[WikiEN-l] Re: Craig Hubley

[Daniel Mayer]

Louis Kyu Won Ryu wrote:
>Seeing as how Mr. Hubley on his web site takes 
>credit for one of  142.177.etc's trademark articles, 
>I believe there is every reason to believe that 
>Hubley and 142.177.etc are one and the same, 
>unless there  is some evidence to the contrary.

I agree with you. And the truth is an absolute defense in any libel case (even 
if not true, then any reasonable person would also strongly suspect a 
Hubley/142 connection given all the available evidence). My mentioning that 
142.177 was Craig Hubley is not, as he likes to state, actionable libel and 
slander. 

>However, I must take issue with the implied suggestion 
>some have made that we undertake to bombard Hubley 
>with e-mail, phone calls, legal threats, and personal visits.  

Who implied this? Lir came close, but I just don't see a clear connection 
between Lir's research and any advocacy to deluge Mr. Hubley or otherwise 
bother him. It was my impression that Lir was trying to make a point that now 
that 142 has been "outed" then we could (in a technical sense) do that. He 
did not say that we should do that and in fact indicated that the outing was 
bad because we could disrupt Mr. Hubley's life. 

>Such a response would be ineffective and  inconsistent 
>with our core values.  

I agree. But we can and should use that information to contact the authorities 
if Mr. Hubley's actions justify that. 

-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)