My Dinner With Chance

Print This Post

You may also like...

172 Responses

  1. Jay says:

    Excellent post, Ken. I love this quote: "nobody whines about bullying more than a bully." So true.

    I hope you've reached out to Chance and helped him see his actions properly so that he removes the content on his site. That would be the best solution for all involved in this. Yet in my experience, when asking people to do the right thing (even with fair concessions on my part), I find that they do the complete opposite.

    Few people, it seems, have the courage to admit that they were wrong. It's always easiest to blame it on someone else, or barring that to ignore it.

  2. TJIC says:

    > I can imagine any of my three children, through their own
    > brokenness, falling into a course of evil and cruelty like Craig and
    > Chance have. I would be disappointed and humiliated but still love
    > them, and would hope that others would still recognize their innate
    > humanity

    This is an excellent point.

    I'm turning into a bit of a bleeding heart in my old age, but sometimes I see these SPECTACULAR internet flame-outs, and I have a twinge of compassion for the a-hole who did a bad thing, and is now – presumably – turning left, and right, and left again, and then digging the hole deeper because he's a cornered dog and has no idea what else to do.

    I loathe the a-holish behavior that got these people into their predicaments in the first place (i.e. "hate the sin"), but I remember being an even more broken person than I am now (yes, it's possible!), and I do feel compassion. This is one of the reasons that I am ambivalent about the internet never forgetting.

    Anyway, tl;dr : I commend your compassion for people, even when they demonstrate themselves capable of making the most loathsome choices.

  3. Josh C says:

    Bravo.

  4. Damn, your away for a few months… think everything is right with the universe and come back and see that Morons, freaks, and other crazies are afoot.

    And that's before even finding out that the batshit crazy mistress of them all…Cox herself is now a part of the new herd of loons.

    Ok Ok.. give us here a few days and we will make some sort of parodical sense of it all… or something … ;)

    Oh and Ken.. I hope you plan to use that $350,000 wisely.. Rainbow coloured ponies of Awesomeness don't come cheap you know o_O

  5. Jamison says:

    Damn. Backbone, principle, AND class. Good post.

  6. Josh C says:

    I can imagine a world where Craig started the website and got over his head, and someone he went to college with (Chance) took advantage of him to use that website to make money. It's at least superficially consistent with the things Craig said, and with offering Randazza money to sue him. That's especially true if the website is Craig's only income, and Chance has recently been cutting him out more and more. You'd see someone desperate to man the barricades against outsiders, and also trying to handle vicious infighting in a way which doesn't collapse the whole thing on him.

    I have no evidence this world is real, but it does explain his motivations in a way that makes sense.

  7. Dan says:

    Three quick thoughts on this wonderful post.

    1. Where oh where can I get in on this $350K "porn industry mafia blood money" for "oppressing" scumbuckets?

    2. You don't really want to take down these posts, do you? The internet is a repository of linking poor behavior to names.

    3. I am blown away by your genuine magnanimity via-a-vis staying out of the gutter and talking to him as (if he were) a human in this post. Well played. You're a better man than me in that regard.

  8. William says:

    Am I the only one who suspects that this post is evidence that Ken has uncovered…something difficult and feels that the moral thing to do is to give Chance Trahan one last opportunity to save himself from whatever horror is about to become public?

  9. Art says:

    I am extremely impressed by the olive branch you're extending with this post, but I'd be lying if I didn't admit that I'd rather watch this jackoff crash and burn spectacularly, possibly culminating in jail time. I'm generally pretty empathetic; I mean I even have some sympathy for people like ol' Chuck Carreon and he tried suing a cancer charity out of spite for Pete's sake. But this guy? Throw the book at him. His entire site, his entire persona seems built around predatory, misogynistic and sociopathic behaviors. If he makes a genuine effort to improve himself, good for him…but he's dug himself in so deep I rather doubt that will happen.

  10. Ken says:

    William: no. Nothing like that.

