The Marc Spring story

I think it’s worth recapping the Marc Spring story as it relates to myself and to Your NZ. Readers here have a right to know what has happened, and it is in the wider public interest to reveal what Spring and associates have done and continue to do, because I’m not the only one who they have chosen to, in Spring’s words, “fuck over”.

This fucking over is fairly serious stuff, involving many multiple identities and online outlets used to abuse, defame, entrap, intimidate and threaten, and involving the misuse of the legal system and threats to the extent of trying to gag and shut down Your NZ and get me in prison ‘by Christmas’.

Spring is the main focus here but associated with him and the ‘fucking over’ have been Dermot Nottingham, Cameron Slater and Lauda Finem. Slater is well known for ‘Dirty Politics’ and his bully boy blogging at Whale Oil, but is probably a junior partner in this.

Why have I been dragged in to what is a much bigger story that goes back fifteen years?

Probably because I decided to stop them using Your NZ to attack and defame Matthew Blomfield, despite court undertakings and restraining orders that were supposed to stop them doing it.

In part they are vindictive, malicious people who seem to play ‘fucking over’ as a game.

In part for reasons that I can’t currently disclose, because despite brazen breaches of court orders they have managed to also use the courts to put gags on some exposure of their activities.

In part because I think they saw me as a quick and easy target in an ongoing online rampage. They don’t seem to have expected me to stand up against them and expose them, and they have gone to desperate measures to try and shut me up, including attempts at entrapment and making false claims to courts.

Prior to 2015 I had barely heard of Spring or Nottingham and knew little about Lauda Finem.

But there had been a feud going on for years between Spring and Slater and Lauda Finem (with various interconnections) versus Matthew Blomfield (I knew little of him before this either). Both Blomfield and Spring had been associated with Hell Pizza and there was a falling out between Blomfield and others at Hell.

A hard drive containing ten years of Blomfield’s business and personal data including very personal family photos was given to Slater (and the contents probably made available to others). Slater posted a number of attacks on Blomfield at Whale Oil.

Blomfield filed for defamation against Slater. The defamation case is still dragging on, but during it’s protracted course Slater gave an undertaking that he wouldn’t attack Blomfield on Whale Oil.

So last year Spring started to use Your NZ to continue the feud against Blomfield, using a number of pseudonyms (something he has done elsewhere) to make it appear as if others supported his claims. One other person that I’m aware of joined the attacks, Dave G. Just about everyone else doing it were identities used by Spring.

Blomfield contacted me claiming comments on Your NZ were unfair and defamatory. I agreed on some and deleted them. I disagreed on others and left them. Blomfield accepted my decisions. I did all of this openly, and I gave Blomfield a right of response.

The attacks against Blomfield on Your NZ continued by Spring and Dave G. I was later to find out that this was despite the courts giving Blomfield a restraining order against Spring in April 2015.

I have evidence of all of this that shows Spring using multiple identities from multiple locations, including from his workplace.

In July things changed quite dramatically.

Lauda Finem posted their first of what has been a number of posts that include attacks, defamation and false accusations against me. My photo was included in a ‘dirty dozen’ of journalists and bloggers – you have to laugh at some of the ironies in all of this. Lauda Finem, Spring and some others are the dirtiest I have encountered online.

I have been implicated in a cacophony of conspiracy claims that get more bizarre with each post. That’s another story that is quite hilarious. They call themselves justice campaigners and investigators. They deserve a top Tui award.

In July Spring was involved in serving me with legal papers for Nottingham. Slater also played a part in this but it can’t be disclosed at this stage.

Lauda Finem put up more posts attacking myself and Blomfield, separately and combined. While they use skerricks of truth they fabricate many of their claims – I don’t know if they are deliberate lies or if they believe their fantasies, I suspect a mixture of both.

And at the same time as the legal action was initiated and Lauda Finem started to post on it @LaudaFinem and @Marc Spring started to attack and harass me on Twitter with false claims, insinuations and abuse.

This tag team has continued off and on until the present. Last night @LaudaFinem repeated a “boozy” claim and added a new one – “likely using prescription med’s for the psych problems”. That’s fairly typical concocted false accusations that look like transference, they often accuse others of what they do.

Interestingly the only other person to suggest that I have psych problems is Dermot Nottingham via email.

I’ve received a number of emails from different people but mostly from a common source threatening a range of things. In addition there have been attempts to entrap me via email and phone (text). There’s some very stupid stuff. That’s for another time.

From July there was an ongoing campaign waged against me by Lauda Finem posts and  the @LaudaFinem and @marcspring tag team on Twitter.

There was also an onslaught of attacks on Your NZ by people using multiple IDs, including Spring and Nottingham and one or two others. There seems to have been two aims – to try to train wreck comments threads, and to entrap.

