up his YouTube attacks on the Blog, again sending links to his videos that skewer the Blog.
Also known as “Pistol” and “Pistol’sPal” — an identity he created after being blocked from posting here — “unclefesta” has been blocked from posting on at least three websites for disruptive behavior. He attempted to re-register at one site from which he was banned 12 times on a single day, according to the website manager.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Is it any wonder so many people believe the Internet is just one giant cesspool? This is the latest news on “joe,” who graduated from Ponzi advocacy to cyberstalking in September.
UPDATED 4:28 P.M. ET (U.S.A.) Saying he wants to give the PatrickPretty.com Blog something else to “chew on” after it announced Saturday that it would share information about cyberstalkers with law enforcement, cyberstalker “joe” now has threatened to file a lawsuit against the Blog.
The lawsuit threat followed on the heels of ceaseless nuisance communications from “joe” and a previous threat by “joe” to start “fires” at the Blog by leeching off insecure computer networks to frustrate attempts to track him. On Dec. 7 between 8:24 p.m. and 8:42 p.m. (ET), “joe” sent six harassing communications from a computer network whose IP resolves to a city government in California.
It is not believed that “joe” is an employee of the city. Rather, it is believed that he used the city’s resources to mask his identity. In September, “joe” claimed he had the ability to access insecure networks near his home and “was able to get online in a few places.” He also claimed there were “a few internet cafes around me” and that the Blog had better “get ready for the return of “joe.”
PatrickPretty.com announced today that it has shared information on seven IPs used by joe, including the IP of the city government in California. The Blog also shared 14 email addresses used by “joe,” one of which used the word “boo,” another of which used the word “eerie” and yet another of which used the word “greatone.”
Some of the email addresses included nonsensical words. At the same time, the Blog since Saturday has shared information on six additional user identities employed by “joe.” The Blog previously reported that “joe” repeatedly used sexual references in his communications, referring to himself in some communications as “Joseph the phallicly gifted.†He also has employed the username “Mr. Wonderful” and “joe the magnificent (and good lookingâ€), among others.
“joe,” an advocate for autosurf Ponzi schemes who says he does not care if they are legal or not as long as they pay, has repeatedly shifted IPs, usernames and email addresses in what the Blog views as a bid to probe it for security vulnerabilities and defeat its ability to prevent his nuisance communications from being published.
In September, “joe” demanded that the Blog publish his unwelcome communications, defining himself as a “bad penny” who would not go away until the Blog agreed to his terms. He has sent dozens and dozens of harassing communications over the Internet to the Blog since then.
Despite announcing his intent to harass the Blog and his plan to leech off insecure computer networks, start “fires,” frustrate efforts to track him and create maintenance problems, “joe” now says he intends to sue.
“You just can’t tell anyone who I am because i would sue you for invasion of Privacy among other things,” joe said Saturday, after the Blog published its announcement it was sharing cyberstalking information with law enforcement. In a separate harassing communication after the Blog published its announcement, “joe” insisted he had a right to send the Blog “behind the scenes comments” and again suggested he may begin to employ YouTube to nuisance the Blog like the cyberstalker “unclefesta26.”
It was the second time “joe” raised the suggestion that he would escalate his cyberstalking mission by employing YouTube. Previously he expressed pleasure in harassing the Blog, saying he feels “some satisfaction that you seem to be intimidated by me.â€
Both “joe” and “unclefesta26” have been blocked from the PatrickPretty.com for spamming, derailing conversations and posing chronic maintenance problems. Other websites have banned them as well.
“joe’s” apparent theory behind the threatened lawsuit is that the use of aliases insulate him from criminal or civil prosecution and give him a lawful platform from which he can send repeated harassing communications.
Under “joe’s” apparent theory, a person is permitted to stalk and harass individuals and businesses on the Internet — and create labor-intensive and time-consuming maintenance work — simply by creating aliases. “joe” appears to believe that it is impossible to commit a crime or subject individuals or businesses to harassment if one does not use his actual name.
At the same time, “joe” seems to believe that those he would nuisance have a duty to permit him to nuisance them because his rights to free speech and privacy trumps the rights of those he would nuisance. Court case after court case demonstrates the fallacy of that thinking.