  11. Kevin says:

    @Ken

    I will, in turn, take down these posts, and also apologize to you as a fellow human being for the cheap shots I have taken in the course of exposing what you're doing — because I've done wrong things, too.

    Unless you're referring to something that we readers aren't privy to, I think you're being unfair to yourself. I don't see anything you've written about these guys as being a "cheap shot"

  12. wotsac says:

    Well said. Last night was very amusing, but not the least edifying.

  13. Jack B. says:

    I'm not trying to piss on Ken's well-written peace offering, but I've read some of the comments from desperate, frightened and hurt women at isanybodydown dot com, and those should have been enough to strike a nerve with anyone possessing a conscience, a capacity for empathy, and a modicum of self-awareness.

    I reckon it's going to take a weapons-grade cluebat before Craig & Chance see the light.

  14. Ken says:

    Jack, the sites are down right now.

    We'll see if it is deliberate, and if there's a commitment to keep them down.

  15. eddie says:

    Ken.
    You're writing about complex issues, any involving the beautifully flawed human species, is nothing short of epic. I've been reading this site for about a year now and you have fast become one of my heroes.
    eddie.

  16. Liokae says:

    RE: Update

    Wait. You're saying an appeal to someone's humanity may have ACTUALLY WORKED? I'm… I'm honestly a little bit shocked right now. That's… whoa.

  17. Chris F says:

    Sometimes it takes someone coming at it from a different perspective (such as a father) to get people to look at things differently. My bet would be that if his daughter's or wife's picture showed up on a site like this he would fight to get it off. People frequently divide others into "people I should protect" and "people I don't need to protect" and treat the groups very differently. The problem comes out because not protecting people in the second group encourages others to take advantage of people we do want to protect.

  18. princessartemis says:

    Sometimes, appeals to humanity really do work. I hope this is one such case. Bravo, Ken.

  19. Shane says:

    @Ken

    I empathized heavily with your post, but I have this to say. I have booted far to many people from the bar that I worked at. They all said the same thing conceptually, they all did the same thing conceptually. There is no repentance for what they did. As an addict friend said to me once and this saying sticks with me even today 10 years later … 'When nothing changes, nothing changes'. Having with dealt with so many like Chance and Craig. I am saddened to say that the odds of them changing are nil. You and Marc are the demanding parent. They will comply with the letter and never the intent of anything that you do. The stories that I heard on the other side of this equation (the Craig, Chance side) tell me that they will not stop until they hit bottom. You see, you think that you are helping them by backing off. I think that you need to understand that they will not stop until they reach bottom and you pulling your punches now keeps them from getting there. And the worse part is that the next level of escalation will be worse than this. I understand your empathy for Chances' daughter, but will you have the real courage to really help her by showing Chance the bottom. He can not teach what he does not have and you are giving him the chance to learn that lesson (no pun intended).

    People often feel sorry for street people. They think that they deserve another chance. What is sad about that thinking is that people can not even fathom how many peoples lives that that street person has destroyed.

    Ken not to apply with a sledgehammer, but you are not helping by backing off. You will do as you see fit because you are the one that has to wake up tomorrow and look in the mirror. But think of this just one thing when you feel that you want to take your foot off of the gas, how many before this site. What about the racing felony, how many between those times how many that won't come forward how many have these guys hurt. Is your omission going to hurt more? If you could see those faceless nameless, what would you say? I felt bad for these guys? That is what they want you to think. For them to reach this level of grotesqueness, how many faceless nameless victims are there that will be hurt by these guys.

    Ken you are in a unique position. Ponder very careful your next move.

    P.S Only a rational person can look inside of themselves to determine if what they are doing is causing true harm.

  20. Ken says:

    @Shane:

    I understand all of your points. But on a very practical level:

    1. I can put posts right back up, and write new posts, if any bad behavior repeats or continues.

    2. The sites going down now helps real, living women currently on them, some of whom — I happen to know — care very much. They are immediately helped if the sites go down, and not immediately helped if the sites stay up.