They were trying to show that a lack of moderation was a problem by causing problems. This was extreme at times.

It escalated in October when Spring planted comments (from his workplace) that he was later to try and use in an attempted legal action aimed at shutting down Your NZ.

At the same time a Spring pseudonym also linked to a new Lauda Finem post that was an insidious attack on someone just because they happened to be a commenter at Your NZ – Mike C, although an ongoing feud between Mike C and Whale Oil may also have been a factor. This included photos and insinuations about family members.

An attack on Alan Wilkinson was also posted at Lauda Finem, I presume because he pointed out how stupid they were. They have a history of reacting badly to having their stupidity pointed out.

In November Spring launched a legal attack. Slater and Nottingham were associated with this. It highlighted their legal incompetence and also the lengths they were prepared to go to to shut up and shut down any critics.

Spring posted a notice of a court order on Your NZ under the Harmful Digital Communication Act (HDCA) via a “press release” (which showed Nottingham as author) just after 5 pm on a Friday. It was a litany of lies and errors.

They had managed to con the court into ordering I remove all references to Spring on Your NZ, and that I put in place a system of full time moderation.

It wasn’t just me they wanted to gag, it was all of New Zealand according to the press release:

“The statutorily enforced moderation of blog site comments should be made law in an immediate amendment to the HDCA, with the addition that the website owner is liable for any comments that are posted after moderation. If these additions were to become law, the significant expense to date will have been worth it” said Mr Spring.

Were they serious? Of course their intention was for this to apply to other blogs, not their own. David Farrar says that it would mean he would have to shut down Kiwiblog. All the other blogs like Whale Oil and The Standard effectively couldn’t operate. And it couldn’t be limited to ‘blogs’ when most of the online comments are on Facebook, on Twitter, on Reddit, on the Trademe message boards etc etc.

A major way in which the internet operates is unlikely to be changed so a few nincompoops can impose mass gagging to avoid a bit of exposure while their own blogs continue with impunity.

There were a number of problems with the court order, including.

  • I wasn’t notified correctly
  • I wasn’t advised as I should have been prior to the order being made
  • The HDCA has no provision for gagging a website
  • Procedures required by the HDCA weren’t followed
  • The part of the HDCA being used doesn’t come into effect until 2017.

A few days later the judge discharged the order – see Court order discharged – because it had been made “without jurisdiction”.

I presume the judge and the court were embarrassed by being sucked in by legal incompetents. They wouldn’t let me view the files (that Spring had failed to provide as required).

Lawyers said that if a lawyer had submitted such a flawed action to the court they would have been in serious trouble.

But it didn’t end there. Spring and others threatened further legal actions along the lines of “Mr Spring is unsure whether Mr George could operate his blog from a prison cell” (from the press release).

Quite a bit more was attempted that I can’t currently reveal.

The posts at Lauda Finem kept appearing with ever more bizarre claims. Everyone in New Zealand who shares my surname could be insinuated – some actually have been.

More attempts have been made to plant ‘evidence’ and induce me into doing things that could be then potentially legally actionable.

The @laudafinem/@marcspring tag team continues.

The bursts of attention they give me are signs of other things happening. Pressure is mounting on them as their behaviours start to catch up on them. They keep digging deeper holes, and with no way out they lash out. I just happen to be one of their targets.

A beige tumble weed target they probably didn’t think would stand up to them and fight back.

They hate light being shone on what they have been doing for years – trying to fuck people over. But they are making more mistakes, and doing stupider things. I think there’s a lot of people who are waiting for them to get what they deserve. It could take a bit of time yet but trash generally ends up in the dump.

Note that there are probably complex associations between various people involved. For me it’s immaterial who owns what and directly or indirectly does what. All I am reporting on are some links, and behaviours in common.

If commenting please be careful and legal. I will remove anything I think could be a risk.

Leave a comment

90 Comments

  1. Grumpy

     /  5th March 2016

    I find it incredible that these guys live is such a closed, paranoid old. They actually think they are important.
    Good on ya mate!

    Reply
  2. Grumpy

     /  5th March 2016

    Of course, I meant “world”.

    Reply
    • kittycatkin

       /  5th March 2016

      Old describes them; they are the school bullies grown wrinkled and age-spotted.

      Reply
  3. MaureenW

     /  5th March 2016

    The only credibility they have damaged is that of LF. Ironic!

    Reply
  4. Alan Wilkinson

     /  5th March 2016

    Cockroaches crap on everything they touch. Just catch them, squash them and flush them.

    Reply
  5. Mike C

     /  5th March 2016

    @George

    Thank you so much for writing it all down so succinctly but in detail 🙂

    They didn’t expect the “Beige Badger” to have such sharp teeth … or friends in high or unusual places … not to mention your solid commenter base who can smell a stirring shit from 5kms away. LOL.