In 1998, for instance, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court tackled the Constitutional issues of free speech and privacy in a case in which a man was convicted of 36 counts of harassment by communication or address after sending repeated anonymous, harassing communications via wire — in this case, over telephone lines and a fax machine.
A lower court had ruled (emphasis added below) “the right to free speech is not absolute and that certain classes of speech, such as obscenity and fighting words, may be restricted.
“It found that Appellant’s . . . faxes, which were sent repeatedly and anonymously, had no legitimate purpose. The court concluded that the faxes were intended to harass and were not a form of communication safeguarded by the Constitution.”
The Supreme Court also rejected the man’s privacy argument, ruling that the mere fact a communication is sent anonymously does not insulate the sender from prosecution under harassment laws.
“Appellant’s argument, and the cases he cites in support, are misplaced because the statute at issue is directed at the harassing nature of the communications, which the legislature has a legitimate interest in proscribing,” the Supreme Court ruled.
DECEMBER 12, 2009, 12:03 P.M. ET (U.S.A.). The PatrickPretty.com Blog announced today that it has made an arrangement to share data about cyberstalkers “unclefesta26” and “joe” on its own initiative with law-enforcement and, at the Blog’s discretion, with the operators of certain websites.
The Blog’s decision to share a limited amount of information with authorities voluntarily will not affect the privacy of other PatrickPretty.com readers and posters. PatrickPretty.com has the capability of segmenting information on individual readers and posters. No user information beyond data associated with “unclefesta26” and “joe” will be shared.
“unclefesta26” also is known by the handles “Pistol” and “Pistol’s Pal.” He operates a cyberstalking and hate site on YouTube and uses crude sexual references and vulgarities in headlines to promote his site, which includes an image of the federal judge presiding over the forfeiture elements of the AdSurfDaily Ponzi scheme cases.
On his YouTube site, “unclefesta26” employs technology to put words in the mouth of the judge, causing the image of the judge to recite the name of an AdSurfDaily participant, make a disparaging remark about the participant, make a phone call to a “psychiatric hospital” and suggest that “men in white coats” bring a “straitjacket and some leg irons” to detain the participant against her will.
“joe” also is known as “Mr. Wonderful”; “joejoe”; “joe the magnificent (and good looking”); and “Joseph the phallicly gifted,” among other user identities. “joe” regularly uses vulgarities and crude sexual references or crude references to sexual organs in his various harassing communications to the Blog. ‘joe” has sent dozens of illegitimate communications to the Blog over the Internet since September.
“We are taking this action because ‘unclefesta26’ and ‘joe’ are stalking the Blog and creating an untenable situation for PatrickPretty.com and its readers,” PatrickPretty.com said. “unclefesta26” uses material from the Blog to make harassing videos on a cyberstalking and hate site he maintains on YouTube. He has delighted in sending us harassing messages to ‘Enjoy!’ his work and harassing messages with links to new videos that subject the Blog and some of its readers to harassment, while attempting to poison the brand identity of the Blog. He has licensed himself repeatedly to use the Blog’s branding materials to disparage the Blog, and recently published a video is which he captured the intellectual property of Amazon.com that appeared on the Blog, used an Amazon.com flash movie outside its intended purpose and superimposed images owned by Amazon.com to create a video designed to harass the Blog.
“unclefesta26” is diluting the value of the Blog’s intellectual property, creating confusion among members of the public, engaging in repeated acts of cyberpiracy and affecting the goodwill PatrickPretty.com has built up among readers. Readers and targets of the videos have complained to the Blog about the YouTube site. PatrickPretty.com has filed three complaints with YouTube, which has not responded to the complaints.
'unclefesta26,' also known as 'Pistol,' sent us this email message to 'Enjoy!' a YouTube video he produced to pillory the PatrickPretty.com Blog. The message was sent after he was blocked from the Blog for spamming links, derailing discussions and posing chronic maintenance problems.
“Meanwhile, ‘joe’ has sought to disrupt the Blog’s operations for months by sending a steady stream of harassing communications,” PatrickPretty.com said. “Among other things, ‘joe’ has threatened to start ‘fires’ to divert and strain our resources, and also has claimed to have access to insecure wireless networks to mask his IP address and escape detection.”
