BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Policy & Help >

Discussion of the behaviour of Deus est Daemon Inversus [Formerly "Mordant's Personal problems in Temple"]

  
  

Page: 123(4)56789

 
 
Daemon est Deus Inversus
19:38 / 19.05.06
Deva, and I only mentioned my professional qualification previously because of this, and for no other reason, there is no information which Illmatic, or anyone else might have, which cannot be made public.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
23:09 / 19.05.06
So, help me out, DEDI. You are admitting that you made a slanderous statement about Mordant's mother's occupation, which by then giving consent to be placed in the public domain you rendered libel? This is a curious gambit, but one I am fascinated to see play out. Do you intent to shoot for simple abuse, or argue factual accuracy? Or do you believe that Mordant's mother, and Jakegnosis' mother, are in point of fact whores - note that you made the second allegation in open discourse in a textual medium on a public forum - and are prepared to offer your proofs of this?
 
 
Daemon est Deus Inversus
23:27 / 19.05.06
I did not. Libel requires that the statement be published to a third person by the person who made the statement. She referred to me as a "pimp" on the forum some three times. Then, when she repeated the comment in a private communication, I made the comment about her mother- which I admit was inappropriate- privately. She then published the comment in public. Thus, there is no libel. Do you really want to get into dignitary torts, Haus?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
23:36 / 19.05.06
Libel requires that the statement be published to a third person by the person who made the statement.

So, for example, this statement that Jake Gnosis' mother was a whore?, published to this message board (a third party) by you? You might want to go for the simple abuse defence here. Can't hurt. Of course, to do so provides a precendent in this very thread of the validity of interpretative reading, which undermines the claim that Illmatic's non-statement of fact, one non-libellous interpretation of which has already been provided within this thread, is libel. Still, that's not really my call.
 
 
Daemon est Deus Inversus
23:38 / 19.05.06
As to the comment about Jake, it must be taken in context as a reply to his immediately preceeding message:

"Hopefully, DEDI, we'll be able to sort all this out for you. By kicking you the fuck off the board. Fingers crossed. That about sums it up for me.
Mordant: You are a saint, and possibly the most patient person to ever walk the earth. DEDI: You are a prick. Do us all a favor and take your order and your law degree somewhere else. "

No person, taking my statement in context, would think that it has anything to so with his mother. Therefore, there is no libel.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
23:38 / 19.05.06
Whenever I posted anywhere, Mordant and Haus cross-posted.

Could you substantiate this claim, also, DEDI? It seems at present to be an unsubstantiated claim, and will continue to be so until you satisfy the burden of proof. Without that, it would seem that you are making an unfounded statement which may cause myself and Mordant to be shunned or avoided, yes?


None of which, of course, is particularly relevant. Barbelith is as a community owned and administered by Tom. He decides, ultimately, who is permitted to have registered membership here. He can, if he so desires, withdraw membership for any reason he chooses. I would probably suggest at this point that, without reference to any statements made, the owner of a property might ask somebody on that property to leave for no other reason than that the person's shouting was frightening his shrews.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
00:00 / 20.05.06
So, let's see if we can move this forward. DEDI appears to believe that certain statements on this board constitute a dignitary tort - that is, a tort without tangible impact on person or property, but with impact on reputation. Perhaps it would be easiest to remove these statements, once identified, without prejudice, in a spirit of charity. By the same token, anyone feeling that they have been the subject of a libelous statement by DEDI could ask to have that statement removed from the public record - for example, the statement that Jake Gnosis' mother is a whore. At the same time, it is clear that this approach to interaction with Barbelith is not causing anybody to have a very nice time. Therefore, for the ongoing protection of DEDI and Barbelith, it might be best for the suit "Daemon est Deus Inversus" to be decommissioned, thus preventing any likely recurrence of such a dispute.
 
 
■
00:21 / 20.05.06
To show that libel or any related defamation has ocurred requires that the wronged party must be identified.
Neither those who have made the alleged libels nor anyone else reading these threads have any idea at all who you are, therefore your reputation in the eyes of right-thinking people cannot have been impugned... unless you care to give us all your name and address. And something you have done that was worthwhile.
THEN you might have a case. One which would certainly fail.
Please go away.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
00:25 / 20.05.06
Well, also there's a point to be made that DEDI has already stated that he does not actually care much about the alleged libel per quod - that is, that he has stated that it is not in his opinion significant, which would be an interesting statement for a plaintiff to make. However, let's focus on the emotional issues for a moment. What's the best way to avoid any further emotional impact here?
 
 
■
00:34 / 20.05.06
I knew that whole lawyer schtick sounded familiar. Hir very first post was having a pop at Vincennes. I think I even sent a friendly guidance PM.
 