    I note you are now using their name again in here … and I noticed several weeks ago that the “Spring Versus Mike C” post title was still written as something like “Court Ordered Removal Versus Mike C”.

    Does this now mean you can put their name back in here again where they have been deleted in the past ???

    Reply
    • As a precaution I complied with the court order until it could be sorted out, so that mean removing Spring’s name from everything. He was that anal he kept sending threatening emails demanding I remove even references to the spring season.

      As soon as the court order was discharged I could mention his name again. I couldn’t be bothered going through all the edits, I might do that some time.

      I decided that now is a good time to put out my side of the story so that it explains what was going on to people here and to the wider public.

      It’s all backed by evidence. They may keep trying to shut me up but the more they do that the stupider they make themselves look.

      Reply
    • kittycatkin

       /  5th March 2016

      Badgers have very sharp teeth and claws and can be very dangerous when provoked.

      I will probably sound very naive when I say that I can’t imagine having so little to think about that I’d do as these people do. It’s a cliche to say that life’s too short, but it is. After the hideous experience that I have gone through, a hideous experience that is going on all over NZ, I can’t imagine wanting to waste my time and energy being so vile and doing my damndest to make other people miserable. There are surely many better ways to spend one’s life than that. If any of these people were given the death sentence that my late husband was, would they think that what they’d spent their lives doing was worth it ? He had two weeks and a day after the diagnosis, and I’m glad that he didn’t have to think ‘Well, I’ve wasted my time on that-bugger, too late.’

      Reply
      • It makes much more sense if you understand who the people involved are and what they have to hide. The potential damage to them, upon being outed, is extremely high.

        There’s one person who binds all these threads and people together. What THEY have to hide MUST be hidden or else it becomes politically deadly, a huge hypocrisy issue and potential for criminal charges.

        There was a story that started a while back. I wonder if Rawshark got any emails between Mr Slater and anyone from Lauda Finem? Or if anyone got proof of association and working together? I am SURE those questions will be answered in future.

        Some very, very bad people are getting angsty. Their last defence is to stifle speech and lock normal Kiwis like Mr George up in vexatious litigation that appears desperate and malevolent.

        I myself have to obey three seperate suppression orders. It’s really, really crazy living in this Kafkaesque nightmare where my adversaries use socks and friendly allies to spin bullshit and lies about me….

        And I’m not allowed to answer.

        Bad men don’t play by the rules. That’s what makes them bad. Good men MUST play by the rules. That is why bad men usually win.

        Not any more.

        Reply
        • kittycatkin

           /  5th March 2016

          No matter who they are and what they’re hiding, they initiated it-and it seems a stupid way to waste one’s life,especially when nobody knows how long they have to go. I couldn’t be bothered, although I am no Pollyanna and can be very mean-spirited. (waits for disbelieving denials) But to invest so much energy in such a long-term negative thing-forget it. Imagine seeing a logging truck bearing down on you and wishing, in your last few seconds of life, that you’d spent it on something less stressful and ultimately pointless.

          Reply
          • kittycatkin

             /  5th March 2016

            Nero, Tiberius, Caligula, Pol Pot, Hitler, Mussolini, Marat, Ceaucescu, Stalin, Gadaffi, Hussein and untold others spent their lives as power freaks and ‘bad men’ and it did them no good in the end. Would many people have been genuinely and disinterestedly sorry when any of them got what was coming to them ? I doubt it.

            Reply
          • “but to invest so much energy in such a long-term negative thing-forget it. Imagine seeing a logging truck bearing down on you…”
            They might be seeing something like that now, figuratively.

            Reply
          • Timoti

             /  5th March 2016

            You can be a nasty Queen, Kitty- no doubt about that. Benny is after utu,girl.
            There’s nothing like payback. The end justifies the means..and the time.

            Reply
            • kittycatkin

               /  5th March 2016

              I don’t know if it does-and I speak as an Ulsterwoman, from a culture where grudges are held forever. Talk about Maori long memories-they’re not in the same league 🙂

              But now I really wouldn’t want to invest all the time and energy that these people are using for the sole purpose of making myself disliked and despised.

    • Beige is the new….CRIMSON! 🙂

      Reply
  6. DaveG

     /  5th March 2016

    So Pete your still publishing outright lies and associating me with Spring and LF, I have stated to you over and over I have nothing to do with them, nothing and no campaign exists involving me, nothing has changed at all since your last crack at me, nothing. Further, be honest enough to admit your other legal issues, and perhaps why the LF’ Springs of this world would even bother targeting you as you call it.