Screen shot: An outtake of a video made by PatrickPretty.com in which 'joe' threatened the Blog with 'fires' and said he could employ insecure computer networks to frustrate attempts to track him. PatrickPretty.com has the capability of segmenting nuisance communications, placing them in a queue to separate them from legitimate submissions by other readers and videotaping the contents of the queue. The queue from which this particular video was made in early September contained 19 harassing communications from joe. The video includes audio narration of 'joe's' IP addresses, usernames and email addresses, and includes dictation of select passages of his nuisance communications, which served no lawful purpose and were designed to annoy, harass,alarm and distract the Blog from its editorial mission. A 'joe' queue from Dec. 7 and Dec. 8 shows eight harassing communications over a period encompassing about four hours, including six within 18 minutes. He has sent dozens of harassing communications over the Internet since September.
“unclefesta26” and “joe” are believed to be separate individuals. “unclefesta26” purports to detest Ponzi schemes; “joe” purports to advocate for them. “joe” now suggests that he, like “unclefesta26,” is capable of posting videos on YouTube, which the Blog views as an escalation of his threats.
PatrickPretty.com’s Editorial Mission
Along with its reports on Ponzi schemes, PatrickPretty.com publishes commentary from posters who oppose Ponzi schemes. It also publishes commentary from posters who advocate for Ponzi schemes. The Blog believes that the advocacy for Ponzi schemes, though puzzling, misguided and dangerous, is an important part of the Ponzi story.
Some of our readers have expressed shock and outrage that an entire subculture of people — people who actually advocate for Ponzi schemes despite their criminality and obvious danger –Â exists. Ponzi advocates typically argue that the government has no right to limit commerce. They often view autosurf Ponzi schemes, for example, as a lawful business because there is a contract between buyer and seller and because “rebates aren’t guaranteed” under the terms of the contract. They frequently deny they are selling unregistered securities as investment contracts, even though the U.S. government has never lost an autosurf Ponzi prosecution brought under securities laws. Despite claiming they are breaking no securities laws, they typically stress that new companies they are representing (after predecessor companies based on U.S. soil were prosecuted successfully under securities laws) are based “offshore” and thus beyond the reach of U.S. law enforcement and securities regulators. Ponzi promoters’ messages often are impossibly at odds with themselves
Other Ponzi advocates hold views that are even more extreme, insisting they are “sovereign” beings answerable to no government authority. Some extremist Ponzi scheme promoters have declared their own nation-states on U.S. soil, arguing they have diplomatic immunity from U.S. law. Still others claim government has no moral authority to regulate Ponzi schemes or enforce laws because it permits things such as gambling, smoking cigarettes and consuming alcohol. Some Ponzi scheme advocates identify themselves as “Christians” or members of a particular religious faith, thus adding an element of affinity fraud to the Ponzi schemes they promote.
The Genesis Of Our Decision To Share A Limited Amount Of Information On ‘unclefesta26’ and ‘joe’ With Law Enforcement
Despite rumors spread by some Ponzi scheme advocates that PatrickPretty.com is a government entity and strange suggestions that the Blog is part of a government conspiracy to undermine free enterprise, PatrickPretty.com is not an agent for the government or part of any government entity or law-enforcement mission.
PatrickPretty.com is a privately owned publishing venture. The Blog conducts research and produces articles, essays and editorials for a general audience interested in the highly newsworthy topic of Ponzi schemes. Readers and posters of all stripes — from news junkies, online entrepreneurs and journalists to Ponzi scheme victims, members of law-enforcement agencies and employees of regulatory bodies — have equal access to the pages and the reporting of PatrickPretty.com.
Self-described Ponzi advocate “joe” is straining this Blog’s limited resources by playing a relentless game of “ring and run,” using multiple user identities, multiple email addresses and multiple IP addresses to harass the Blog. He says he will not stop, defining himself as a “bad penny.”
Beyond his harassing behavior here, “joe” started a hectoring campaign against the Blog on Scam.com, which subsequently banned him for inappropriate behavior and creating multiple user identities to send illegitimate and nuisance communications. PatrickPretty.com views “joe’s” actions as evidence of intent to dilute the value of the Blog’s brand, affect its goodwill with readers and confuse the public on multiple websites.
“joe” asserts a nonexistent right to to hector the Blog, leech off unprotected communications networks to harass the Blog and set the editorial standards by which PatrickPretty.com operates. In short, “joe” wants to dictate the terms under which we grant a voice to readers, insisting he won’t go away until we submit to his demands.