 
Alex's Grandma
01:48 / 20.05.06
I don't suppose I'm the only one, but I do have a law degree. From a jolly good university, I'll have everyone know. Sometimes, I like to picture all the happy people I'd have been if I hadn't pursued it, but if I learned one thing on the road of law, it was this; that talking about 'libel' on an internet message board, or really anywhere else if you aren't seriously planning on taking legal action is terribly uncool.

That then, I guess, is the 'obitur dictum.' If you carry on with this particular line of argument, DEDI, and it's of course your decsion, I may well find myself seething, with a knife in my brayne.

Please don't, let's just let this thing go.
 
 
Quantum
01:50 / 20.05.06
DEDI- I think one problem I have is that I don't see what Mordant did that any responsible moderator wouldn't do. If she wasn't so conscientious and didn't get there first, any one of the Temple mods could have drawn your fire simply by doing the same, and be faced with this sort of kerfuffle. It's standard practice to warn posters about potentially problematic posting for example, and to discourage pimping (in the sense of marketing or merchandising one's goods or services, no offence meant.)

From my corner it looks like MC has done nothing wrong, and in fact has acted in a way that will make Barbelith a better place, and you have responded with indignation and personal abuse. I'm a Temple mod, it could easily be me or my mum getting abused*, I'm not comfortable with having posters on the board who do what you're doing. I support a ban despite the contributions you could make to the Temple on ceremonial magic. The price is too high. Your behaviour is unacceptable In My Humble Opinion, and you seem unrepentant as though you feel you've done nothing wrong or impolite, and that you are in the right and besieged by pesky harrasers like a noble stag plagued by hounds.

Do you regret insulting other posters? Or are you determined to hold your ground no matter the cost?


*and rest assured if it were me I would be a whole lot less reasonable than MC and probably get banned myself
 
 
Jake, Colossus of Clout
04:11 / 20.05.06
As to the comment about Jake, it must be taken in context as a reply to his immediately preceeding message:

"Hopefully, DEDI, we'll be able to sort all this out for you. By kicking you the fuck off the board. Fingers crossed. That about sums it up for me.
Mordant: You are a saint, and possibly the most patient person to ever walk the earth. DEDI: You are a prick. Do us all a favor and take your order and your law degree somewhere else. "

No person, taking my statement in context, would think that it has anything to so with his mother. Therefore, there is no libel.

Really? Nothing to do with my mother? I notice you failed to add your post to that cut-and-paste. No worries, I'm on it.

I'll be kicked off after the whore your mother, Jake.

I would call bullshit on you, sir.

I certainly called you a prick, and I stand by that statement. However, my mother does not post here, so it would be impossible for her to be banned from the board, as she has no ficsuit to ban (I think... Ma, are you out there?). Neither is she a prostitute, to my knowledge (Ma, is there something you need to tell me?). Honestly, DEDI, how can you say that "No person, taking my statement in context, would think that it has anything to so with his mother," when your post clearly states that you believe my mother is a whore? Why not just call me a whore? I'm the one who insulted you, not my mother. What does she have to do with anything? Your post clearly has something "to so" with my mother, as she, not myself, is the target of your post.

And, yes, Barbelith, I know that I said I was going to watch the rest of this from afar, but I guess I lied.

Oh, and DEDI, the first bit of my post that you quoted was itself a quote, from Randy (Don't mean to call you out, buddy- just setting the record straight).
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
05:32 / 20.05.06
Erm, DEDI, you can't be a lawyer just by watching every episode of Boston Legal. Just so you knows.

Secondly, how can you be libelled when no-one here knows your real life identity? I can libel William Shatner, I can't libel Captain Kirk (though I could probably make Paramount very cross).

I also have to say that I'm very disappointed that a self-professed magician such as yourself is threatening everyone with legal action. Have you no sense of tradition? How are you going to attract sexy people to your coven if the mythology runs "... and then I made a number of spurious accusations against people who laughed at me and threatened them with the combined resources of Crane, Poole and Schmidt, who are close personal friends"? You're supposed to go start your own group now and pretend we don't exist, which is fine by me.
 
 
illmatic
06:21 / 20.05.06
Quantum has stated pretty much outlined the reasons I feel Dedi should be banned from the board. I'd disagree with you on a couple of points (re. Dedi's ability to make worthwhile contributions re. ceremonial magic) but I think you've got the gist.

As to the allusions I made above, I'm going to keep quiet on the whole issue till Tom gets here. I was trying to be diplomatic above, guess it backfired. Never mind.
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
09:59 / 20.05.06
Daemon est Deus Inversus As to Illmatic's underhanded insinuations, I consider them an unwarranted attack on my character libelous per quod.

How are they libellous before he's broadcast them? I accept that you may have watched all the episodes of Boston Legal, LA Law and that thing with Rob Lowe that never took off, but doesn't Illmatic have to actually repeat these accusations before you can think you're libelled?
 