  21. Matthew Paris says:

    I hate to be a negative Nancy, but I would be willing to bet quite a bit that even if the sites are down now, they will simply be renamed and relocated shortly. While I hope the pair in question have learned their lesson, it frequently takes some more concrete consequences than have yet befallen them.

  22. Owen says:

    I commend your compassion and understanding in this matter, but I have a hard time stomaching the idea that Brittain and Trahan should be able to just sweep this under the rug. After spending years posting and hosting unconsented pornography, committing wire fraud, committing extortion, and engaging in a campaign of psychological torture against young women, is it really right or moral to say 'well, you've had a week's worth of internet embarrassment, let's call it even'? This isn't a simple misunderstanding like some guttersnipe yelling a racial slur at a passerby – this is a business that was built on committing felonies to torment people and then profiting off of their trauma.

    Obviously a blog isn't the correct (or only) avenue for addressing these crimes, but surely it would be a step backward to scrub the posts and pretend it never happened, right?

  23. Shane says:

    @Ken

    Valid points

  24. Ken says:

    Matthew:

    If I take down my posts (because I get some sort of assurance that the sites will stay down) and the sites go up again, under whatever name, in whatever form, my posts go up, and the efforts of the team redouble. This has gotten a lot of attention. Many people — lawyers, technical experts, just interested citizens — have written in offering to help and investigate and back us up. I suspect they will still be willing if these people pop up again.

  25. Kevin says:

    @Ken – Shouldn't giving back the money they scammed also be a precondition for taking the posts down?

  26. Joe Pullen says:

    @Ken – nicely done!

  27. princessartemis says:

    @Owen, would a few removed posts at Popehat stop Randazza from following up on his pro bono offer to help affected women? I rather doubt that; there's too much integrity on show here.

  28. Matthew Paris says:

    @Ken–I have no doubt you will do the right thing in this situation. My post was more a meditation on the recalcitrance of such people.

  29. Nicholas Weaver says:

    Also, all the evidence is archived. If this comes back, the evidence flows.

  30. Liokae says:

    @Owen As they've noted, they've got all the info they need to swing the hammer if there's any misstep at all further. If/until that happens… I guess the question is just which is more important, the people harmed by the site, or punishment/justice on the ones who ran it?

  31. Bill says:

    @Ken – If all of a sudden a partial Popehat mirror were to appear with copies of all the posts about these two, and you found out I did it, would you be pissed about it? I wouldn't want to piss you guys off but you're being way to gentlemanly about this. Essentially "Jules, You Give that Fuckin' Nimrod $1500, I'll Shoot Him on General Principle." ;-)

  32. James Pollock says:

    There's another possibility… did anyone contact the ISP? Perhaps the ISP cut them off and the sites are not down voluntarily.

  33. Owen says:

    @Liokae –

    Surely, however, if it does appear in the future, or if Brittain or Trahan decide to cause some other trauma, there is no guarantee that Marc or Ken will either be aware of it or be in a similar position to put an end to it. This is similar to a con man being caught in the middle of his grift. You've said to him, 'I've found you, look at all of these mistakes you've made, and I could nail you to the wall if I were so inclined. But, in the spirit of respect and compassion, if you cease your grift, I will let you go this time.'

    As I said, that would be a generous and commendable act. But now the con man knows that he is being watched, he knows what mistakes he has made, and he knows how to cover his tracks better. He is becoming more experienced at his con. You may not find his next crime. He may decide to do it somewhere else (e.g., somewhere out of reach of U.S. jurisdiction). Or, if you do find it, despite being absolutely sure that it's him, you may not be able to prove it as well as you can now.

    In addition to our responsibility to see justice and to help those harmed now, isn't there also a measure of moral responsibility for those who may be harmed in the future? You are trading a virtual certainty at stopping these sociopaths now for a hope that you would be able to next time.