    When you published the story about me, it was not accurate and you know it, I kept screenshots of all of it, and sought legal advise but chose not to do anything despite them saying it’s quite clear you and Mike C lied. If you have evidence, emails, letters etc (which there isn’t, I don’t know them) then prove it or apologise and cease and desist associating me to them. Just like Mike C lied and claimed I abused her/ him on your blog, yet when called out by myself and others there was no proof, and you allowed it. Others were shocked and questioned your actions as well as his / hers as well. Your story is flawed Pete, fix it please. Naturally I will keep a copy of this before you simply remove it or alter it.

    Reply
    • You made similar attacks on Blomfield that Spring did, that’s all I’ve said here.

      And you still seem to be associating with @laudafinem and @marcspring on Twitter – is that true or not?

      Reply
      • DaveG

         /  5th March 2016

        Pete that’s utter BS, I made previous comments about Blomfield and when asked by you backed me up with evidence / links and so on. There is enough evidence on him on he Internet. Since your story, yes I have liked a few of their tweets but go back Pete, as I said then I quite liked some of the work by LF (some) and to like a tweet here and there is now a crime Pete, come on you know better than that. I am not associated, and Pete, remove my name and APOLOGISE.

        Reply
        • ” There is enough evidence on him on the Internet.”

          Where exactly apart from on LF?

          Liking their tweets (and it looks like more than that to me) is associating with them.

          Saying you ” I quite liked some of the work by LF” is associating yourself with some of what they have posted – if I recall correctly you appeared to quite like their attack on Mike C.

          Why are you so agitated as being mentioned on the same post as them when you like (in words and on Twitter) some of what they do?

          I think what they do is disgraceful, but I think you even defended or justified their attack on Mike C.

          Perhaps you could clarify what you thought of that attack, and LF’s attacks on Blomfield – do you think that’s credible evidence?

          Reply
          • Conspiratoor

             /  5th March 2016

            So if I say I like one of your posts, that makes me one of PG’s associates. Really?
            I thought at the time you were being a little mean spirited towards DaveG and this appears to be more of the same. If memory serves he was up-front where he stood on Blomfield and got a little testy with chirping Mike at times but how does that make him an associate of the bad guys?

            Reply
            • He made very similar claims about Blomfield that Spring was making.

              The only other place claiming ‘evidence’ since Whale Oil was cleaned that I know of is LF, and I know they make a lot of things up and outright lie.

              And court documents so far have backed up Blomfield, and Slater and Spring and Nottingham have been found wanting by the courts.

            • Ralph

               /  5th March 2016

              “He made very similar claims about Blomfield that Spring was making.”

              Two people don’t have to know each other to form a similar opinion of someone.

          • DaveG

             /  5th March 2016

            Once again Pete, you are twisting facts and putting it on the Internet. At the time I stated I did not support the attacks on Mike C, but then you did almost exactly what LF did to Mike C to me, and you fail to see you were wrong or what you have done. The message from me remains to you to apologise, withdraw and stop lying that I am associated with Spring or LF.

            Reply
            • Tell me what is incorrect in this…

              So last year Spring started to use Your NZ to continue the feud against Blomfield, using a number of pseudonyms (something he has done elsewhere) to make it appear as if others supported his claims. One other person that I’m aware of joined the attacks, Dave G. Just about everyone else doing it were identities used by Spring.

              …and I’ll correct it.

              That is all I said about DaveG (which is not your identity, it’s a pseudonym).

        • I’m sorry, DaveG, but that is disingenuous claptrap. Throughout all of this saga, you alone have been the one consistent attempted voice of reason defending Spring, Nottingham, and Laudafinem. This isn’t a matter of liking occasional tweets. This is you systematically claiming to be an independent party on this matter, and conveniently siding with the abusive and hostile conduct by Spring, Nottingham, and Laudafinem.

          I’m not sorry that you feel that being painted with the same brush as Laudafinem seems unfair to you. You are the one holding the brush. Anybody with a degree of commonsense would stop painting that damning picture.

          Reply
          • Mike C

             /  5th March 2016

            @HamishPrice

            And let’s not forget that Guest Post that “DaveG” wrote on behalf of Whale Oil in the middle of last year 🙂

            DaveG appears to have [If you don’t have evidence of that don’t say it. PG]

            Reply
    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  5th March 2016

      Your pseudonym generates its own history and reputation, friends and enemies. But it is divorced from reality and yourself by your own choice. If you were to take legal action the consequences of joining the fake and the real would again result from your own actions, no-one else’s.

      Reply
    • Mike C

       /  5th March 2016

      @DaveG

      WOW !!! You haven’t commented in here for many months … but within about an hour of George writing this post you are in here like a rocket 🙂

      Its about 6.30 or 7.30am over there right now isn’t it … so it’s quite clear that either Georges Blog is the first blog you check upon waking each morning … or somebody on this side of the Tasman alerted you to the content of the above post.