“I feel some satisfaction that you seem to be intimidated by me,†joe said. “You can deny all you want but it’s true even though [sexual reference/poster’s name deleted] is right, I’m harmless. Now if you’re a good boy and post this unedited we can consider this my final retirement. I don’t really want to keep coming on here but I just wasn’t going to be unceremoniously tossed like a bad penny and you know what they say about bad pennies.â€
We believe “joe” will not stop his resource-draining hectoring campaign, absent proactive steps by the Blog to protect its operations. During the late evening and early morning hours of Dec. 7 and Dec. 8, we received eight harassing communications from “joe” in a period of about four hours, including six within 18 minutes.
“unclefesta26” also has been banned from multiple websites for sending inappropriate and harassing communications. PatrickPretty.com believes the multiple identities created after he has been banned from various sites for misconduct constitute evidence of intent to commit a crime and to tax resources. His harassing messages prompting us to “Enjoy!” his chronic pestering and submission of links to announce new YouTube video creations also constitute evidence of intent to commit a crime, and we view his behavior as a form of extortion.
If one doesn’t play “unclefesta26’s” game, one gets pilloried on YouTube. If one does not accommodate the full license he grants himself to invade a space, one gets pilloried on YouTube.
We believe at least one major provider of free hosting space on the Internet already has taken action to prevent “unclefesta26” from engaging in cyberstalking. His YouTube site, however, remains.
An Impossible Condition
We believe the behavior of “unclefesta’26” on YouTube is consistent with the behavior of an extortionist. The site cannot be construed as legitimate satire, parody, journalism, consumer advocacy or a “fair use” of intellectual property because of his history of stalking behavior and extortive conduct.
“unclefesta26” creates an impossible condition that is inconsistent with satire, parody, journalism, consumer advocacy and “fair use.” He relentlessly harasses the objects of his supposed satire by deliberately making obnoxious posts in spaces they control, gets blocked or banned from forums because of his obnoxious behavior and then retaliates for the condition he created by cyberstalking and exacting a penalty on his cyberstalking targets by skewering them on YouTube.
There is a “cause” and “effect,” we believe, to what “unclefesta26” does. Any attempts to reason with him “cause” an escalation in his outrageous conduct and, finally, a YouTube video to be created. These videos have the “effect” of exacting a penalty and harming individuals and entities. At the same time, they cause a chilling effect on speech. We believe that some readers no longer are posting here or have curtailed their posting because they believe “unclefesta26” will stalk them and subject them to ridicule on his YouTube hate site.
In general, “unclefesta26” creates an impossible condition for forum operators and participants by insisting he is permitted to behave in any fashion he sees fit, however unwelcome and objectionable by the standards of common courtesy and common human decency that most people observe. If a forum operator attempts to assert ownership rights or disagrees with “unclefesta26” even civilly, “unclefesta26” reacts by escalating his obnoxious behavior, which further drains resources and creates maintenance problems — and ultimately results in the retaliation he carries out on YouTube. He is not using YouTube to educate, enlighten and inform. He is using it to harass.
His behavior chills speech. It puts people in fear of caustic, often vulgar reprisal, and it is consistent with an agenda of ravaging human beings. His YouTube headlines include, but are not limited to:
“Has [Name] got the balls”
“Shit for brains”
“Bullshit from [Name] . . .”
“Fat Greedy Bastards”
“Wimpy [Name] throws down the gauntlet to Wimpy [Name]”
“Breaking news from [Name] [Veiled Sexual Vulgarity]”
“The Fat Mod’s battle”
“The bastard had to get greedy”
“[Name’s] blow job”
It is for these reasons that the PatrickPretty.com is segmenting the information on “unclefesta26” and “joe” and sharing it with law enforcement voluntarily.
In the coming hours we will publish a post that revisits some of these issues and explains our point of view on the perils of publishing online during an era in which advertising revenues are plunging, publications large and small are failing, thieves and pirates are leeching off the hard work of others and cyberstalkers are on the prowl looking for ways to subject people and businesses to harm.
Our grandmother could not have imagined this era — and the incivility and criminality it has brought front and center.
The drop-off coincides with the holiday season, a period in which readers may have less time to interact with the Blog. It also coincides with a harassment campaign being conducted on YouTube against the Blog by the cyberstalker “unclefesta26.”