    @princessartemis –

    Perhaps not, but the fact that others may not discontinue their efforts doesn't remove a moral responsibility on our part, does it? Are we no longer obliged to call out wrongdoing and seek its redress if others may do it for us?

  34. Art says:

    Doubtful, I'm pretty sure their servers are hosted out of Romania. I'm glad the sites are down but I still don't want to see these guys walk away from this. Their entire web presence is revolting.

  35. Joe Pullen says:

    Craig and Chance have also attracted the attention and support of the floridly ill and evil Crystal Cox, who has used the occasion to put up a slew of new sites attacking me and my firm, which — by the way — has nothing to do with this blog.

    Given that Cox and her sidekick Monica Foster purport to hate men who do what Craig and Chance did, it demonstrates they are far more interested in whatever inconvenience or revenge they can rain down on Ken or Marc to care about the real victims – the women whose pictures were on these sites.

  36. Liokae says:

    @Owen And if they respond to renewed pressure by going active with all the photos they do have? It's highly unlikely they got *rid* of whatever photos they took down. Distasteful as it would be to leave it at them getting away with it up to this point, if we want to talk moral obligations, there's also one to the massive number of people that, if pressured further, would be in clear and distinct danger of a lot of harm. If the guys trip up again, then we know they'd do that *anyway*- so there'd be no point in holding back. But if it's possible to actually prevent that immediate threat to a huge number, I'd say it's the choice to take.

  37. Nicholas Weaver says:

    James: They have been using deliberately takedown resistant overseas hosting. The whole choice of hosting provider was so they could say "F-You" to takedown requests.

  38. mcnugget says:

    While I can definately see that extending this "olive branch" is the fastest, easiest way to help all the women without a long, drawn out paper battle, this just doesn't feel very right or just to me. Also, since Marc Randazza offered pro bono assistance to any woman that wanted to go after them, what if there are women who want to take him up on that offer. I mean the pictures are down and that's great, but lives have *already* been destroyed. Did that offer only apply to helping them get the pictures down? Because I think someone who went through what some of these women went through deserves more than that. So would he still represent them or does taking the pics down close the matter. Because I don't like that.

  39. Owen says:

    @Liokae –

    Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like your post is suggesting that, because they have the capacity to harm more people now, we should let them get away with these crimes. Would this be acceptable in another context? If a man was beating his wife and told her, 'If you tell the police, I'll just beat you more,' should someone advise her to refrain from telling the police?

    I don't mean that to be something of a 'do you support spousal abuse' ad hominem, but since when do we use the idea that a person might commit more crime as an excuse to let them off the hook for crimes that they already have committed?

  40. Ken says:

    @McNugget: I can't and wouldn't offer to prevent any victim from seeking legal redress. Their taking the sites down doesn't stop women from seeking redress through the legal system.

    However, these guys are probably judgment-proof. It's unlikely any woman will get money from them. (If I were Craig Brittain's parents, I might be worried about potential liability if Craig was doing this from their house with their internet connection — but we don't know if that's the case.) I suspect that the primary redress most women would seek would be having their pictures and contact information taken down.

    Neither Marc nor I can do anything to prevent the criminal justice system from getting involved, either. Practically, it's much less likely to happen if the wrongdoing is not ongoing.

  41. Dan Weber says:

    If you want people to do something, it's helpful to offer them something they want.

    Ken taking down the posts would, of course, not stop other people from keeping the pressure up. He can only control himself. Marc may or may not continue his search for a client. It's a pretty nice good-cop-bad-cop routine. It's not an act, though; I think I've read Ken enough to know he means his stuff about mercy. Blessed are the merciful for they will be shown mercy and all that.

    But it's a pretty good deal Ken is offering. C&C should take it. It doesn't necessarily make Randazza go away, but keeping the site up doesn't provide them any benefit at this point — surely there are no current paying suckers, and they would be forced to assume that any supposed client is actually a trap set by Randazza.