      If George says you are involved in some way with Spring or Lauda Finem or Slater&Co … then I believe him.

      Reply
      • DaveG

         /  5th March 2016

        No, definitely not the first blog Mike, we are currently having some good rain, the remnants of TC Winston and about 5.00 am our time It was torrential so I went out to check the property, water everywhere but the pumps are doing their job. After that a coffee and read the paper then the blogs. As I said previously Mike, I will check, and I’ll protect myself against people and lies such as Pete and indeed you put online. I have not commented here and won’t again except to protect myself and correct false allegations.

        Reply
        • What false allegation have I made here (by the way, I’ve only used a pseudonym). You’ve admitted attacking Blomfield here, and that’s all I’ve said you did. I thought it was pertinent that you are about the only one to have done that here to any extent apart from the multiple Spring identities.

          Reply
  7. Alan Wilkinson

     /  5th March 2016

    It would be interesting and possibly useful in future, PG, to compile a spreadsheet list of pseudonyms, emails, ip addresses, date time of comments/contacts by the mob.

    Reply
    • I’ve already compiled a lot of that.

      Reply
    • DaveG

       /  5th March 2016

      I support that Alan, and you will find I have not once used a pseudonym, all under my own name. And whilst this is being compiled, perhaps it could include all pseudonym’s from all commenters, the regulars etc. only a suspicion Alan, but al might not be as it seems.

      Reply
  8. Ralph

     /  5th March 2016

    Long time reader, first post.
    Pete, I’ve followed this story for a long time. I understand there is a lot that you can’t say. What I would like to see, and it would be very informative, is for you to do a rundown of [edited – as I suspect you may be aware if you know about it I cannot say anything about it at this stage. PG]

    It would explain your predicament without a need for details, and educate your readers in what can and cannot be done.
    [I would love for someone to explain my ‘predicament’ but so far those responsible for doing so have failed in their duty. And have had it all gagged. So you can’t say anything about it here either. PG]

    Reply
    • Oliver

       /  5th March 2016

      Good question, I know a bit about the law so I could explain it to everyone just give me a sec to write something up.

      Reply
      • Mike C

         /  5th March 2016

        @Oliver

        With all due respect … I would prefer to hear it from George … because I have a feeling that what you write may be very different to what George will write. LOL 🙂

        Reply
        • Mike C

           /  5th March 2016

          @George

          Just saw your edits of “Ralphs” comments 🙂

          Right now “Oliver” is busy scribbling something down to write in here … and I fear their comment might disappear altogether. LOL.

          Reply
      • Oliver

         /  5th March 2016

        I’m not going to bother if Pete is just going to censor it.

        Reply
        • Mike C

           /  5th March 2016

          @Oliver

          Don’t you understand that nothing can be written in here about what “Ralph” was talking about … because [Please don’t say anything about that. PG]

          It’s nothing personal 🙂

          Reply
        • It’s not me who’s desperate to keep things secret. As I think you may know.

          Reply
          • Ralph

             /  5th March 2016

            “as I suspect you may be aware ” “Ralph”.(in inverted commas)
            I’ve seen how this works, let me say right from the outset – I have no skin in this game.

            Reply
      • Iceberg

         /  5th March 2016

        It’s great to have a legal mind as sharp as yours at PGs disposal.

        Reply
  9. Excellent post, Mr George! Succinct and gets to the point about things that relate to yourself, your blog and those trying to entangle you in order to silence the truth.

    Misuse of suppression is a huge issue but ironically those who have long fought against suppression now hide behind it. The coming sunlight will be glorious and quite memorable for those who have long wondered just what exactly is going on.

    It’s tough not being able to speak out but to place oneself above the law makes one an outlaw. We are not outlaws and neither do we seek suppression. The other ‘team’ do and hide behind a long list of troll and sock handles. Their tactics are to be learned from and exploited when it comes time to deal with the next wave.

    LF IS going down. Those who operate the site are going down. Anyone who has used their services to smear or attack others will be outed. The biggest bully on the NZ web will soon find themselves without any more rat holes to hide in.

    I can’t wait 😉

    Reply
    • Mike C

       /  5th March 2016

      @BenR

      “LF is going down. Those who operate the site are going down. Anyone who has used their services to smear or attack others will be outed”.

      You keep promising this … but nothing has happened.

      Note to Self:- Take a screen shot of this comment before George deletes it like he did with my last comment. LOL 🙂

      Reply
      • How would you know nothing has happened? You’re not a party to any litigation, you haven’t laid any formal complaint against LF and you’re unaware of a myriad of things. You’re completely outside of the pushback. Recommend you work out how you can be useful.

