Slashdot Mirror

You don't read enough then. I wrote about her censorship YEARS ago...as in 2005: http://linux-blog.org/groklaw-and-censorship/

Five years ago, my company budgeted for the purchase of several dozen printers at a cost of over $4000.00...having just migrated to Linux, I had the task of researching the most productive printers for the Linux environment. I was told to "lean" toward Canon printers. Like that was going to happen. I took the time to write to Canon and tell them that we would not be purchasing their product due to their lack of support for Linux. You can see a copy of their response here half way down the page here: http://linux-blog.org/more-printer-mayhem/ Canon may have, by now, released drivers for Linux. I could care less. They were not available for me when I needed them. HP and Samsung were and still are and any printer purchases we make will be through those companies. I wonder at how many decision-makers have done the same.

> blinders on how?

Well, she has censored certain facts (and anyone who tried to discuss them on Groklaw). Like when she deleted a post showing that Red Hat is a CCIA member, or the PDF to text of the four letters between TH and IBM (formerly available as the parent of this post, but that link will just give you a blank page). Somehow, she STILL makes it out that TH brought this upon themselves when IBM FUDed them in letter 2 by raising the specter of Hercules itself being an "infringing platform", when all TH had asked prior to that was if it was possible to do business with them. But letters 3 and 4 came out first, so it's understandable that many people are confused.

Then she has an awful lot of hate for Florian personally and anyone else who tries to correct her. In fact, she's downright nasty when she disagrees. That's how AllParadox left. Nobody is free to disagree with her. You can be polite and well-mannered as you wish. You can cite facts and sources. But she'll just disappear them if she disagrees. And she's removed more than a few accounts, like on this story, where you can see that she would delete the account of someone who is only trying to help. Ask yourself: if that person was really a troll, why would they be contributing to Groklaw? Exactly what did their account get deleted for? Can you imagine the people who post Goatse here turning over a new leaf and deciding to help the site? But Slashdot uses transparent moderation: you know if you're at -1 or not. But you won't even know you've been moderated on Groklaw unless you know how her invisible moderation works: I can still see my own posts, but nobody else can (unless they replied before I got vanished). You have to use a proxy or something to see if your posts still exist.

That would be great if she were moderating the Goatse guy out of existence. But exactly why is it necessary to vanish someone who gives citations proving that many of her facts are in error? Shouldn't Groklaw post ALL the facts? And AllParadox isn't the only person to question her censorship of people merely for disagreeing.

This isn't new. It's been going on for ages. Plenty Groklaw supporters have gotten fed up. Or are you going to accuse several people who have written for Groklaw, moderated for Groklaw, and promoted Groklaw on Slashdot of all being anti-Groklaw trolls?

That's what she does, right? The only way someone could disagree with her is if they were paid to or if they're trolling, at least in her mind. Never mind the fact that I can find plenty of people who have worked closely with her only to get fed up. Yeah, I knew her. Her real email (past the filter) is pj2@groklaw.net (she can change it again if she wants to).

But I guess she can call all this "trolling." As we all know, anyone who disagrees with her is a troll. It doesn't matter how much they try to cite their sources or argue that something is a mistake. No, if they disagree, they're clearly being paid by someone or something or question her. But it's always okay when she speculates wildly about people's motives.

Just for the record, lest people accuse me of holding all sorts of beliefs that I do not hold, I say that Darl & SCO can die in a fire as far as I'm concerned. I believe that PJ is a real person (a retired paralegal in Connecticut, if I'm not mistak

The link to that story about AllParadox is here for anyone who is smart enough to require them for a bold claim like that.

You can find other, independent corroboration of that from some poor sod who commented about it years ago, from someone who was briefly given moderation powers on Groklaw, and more recent examples on Jay Maynard's website which has some active discussions about how it's going down right now, with respect to those who don't think IBM was justified in how it intimidated TurboHercules SAS.

I've seen it personally, but you don't have to take my word for it. Their idea of "trolls" over there is anyone who disagrees too often. I think that anyone has been around Groklaw for long enough should remember how respected AllParadox was. She calls people who bring up this stuff "PJ moderates trolls" just so you know. Because nobody can think that sneaky moderation systems that don't show you when your post has been deleted, or silently editing people's comments are bad without being paid to think that by SCO, Microsoft or Satan.

You can start here for FUD 101: http://linux-blog.org/index.php?/archives/30-What-is-FUD.html

Cheers.

I started collecting links on this subject a few hours before this hit slashdot... http://linux-blog.org/index.php?/archives/134-The- Dirt-on-Suspicious-Digging-at-Digg.com.html Just FYI for everyone...if you have another link, comment it and I'll update it.

Not according to this experiment. I found it following some links from TFA.

Groklaw's credibility has been diminished for very specific reasons, including its censorship policy, hypocrisy and flouting Godwin's law.

Let's be clear: PJ threw the first punch at MoG by publicly accusing her of lying. Thereafter, the Groklaw community regularly attacked MoG in the most vicious and personal terms. If someone was anonymously running a web site attacking me, I sure would want to find out who was behind it.

You complain about Maureen's excellent expose on PJ but you think PJ is nothing but perfect? LOL. Groklaw's credibility has been diminished for very specific reasons, including its censorship policy, hypocrisy and flouting Godwin's law.

Let's be clear: PJ threw the first punch at MoG by publicly accusing her of lying. Thereafter, the Groklaw community regularly attacked MoG in the most vicious and personal terms. If someone was anonymously running a web site attacking me, I sure would want to find out who was behind it.

Groklaw's credibility has been diminished for very specific reasons, including its censorship policy, hypocrisy and flouting Godwin's law.

Let's be clear: PJ threw the first punch at MoG by publicly accusing her of lying. Thereafter, the Groklaw community regularly attacked MoG in the most vicious and personal terms. If someone was anonymously running a web site attacking me, I sure would want to find out who was behind it.