  42. I suspect that the deletion of both of Chance's Twitter accounts and the takedown of all the sites on their server (not just the controversial ones) are related.

    Perhaps one acted without the other.

    Either way, I've emailed Craig for comment. The email didn't bounce, whatever that's worth.

  43. Joe Pullen says:

    I'm assuming they finally got competent legal council who told them to take everything down and STFU.

  44. TPRJones says:

    Ken, it's a beautiful post but I'm worried. The sites going down may be a good sign. Or it may be a prelude to their revealing that they've gone into hiding because "someone on the internet" decided to make threatening posts about his daughter and his family.

    I know that's not what you did at all here, but I can see where someone desperate enough could spin it into that. And I can see some over-reactive law enforcement officials possibly deciding to go after you for it without giving the post due consideration first. Please be careful.

  45. Joe: maybe, but they were still blathering on and setting up Trolldown last night. I doubt they've had time to talk to a lawyer overnight.

  46. Ken says:

    I'm suspending judgment on whether the site outages mean anything.

    @TPR: any threats should be reported to authorities. I would cooperate fully with those authorities. Note, though, that it's common for con men and bad actors to claim threats when exposed.

  47. Ygolonac says:

    I'm still behind the Nannywall and thus can't look for myself, but are the sites down due to administrative/technical action (host/owner decision, or a meteor fell on the hard drive), or is it 404'ing with no info, possibly due to Anonymous and sundry having found something to do while waiting for lunch?

    I can see the fickle hand of TEH INT4RW3B taking the shot, but it's a bigger stretch to accept it happening without bragging.

  48. @ygolonac: they're timing out. No 404s.

  49. Ken says:

    Don't make assumptions.

  50. princessartemis says:

    @Owen, I think Dan Weber says it better than I would, but I'll try. It strikes me that this act of Ken's is one of both mercy for Chance, the fellow man, and of some recognition on his part of his own faults. I would be shocked if it does not affect Chance in some positive way for the rest of his life, even if that way is small and one which no one here will ever see. It also has the potential to help a lot of victims right away, should the better angels of Chance and Craig's nature win out.

    Since this is the case, at least here, I believe the matter has moved from pointing out wrongdoing and seeking redress. Not all people believe that is our moral imperative as humans. Many of us believe it is our moral imperative to love our fellow brothers and sisters and leave vengeance to Another. I won't speak for Ken's morality, but I will be glad to see posts like this as evidence of my faith in humanity.

  51. Liokae says:

    @Owen No, the closer equivalent that I can think of would be somebody that beat his wife, but when confronted with it agreed to, in exchange for not being arrested, leave the country rather than blowing up their entire apartment building and killing the fifty people inside.

    Of course, it's all pretty much an academic exercise until we get any actual word on what the outage means, rather than just guessing.

  52. Nicholas Weaver says:

    The server appears disconnected from the network: no ping, no web server.

    Since it also acts as the DNS server for their domains, the DNS is failing as well.

  53. Dan Weber says:

    I can still connect to the site but I get a 502 Gateway error. I'm connecting to the one marc randazza said he wanted to hurt. It has two IPs, since it looks to be on the CloudFlare network, but it's been put into offline mode.

  54. Nicholas Weaver says:

    OK, it looks like its back up, at least on the connectivity side. And I telneted to the side (NOT browing it where I'm at) and its back up.

  55. Tali McPike says:

    yeah, definitely still up.

  56. Nicholas Weaver says:

    So I'd bet (1:1 payout, max bets total $20) that it was some anon weenies with LOIC or the like…

  57. Dan Weber says:

    It's very weird that it seemed to come back up as soon as I tried connecting through CloudFlare's cache. Could be a coincidence, I suppose.

  58. Michael says:

    Great job guys, you continue to help keep my faith up in humanity!