        Reply
        • Mike C

           /  5th March 2016

          @Ben Rachinger

          Yeah … Lauda Finem has never done anything to me and my Family Members … eh? 🙂

          [Deleted – there are incorrect claims in that. PG]

          But somehow … you and George are the victims here … and I am simply a nobody who “needs to work out how I can be useful”. LOL.

          Reply
          • Mike C

             /  5th March 2016

            @George

            No … my claims that you deleted were correct 🙂

            Reply
        • Kevin

           /  5th March 2016

          Have you laid a formal complaint against LF?

          Reply
          • I laid a formal complaint when they doxed my parents, called me a pedo, attempted to intimidate me on behalf of someon I was speaking out against and also when they posted the general location I was at in a tweet (knowledge that could only come from following me, the Police or hacking).

            I also have been given copies of emails between several parties and IP addresses of parties involved in LF.

            LF updated their security to using two factor authentication when they updated their website. Means a device is needed to login to the website. Their security is NOW okay but was formerly a joke.

            There’s no question that this year will see the unveiling of what all of these people have been up to. This has been going on, for me personally, since Feb of last year. 13 month campaign by LF to smear me and silence me isn’t working at all.

            I feel sorry for all who have been targeted by these miscreants. I hope every victim gets justice.

            Laying a complaint is a necessity if you are a victim. Don’t be afraid of them. They’re just little kids. At the end of the day….. It’s just the Internet.

            Reply
        • Crumbs

           /  5th March 2016

          It’s all there for anyone to see. This blog is the only place that goes on about Open Justice. And then you keep an eye. Nowhere else is it mentioned. And then suddenly —

          Mike C, have faith. Things are clearly in hand.

          Reply
          • Lol your sarcasm? What I’m referring to in those tweets relates to me and suppression covering me. It has nought to do with LF except perhaps tangentially.

            Reply
            • Crumbs

               /  5th March 2016

              I’m fine with it Ben. Just can’t wait to see what happens to appear on that site next. There is quite a list but I understand some have to wait until the court thing is done.

            • Crumbs

               /  5th March 2016

              ansd I must add, a much more constructive use of time it is as well.

            • There is nothing your friends can write about me that they haven’t done already. A great way for me to repay their attacks on my family and I is to work legally and fairly to make sure that site has no future. Criminal harrasment, cyberstalking and intimidation doesn’t sit well with regular Kiwis. It doesn’t sit at all with me.

              A younger version of me would have reacted to all of this in a very different manner. The evidence against all the conspirators involved in that site is ironclad. The legal system should show them no favours given their attacks on judges, police, lawyers and politicians.

              It’s going to be really fun. Really, really, really fun. LF intimidation of PG and YourNZ commenters draws to a close….

              🙂

              It is inevitable.

            • Mike C

               /  5th March 2016

              @Ben Rachinger

              What are you talking about?

              Until very recently … you hadn’t commented in here for ages and ages.

              You have your own Twitter and Blog … so why are you suddenly so incredibly worried about Georges blog of late?

            • Do you have an issue with me? Please feel free to tell me what your issue is. I comment anywhere I like and Mr George runs a blog where all, including yourself, are welcome as long as they adhere to very basic rules and principles.

              I haven’t attempted to dox anyone here.
              I haven’t rung Mr Slater and abused him.
              I haven’t popped my comments into every single thread I see and gone off-topic.
              I don’t put Mr Georges legal position in jeopardy.

              The reason YourNZ is such a great site is the fairness, accountability and transparency offered here. Defending such a thing from those who are unfair, deem themselves unaccountable and behave in the most opaque manner possible is a given for anyone who believes in free speech.

              What say you?

            • Mike C

               /  5th March 2016

              Rachinger

              I have already told you 🙂

  10. Ratty

     /  5th March 2016

    Online harassment is an offence (allegedly).. Have a word to the Police about this. I’d start with Slater, he is as thick as two short planks and will squeal the entire story

    Reply
    • Maggy Wassilieff

       /  5th March 2016

      Online harassment is an offence under the Harmful Digital Communications Act 2015
      (Section 32:3 gives the definition and necessary conditions for online harassment).
      http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2015/0063/latest/whole.html#DLM5711874
      If a continuing pattern of someone posting harmful comments against an individual occurs , then harassment is established.

      Reply
      • Thanks for linking the legislation. Been a while since I was reading it. It’s really a fascinating statute with an abundance of new responsibilities for Kiwi internet users, site owners and people written about on the Net.