 
Daemon est Deus Inversus
10:14 / 20.05.06
I'm glad you quoted that. That was the only context in which I mentioned libel; and, despite what was said two or three posts up, I never threatened anyone with anything. And, yes, the only possible inference that can be drawn from Illmatic's post is that he has in his possession information so damaging that it makes all further discussion moot. That is the very essence of libel per quod. It's also a Star Chamber tactic.

I've said about five times, in five different ways, that the comments to Mordant and Jake, though not unprovoked, were inappropriate.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
10:32 / 20.05.06
She referred to me as a "pimp" on the forum

No I didn't.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
10:38 / 20.05.06
You're meant to scream "OBJECTION!" before that, Mordant. That's how lawyers do it. I know. I've played Phoenix Wright.
 
 
Ganesh
10:46 / 20.05.06
I think we're in danger of conflating pimp-as-a-verb and pimp-as-a-noun here.
 
 
Quantum
11:01 / 20.05.06
The only possible inference that can be drawn from Illmatic's post is that he has in his possession information so damaging that it makes all further discussion moot.

No it isn't. I inferred something else from it, not that he had damaging information about your character. So did several others. So there are other possible inferences. Then he explicitly said I was trying to be diplomatic above, guess it backfired. Never mind. which would indicate that he wasn't implying anything like that either. You leapt to an erroneous conclusion and seem to think it's the only possible view. It isn't.
Now I'm awaiting Tom I think.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
11:23 / 20.05.06
That is the very essence of libel per quod.

No it isn't - libel per quod claims that an apparently non-defamatory statement becomes defamatory due to to extrinsic information. If I were to say of Illmatic that he was always in work at the stroke of ten thirty (that's thirty after ten for our American readers), it might be seen as libel per quod if he was supposed to be getting into work at nine o'clock to look after the orphans. You might believe that this is going on here, as you might have access to extrinsic information we do not that convinces you that the meaning was that you are not suitable for Barbelith, but the very essence? Not so much.

Personally, I would very strongly advise that any informations extrinsic to Barbelith are not considered, and that decisions on DEDI are made on the basis of his behaviour on this thread and on other threads of Barbelith, and the content of his private messages.

It's also a Star Chamber tactic.

Not really - it's more, if anything, like a trusted intelligencer bringing information directly to the King. If it were a Star Chamber tactic, he would have gathered Tom's privy coucillors, of which to my knowledge there are none.I fear that you are not John Lilburne, DEDI.

Now, I notice that you have not so far satisfied the burden of proof on the claim that Mordant and (not or) crossposted (I assume you mean - responded to) every post you have made subsequent to the publication of your statement that Mordant Carnival's mother was a whore. Please do so. Also, please provide substantiation for the claim:

She referred to me as a "pimp" on the forum some three times..

Specifically, prove that she referred to you as a pimp - that is, a procurer of prostitutes for a customer - not that she referred to your actions as "pimping" a website or a magical order - that is, clearly a metaphorical usage not involving the procuring of prostitutes for a customer.

There is another possibility, which is that you apologise for your actions - that is not that you admit that your actions were inappropriate, but that you apologise personally to those who have been on the receiving end of your factually incorrect invective, state for the record that you undertake not to behave in such a way again, and acknowledge that were you to do so it would be entirely within the rights of the owner and manager of this online forum to perform an administrative function such as the altering of the password on login number 5385. We could see how that goes.
 
 
Alex's Grandma
11:41 / 20.05.06
Can we add 'nebulous use of legal jargon' to the list of things that automatically get you banned from Barbelith, m'lud?

'He said, striding majestically up the courtroom and then turning, with a flourish, to the jury.'

At the moment, I feel embarrassed to be alive.
 
 
Daemon est Deus Inversus
11:52 / 20.05.06
Haus wrote,
"There is another possibility, which is that you apologise for your actions - that is not that you admit that your actions were inappropriate, but that you apologise personally to those who have been on the receiving end of your factually incorrect invective, state for the record that you undertake not to behave in such a way again, and acknowledge that were you to do so it would be entirely within the rights of the owner and manager of this online forum to perform an administrative function such as the altering of the password on login number 5385. We could see how that goes. "

I apologize personally to Mordant and Jake for the comment that I made. I state for the record that I will undertake not to do so again. Of course, were I to do so, such administrative action as you mention would be more than appropriate.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
14:10 / 20.05.06
Still waiting for those answers that Haus asked for. I'm sure there must be an episode of Ally McBeal running on a TV station somewhere if you need any help.
 
 
SMS
20:14 / 20.05.06
I would like to see us make this apology as easy on DEDI as possible. It would certainly be good for this community to have this kind of conflict resolved without a banning. But this particular thread seems to be something of a minefield. Yes, it is a thread that DEDI himself started, but I only see two outcomes of this conversation. Either everyone generally agrees to a kind of fresh start or else the fight goes on until DEDI is somehow forced off the board.