  59. Chocomilch says:

    I really don't want to swear here. I have a lot of respect for popehat — the kind of respect that one usually has for a sage teacher or uncle, not for a website. Those are the people in front of whom, when you swear, you cover your mouth and say sorry.

    With that in mind: Fuck. That.

    These people are sociopaths. They lack the ability to feel remorse. They're dishonest mechanics. They're Goldman execs. They're people who fleece the elderly. They're dishonest mechanics. They're post-hurricane price-gougers. They're people who torture puppies to watch them suffer.

    They're people who exploit and laugh at the mistakes of young women and young men who are still in the dumb-as-a-box-of-trees stage of their lives.

    This isn't a first-time-transgression transgression. This isn't a we-should've-thought-this-through-better transgression.

    Fuck these two. LEt them serve as examples. Grind their bones.

    Sorry for the language.

  60. Paul Baxter says:

    "However, these guys are probably judgment-proof. "

    It might still be fun to get a judgment and show up and take away all of their computer and networking equipment and other odds and ends.

  61. Kevin says:

    So I'd bet (1:1 payout, max bets total $20) that it was some anon weenies with LOIC or the like…

    I considered that possibility, however the fact that the site is back up so soon seems to me to be evidence against that. There's no reason for them to have just stopped the attack after a few hours, and C&C clearly are not technically sophisticated enough to have worked around a DDOS so quickly.

    I could be wrong of course.

  62. AlphaCentauri says:

    There could be a lot of explanations about why they were down. With cloudflare, they could be getting DDoS'd on and off all the time and it might not be apparent if it was a DNS based attack. They might have been trying to block access from certain IP addresses through the cloudflare control panel, too.

  63. Bear says:

    Pity the scummy sites are back up. I'm guessing technical difficulties rather than conscience. Too bad; just once I I'd like to be wrong and discover I'd misjudged someone, and they really did have at least the tiniest — largely suppressed — streak of decency.

    I'm not a cynic; I'm a realist.

  64. Ken says:

    Looks like they are doing some scrubbing of some elements of the site — like contact info of the girls.

  65. Gal says:

    I don't like this. Not one bit. The damage HAS been done. These women had their photos publicly linked to their personal information, and just because the sites have been taken down now doesn't mean they haven't been made to suffer or will not continue to suffer because of this.

    These scumfucks should be made to pay, not just go away quietly.

  66. Tali McPike says:

    So Ken, how does their changes to their website change your approach? And how long are you going to wait before they've "missed their chance"?

  67. Joe Pullen says:

    Am I the only one with the MC Hammer song running through their heads?

  68. Myk says:

    @Ken: According to Marc, "Kenneth White is a certified First Amendment Bad Ass" – do you get a Power Ring? Will they issue the certificate in the name of Drake Howitzer?

  69. Can someone run a site-grabber to archive the site before it's scrubbed? I'm a but tired up at the moment.

  70. Ken says:

    Gal: the disagreement may be moot, because it seems they aren't taking the sites down.

    They've chosen another path — and lawyers, tech experts, citizens, media, and decent people everywhere are preparing to meet them on that path.

  71. Dan Weber says:

    Remember, our host is a former federal prosecutor. Allocation of resources is important. There are other scumbags out there.

    C&C's time is running out, though. Even if both Ken and Marc back off (and there will be a point of no return where Marc will not), other people can arrange to file some lawsuits, or contact police, and the odds of that happening are strictly increasing.

  72. Tali McPike says:

    So has the "murum aries attigit" war cry been initiated? Or are we still in a "wait and see" holding pattern?

  73. Ken says:

    The die is cast, the Rubicon crossed, murum aries attigit.

  74. flip says:

    Ken, the voice of reason. Love this post. Sad that they don't seem to be taking the sites down.

  75. Brett says:

    @Adam I started a scrape last night, and have a full archive as of ~4:45am PST. Mirroring processes are ongoing to monitor changes.