        HDCA:
        Causing harm by posting digital communication
        (1)
        A person commits an offence if—
        (a)
        the person posts a digital communication with the intention that it cause harm to a victim; and
        (b)
        posting the communication would cause harm to an ordinary reasonable person in the position of the victim; and
        (c)
        posting the communication causes harm to the victim.
        (2)
        In determining whether a post would cause harm, the court may take into account any factors it considers relevant, including—
        (a)
        the extremity of the language used:
        (b)
        the age and characteristics of the victim:
        (c)
        whether the digital communication was anonymous:
        (d)
        whether the digital communication was repeated:
        (e)
        the extent of circulation of the digital communication:
        (f)
        whether the digital communication is true or false:
        (g)
        the context in which the digital communication appeared.
        (3)
        A person who commits an offence against this section is liable on conviction to,—
        (a)
        in the case of a natural person, imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years or a fine not exceeding $50,000:
        (b)
        in the case of a body corporate, a fine not exceeding $200,000.
        (4)
        In this section, victim means the individual who is the target of a posted digital communication.

        What constitutes harm will be fought out in court cases really but it appears that anyone who engages in a pattern of malicious sharing about another person or persons will run foul of this law.

        The intent of the law, I guess, is to introduce consequences for certain types of online speech. In lieu of being able to target users who are criminals under the act (if they use anonymising processes and there’s no ‘catch’ to be made) then the weight falls on the site owner/operator. Bigger/more profitable sites will be better placed to challenge the inevitable legal onslaught that comes with making types of speech online criminal. Smaller sites, as in the FIRST use of the HDCA in NZ against Mr George of this website, will be less materially able to fight vexatious litigation.

        Where to from here for free speech online? Because only the best cannot be traced from what they say to a physical location. What do blog owners say when they talk about it? Are communities looking for self-moderation, community moderation, owner/operator moderation or external requests for moderation?

        This law changes a lot. Thank you, JuCo. The Great Crusher, of civil rights and that one shit car.

        Reply
        • Robby

           /  5th March 2016

          “(c)
          whether the digital communication was anonymous”
          This is the part that interests me Ben. Does it apply to the victim, the perpetrator, or both equally? The law seems a little ambiguous….

          Reply
          • Hey Robby. I was just discussing your point with some friends. It’s my understanding that it refers to the perpetrator as parts of the statue refer to “natural person” and also I don’t know how one could quantify harm to a pseudonym? Really like to have that discussion.

            If I post under a pseudonym and another pseudonym ‘harms’ me via a digital communication, do I have grounds for cause even though the only link between the pseudonym and my legal identity is my knowledge of it?

            Will the onus fall on site owners/operators to remove anonymous posting as a safeguard against falling foul of the law?

            How do ‘they’ intend to deanonymise people? Technically, legally and procedurally.

            What protections exist for whistleblowers posting information that can harm someone but it is in the greater good?

            And my favourite….

            What non-governmental agency, in NZ, will look out for the digital civil rights of both victims and those who may be unfairly targeted as perps? Does such a body exist even in offline communication?

            I think being anonymous online will offer people no protections against harm but still allow them to be prosecuted ergo doxed.

            What are your thoughts?

            Reply
            • Robby

               /  6th March 2016

              My thoughts are that because I choose to write anonymously, I have no right to complain. Put it this way, anyone can threaten me with whatever they like, & my response will be “GFY, you don’t even know who I am”. I might even have a little chuckle to myself about how much I’ve upset some anonymous emotard. At the same time, I realise that if I made a ‘real world’ threat against anyone, on this forum, or anywhere else on the internet, it can be traced back to my IP address by the ‘authorities’.
              And I have no problem with that, at all.

            • Robby

               /  6th March 2016

              I should probably elaborate a bit more, regarding those who choose to walk cyberspace ‘wearing real world clothes’. My interpretation of the law is that these individuals are in a class of their own. By being brave enough to ‘wear their heart on their chest’, they earn a whole lot more protection under the law, than an anonymous commentator such as myself. Any threat made online, against persons who use their real identity online, under the new law is actually a threat against a natural person. Food for thought…..

            • In the examples you give I do agree.

              That particular specific type of speech, a threat, isn’t the only thing criminalised by this law though. “Harm” is defined unclearly and “malicious” speech is somewhat defined by the amount of times over what period the speech happens. If a person takes umbrage to something said to them or about them, ergo harms them, and that happens over a period of time… Then the person whose speech is giving “harm” is open to consequences.

              There should absolutely be consequences for speech online and offline. Speech can be harmful and be inciting.

              Any Law that seeks to police speech on the internet needs to take speech and what it means very seriously. The ability to speak/interact/learn online about a range of issues and topics is an unheralded platform for speech that hasn’t heretofore existed. It could be the making or breaking of the effort to spread knowledge worldwide and bring access to knowledge inequality down.

              Laws like this guide the philosophy, ability and future of the Internet.

              I would expect any Law that criminalises speech online to be very specific in both intent and word. This Law is not that. The Nats were dishonest in the way they made it about cyber bullying too.

