Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Groklaw Torch Handed To Mark Webbink

Posted by Soulskill on from the onward-and-upward dept.

eldavojohn writes "A month ago we read a Eulogy for Groklaw, but now PJ has announced that Groklaw will not be shutting down. Instead, it is now Mark Webbink's Groklaw 2.0. If you don't know who he is, Webbink is a member of the board of the SFLC and was General Counsel at Red Hat. Legal FOSS news will continue to flow."

9 of 47 comments (clear)

  1. Spicy by Shadyman · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The FOSS Must Flow!

  2. Re:And what the fuck will groklaw do ? by sconeu · · Score: 2

    Steven J. Vaughan Nichols disagrees with you.

    --
    General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
  3. Re:Put your emotions down and think it through. by bug1 · · Score: 2

    Your saying PJ isnt real because you havent seen her on TV ?

    Seriously ?

  4. Re:And what the fuck will groklaw do ? by simoncpu+was+here · · Score: 2

    But let's be honest: "P.J." has never been proven to be a real person.

    Ladies and gentlemen, I bring you proof on the existence of PJ. Please check out the description of the video.

  5. Re:And what the fuck will groklaw do ? by mwvdlee · · Score: 3, Interesting

    But let's be honest: "P.J." has never been proven to be a real person.

    Neither have you, therefore you are not a real person and your post is likely the work or an automated trolling algorithm.

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
  6. Re:Put your emotions down and think it through. by bug1 · · Score: 2

    Maybe they just wernt interested in stories 99% of the population are clueless about. How many legal bloggers _are_ shown on American News Media ?

    I think skepticism is generally a good thing, but if you question everything you have nothing left to believe in, except 'cogito ergo sum'.

    If people in the community have said they have met her, then that should be good enough unless there is reason to question their word.

  7. Is that a joke or are you on drugs? by dbIII · · Score: 2

    That Amityville horror idiot that pretends to be a journalist stalked PJ and her mother. You can't do that to clippy.

  8. Re:Put your emotions down and think it through. by timholman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    But it's the truth: There is no real proof that anyone named "P.J." exists, and it is a perfectly reasonable speculation that "P.J." was / is in fact a consortium of paid shills for IBM.

    SCO's little mind game worked on you, didn't it?

    During the trial SCO made a claim to the court that P.J. was not a real person, but an IBM shill. IBM vehemently denied that claim, again to the court.

    If you've had any experience with the law, one thing you'll have learned is that judges hate is to be lied to. I guarantee you that SCO had some private investigators check on P.J. Had any evidence existed that P.J. was an IBM shill, I also guarantee you that SCO would have presented that evidence to the court with trumpets blaring. What better way to prove to the judge that IBM was the bad guy?

    On the other hand, it would have been pointless for SCO to publicly prove that P.J. was a real person. It would have made them look like paranoid idiots, and it would only have helped IBM. So SCO said nothing more, and instead just let the accusation itself continue to taint P.J. It's one of the oldest dirty tricks in the book, and it clearly worked on you.

    Is P.J. a real person? No doubt in my mind. Is "Pamela Jones" her real name? Who knows? Pen names and pseudonyms are as old as reporting itself. But if P.J. was an IBM shill, I am certain that SCO would have presented ironclad proof long ago.

  9. This made my day. by sabernet · · Score: 2

    This is joyous news indeed. Thanks for hanging in there, Groklaw :)