  76. John Barleycorn says:

    I think My Dinner With Andre had its thirtieth anniversary this summer.

    It's all relative until its not.

    "Tell me, why do we require a trip to Mount Everest in order to be able to perceive one moment of reality? I mean…I mean, is Mount Everest more "real" than New York? I mean, isn't New York "real"? I mean, you see, I think if you could become fully aware of what existed in the cigar store next door to this restaurant, I think it would just blow your brains out! I mean…I mean, isn't there just as much "reality" to be perceived in the cigar store as there is on Mount Everest?"

  77. Analee says:

    I'm impressed that you were so willing to make this sort of offer, Ken. Clearly shows that you're the bigger and better person in all of this.

    Having said that, since they weren't smart enough to take the deal, I can't wait to see you and Randazza eat these bastards alive. :D

  78. Brian says:

    Great piece! I'm only partly sad that they didn't take the site down. Mainly because it will be much more fun to watch the two of you take them down.

  79. Dave says:

    So you are now giving them Tarelton's quarter eh, ken?

  80. Artor says:

    I commend Ken for showing an elevated level of decency to a 1st-class scumbag, but the knowledge that Trahan has a young daughter fills me with dread. Maybe he can compartmentalize his misogyny and predatory nature, but I have a hard time seeing Trahan as that principled. I'm worried that he might abuse the poor girl, emotionally if not physically, And living in his house, the opportunities to take some "personal" pictures that he might or might not post would be awfully attractive to a demonstrated sleaze like Trahan. I hope this story doesn't end up going down that path.

  81. David says:

    Grond! Grond! Grond! Grond!

  82. Matthew Cline says:

    that's the one saying that Marc Randazza and I have been paid $350,000 each in porn industry mafia blood money to oppress them

    Wait, when'd that happen? I miss all the fun.

    The die is cast, the Rubicon crossed, murum aries attigit.

    FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC.

  83. princessartemis says:

    Shame they didn't take the olive branch; I still believe a seed was planted. Perhaps when one of them really does hit bottom, he will recall this and it will help him.

  84. leo marvin says:

    Ken,

    I applaud your (futile) conciliatory offer, and even more your personal humility. They make enjoying your typical fare of ridicule and badass a lot easier on my conscience.

  85. Shane says:

    Damn lawyers anyway … for the lazy Murum aries attigit

  86. Gal says:

    @Princessartemis: I wish I could believe the world might be as you see it, or even understand how anyone could have that kind of faith.

  87. darius404 says:

    Am I the only one with the MC Hammer song running through their heads?

    Perhaps not, but I'm pretty certain I'm the only one on this site with the MC Hammer cartoon theme song running through their head!!!!

  88. Jon says:

    I respect the thought of the peace offer, but it makes me uneasy.

    Of course easing the pain of the women currently suffering is important, but I can't help but feel that if these sociopaths are let to limp off into the dark their next incarnation will be worse, and probably harder to stamp out.
    The continued activity does make it a moot point, but only to some degree; you offer mercy (a mercy they would not show and mocked the women asking for it), and knowing this they may continue pushing the bar thinking your mercy may be sought in a in-case-of-emergency-break-glass fashion.

    The women shown no mercy may never be able to escape their internet past, and they deserve to a lot more than Craig and Chance do.

  89. Jon says:

    hahaha and your update makes my point moot. Good.

  90. darius404 says:

    Oh, so the link itself is all it takes for the video to show. Awesome! My only regret is that the video isn't centered.

    On an actually somewhat relevant note, I tried to give "Trolldown" some advice as to your name, Ken. Since they'd dubbed Marc "Marco Randazzo", I suggested that they call you "Ken Polohat". I can only hope they take my suggestion.

  91. Shane says:

    Think wire fraud does this.