              Criminalising Cyber bullying – Ohhhh scary defs jail

              Criminalising Speech that causes un/quantifiable material harm or otherwise harm to a person – Well, where does that stop? Where does it begin?

            • Robby

               /  6th March 2016

              Yes, well, where does it start & where does it end?? If I think you are full of shit, I think I should be free to express that opinion….

            • Robby

               /  6th March 2016

              Have you read 1984 by George Orwell, Ben?

            • I have read it but it’s not my favourite Orwell.

              Societal change towards criminalising speech is all well and good in an informed, involved society. When it is pushed by an involved few into an apathetic many and the debate among the many is mostly “Dey be coming fo tha hangi nek bro” with a mix of “FJK” and so forth it’s quite hard to have a conversation about anything really. The many are the future criminals so I just thought I’d have at least conversation with someone about it on here.

              Fear makes the wolf look bigger.

            • Robby

               /  6th March 2016

              OK Ben, Ive taken a little time to consider your opinions, so here are my opinions…
              1. Someone said I’m an arsehole!
              Deal with it. They are either wrong or right. It’s a matter of perspective.
              2. People keep calling me a liar
              When all the suppression BS is gone, maybe you will still be called a liar, or maybe not…

            • Robby

               /  6th March 2016

              Do you prefer ‘Animal farm’ Ben?

            • Robby

               /  6th March 2016

              Don’t diss the hangi Ben, it’s a staple in my whare..

            • That’s all true. That’s the beauty of free opinions. Your opinion has no effect on me. Mine has none on you. We aren’t inciting others or saying factually incorrect things. We don’t make accusations without proof. People haven’t called me a liar in quite some time and never to my face. This Internet place is a playpen. The work happens outside of the playpen.

              Nice chatting to you. Goodnight 🙂

            • Robby

               /  6th March 2016

              Exactly Ben DILLIGAF

            • The hangi thing was a play on the meme that’s floating around referencing that. I’ve had plenty of quality hangi and boilup. Animal Farm is good. I prefer Terror and Consent by Philip Bobbit or Crime and Punishment by Dostoyevsky. I’m definitely partial to browsing Nietzche, Locke and the works of Solzhenitzyn (Gulag Archipelago is an amazing book).

              In a round about way I’m saying, you can not like me for what I have done that is all out there. I haven’t done my cause or case any favours. Who knows? You might get some surprises before this shitshow comes to an end. Perhaps you don’t care. Perhaps I don’t care.

              And so it goes 🙂

            • Robby

               /  6th March 2016

              Perhaps I do care, even if it doesn’t affect me directly….

            • I’ll be super plain so we have no misunderstandings.

              Who has been charged with a crime? The bro certainly has not. Snitching usually ends in someone getting charged. A smooth story from Mr Ng stands until I exercise my right of reply which was denied me by Mr Ng. To his credit we have spoken on that to my satisfaction and I consider what he did force me to admit, that of my act of sending pictures of a journalist to a party I won’t name here, the steepest aspect of the learning curve I’ve been on this whole time. Facing up to sending those pictures to that party means admitting I made a terrible choice which reflects extremely badly on my character NO MATTER what I have to say to justify it. The ‘damage’ caused begins and ends between those two people directly.

              One side have nothing to worry about. Nothing a quick off the record chat wouldn’t have solved.
              The others are right to cast dirt on my character for that act.

              I made a terrible error. To have criminals go unnaccountable because of that error would compound that error a million times over. I apologise to you if my two actions hurt you or people you like/love/admire.

            • Robby

               /  6th March 2016

              @ ben
              You made a terrible error, but at least you can admit it…
              It didn’t hurt me, or anyone I care about, but it still hurt someone…Consider yourself fortunate that you didn’t hurt someone I care about…. Anyhow, naughty little ‘indescretions’ shouldn’t distract attention away from real crimes…

  11. Crumbs

     /  5th March 2016

    PG, you have the patience of a saint. How you put up with some people here working against you has be completely befuzzled. It must be a fulltime job to keep an eye on your blog. Even your apparent freinds aren’t helping. They take no risks at all but you are haveing to front it all. Some price to pay. Are they going to pay your fines? I doubnt it.

    Reply
    • Mike C

       /  5th March 2016

      @”Crumbs”

      Thanks very much for your above comment 🙂

      The last time you commented in here you called yourself “Toby”.

      Am I being “useful enough” now?

      Reply
    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  5th March 2016

      Cockroach alert.

      Reply
  12. David

     /  5th March 2016

    What a bloody carry on. I enjoy your blog Pete and used to enjoy the comments section and no doubt will again now you have purged the nonsense commentators.
    Keep up the good work.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s