Regarding Haus' request for DEDI to prove that Mordant referred to him as a procurer of prostitutes, can I suggest that, even though Haus can probably win a debate over whether this is necessary, and even though DEDI's use of "as a pimp" might have been an inappropriate use of the term to describe what transpired, even though all this may be the case, actually going through the motions of demonstrating this might not be very healthy. If Barbelith \ DEDI and DEDI both actually want to make a fresh start, then this kind of thing simply has to be forgiven.

Even if Barbelith wishes to take this path, there is still a way that we can drag out the conflict. We could demand that DEDI apologize, not generally, but specifically for everything we perceive he has done wrong or else provide a reasonable defense of it. What seems to me necessary is that Barbelith accept a general apology from DEDI, ackowledging that certain disagreements may still remain, but hoping that some kind of successful reconciliation is actually worthwhile, and even more valuable than all the details of pimp-words and such. I don't mean that word choice is unimportant, but sometimes restoring peace is more important. Maybe this isn't one of those times, but, then again, maybe it is.

Now, I'm not a part of the conflict, so my post should not be taken as though I've taken sides. I'm only trying to offer a suggestion. In addition, I have tried to avoid misusing language, but perhaps I inadvertanly said something inaccurate or even offensive. If you notice this, but it seems that you can glean my meaning from it, anyway, I ask please for the benefit of the doubt.
 
 
SMS
20:18 / 20.05.06
I can already see a problem with the last point. I referred to "Barbelith" when I should have taken the time to refer to specific individuals.
 
 
invisible_al
20:48 / 20.05.06
Ok he's apologised for calling people's mother's whores, but has DEDI shown any understanding of why Mordant took the action in the Temple and why his actions were inappropriate? I'm not seeing anything but obfuscation about that issue here from DEDI.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
21:00 / 20.05.06
Didn't really want to have to get into this, but: My problem with the pimp thing was not OMG teh fales acuzashun! That's just mildly irksome. What's a lot more annoying is the kind of mindset behind it.

Dedi must be aware that the expression 'pimping your group' or 'pimping your site' is a slang term for plugging or advertising and does not equate to an accusation of being a pimp. Ergo, he knew I wasn't calling him a pimp. If you accuse someone of doing something they clearly have not done, you're not looking for an apology or an explanation, you're looking for a (pointless) squabble.

Be that as it may, thanks to Dedi for taking time out of his busy schedual--and really, it must be terribly busy--to apologise to me.
 
 
Daemon est Deus Inversus
21:12 / 20.05.06
For whatever it's worth, I was sincere in my apology.
 
 
SMS
21:55 / 20.05.06
The use of "pimping" reminds me of an exchange between Haus and Mathlete in the Shadowsax thread over the use of the word "dogpile." Haus asked Mathlete not to use the word because it was "rather obvious in its implication that any number of people greater than two expressing an opinion with which you disagree are some sort of slavering, animalistic mob." This struck Mathlete as "fucked up," yet Haus seems to have disagreed in all seriousness. I'm not saying any kind of double-standard is being applied, since there may be important differences between dogpiling and pimping. However, in the disagreement between Haus and Mathlete, both people seemed to think their point was rather simple and easy to follow and Mathlete, at least initially, thought that Haus' concern was very absurd. Possibly, something similar is going on here?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
23:09 / 20.05.06
Quite different. One is a difference of interpretatation of a noun, the other the difference between a noun and a verb.

However, you make a worthwhile point, SMS, if one apparently in response to a different discussion than the one taking place. There are different ways to do this. One set of ways is adversarial, another is consensual and seeking to establish ways in which resolutions can be reached in which all parties feel that their personal dignity is respected, whether or not they remain on Barbelith.
 
 
Tryphena Absent
00:35 / 21.05.06
Okay, so we're now in a place where someone has actually apologised for their actions and noted that we have a right to ban them should they behave in that way again. I think we should note that he has not responded viciously to Mordant's sarcasm, simply restated his apology.

DEDI, I get the impression that you want to stay here. I think it would be helpful for all of us if you explained why.
 
 
*
00:50 / 21.05.06
I'm not sure I need anything else from DEDI, actually— ze's essentially agreed to summary banning if ze does anything else unacceptable, as I read it. And if ze won't abuse or harass anyone or post any -ist comments, and keeps hir posts informative rather than advertisive, I'm happy enough to move on from here.
 
 
Spaniel
00:56 / 21.05.06
Same here, although I hope he's figured out that Mordant was just doing her job and doing it politely (as usual).

DEDI, for the record, I would've behaved in exactly the same way were you behaving similarly in the fora I mod, and I probably wouldn't have been quite so couteous.
 
  

Page: 123(4)56789

 
  
Add Your Reply