  92. Joe Pullen says:

    @Tali – I liken this whole kerfuffle to being at the top of the curve of a really scary roller coaster ride – – -right before the precipice. The olive branch has been most graciously extended by Ken and Marc – and most churlishly, rudely, and ignorantly slapped down. I imagine Craig and Chance have a very short runway indeed in which to grasp, acknowledge, and mend the errors of their ways before what I predict will be a “hammer” down of epic and appropriately humiliating proportions.

    @Darious404 – that may work nicely with a little “project” I have under way – many thanks.

  93. Kevin says:

    @Shane, your youtube link inspired me.

    Craig and Chance, since we know you're reading this, let me offer you some helpful advice that I think may prove useful to you in the near future:

  94. Tali McPike says:

    Check out point #1 about "attaching Chance" as a parent. These guys really do deserve no quarter

  95. Kevin says:

    Wow. Well if the die hadn't been cast already, I guess it would be now.

  96. Tali McPike says:

    Lol yeah, that's for sure

  97. Kevin says:

    5. Out of all the Latin phrases you could’ve picked, yours is the most homosexual in nature (not that there’s anything wrong with that, of course) – the ram touches the wall? From the era of the Greeks and Romans? I’m awaiting for you and Randazza to announce that you will be coming out of the closet any second, Ken.

    Yes, Craig. The reason you can't find a job is because of Obama. I'm sure that's the reason. Not because you're the kind of guy who associates education and intellect with homosexuality. That couldn't have anything to do with it.

    Nope. It's all Obama's fault.

  98. Tali McPike says:

    Has he ever though about the fact that he could, in theory NOT try to be a small business owner, and instead actually, ya know, work for someone else. Or perhaps, no employer will give him the time of day, because they (surprise surprise) do background checks and are always hesitant to hire someone with anything bad in their background (including felony…which by the way is also part of the reason he can't get it on place, most apartments won't accept your application if you have a felony on your record), particularly when the is an equally qualified applicant with a clean background.

  99. Joe Pullen says:

    @Tali – nah that would mean actually taking responsibility for his actions. Something that Craig even at the ripe old age of 27 has not managed yet to do.

  100. Tali McPike says:

    Ah, good point. I keep forgetting that just because someone is older than me doesn't mean they think rationally/like an adult.

  101. Kevin says:

    @Tali Yeah, I was actually just thinking about that earlier. The thing is, if an employer turns you down for a job (or a landlord turns you down for a lease) due to failing a background check, does the employer/landlord TELL the applicant that that's why they're being rejected? My guess is that a lot of the time if someone fails a background check, they never hear about it, they just never get called back.

    So maybe he applies for a bunch of jobs/apartments, never gets called back due to failing the background check, but just thinks to himself "damn, this economy sure is bad! Nobody's hiring!"

    I dunno. I'm trying my hardest to give him the benefit of the doubt and not view him as "all bad", in keeping with the spirit of the original post. Ken inspired me.

    But putting my cynic asshole hat back on…. yeah, he's probably just a scumbag.

  102. Joe Pullen says:

    And let's not forget one of my favorite pieces of his latest rant

    I’m a misanthrope, who doesn’t like people in general. I have good reason to hate people for no reason at all. I only make exceptions to the general rule (my family and a few close friends, like Chance). Everyone else? They never helped me. Why should I feel bad about what they’ve done to themselves?

    That says it all narcisist to the core. It is

  103. Joe Pullen says:

    Hit the enter key too soon. Bottom line – this is someone who is all about himself – why should he do anything for someone else unless they do something for HIM. No wonder he is unemployed with no friends.

  104. Hal 10000 says:

    Even though your generous offer has apparently been rejected, I applaud it. I think we often get too caught up in being right and not concerned enough with doing right.

  105. Tali McPike says:

    @Joe, we should also consider the fact that, when he decided to get into the porn business, he essentially tattooed "unemployable" on his forehead in big bold letters

  106. darius404 says:

    I am overly fond of point 9:

    9. We will teach our children not to take naked pictures of themselves, of course.

    If I had a dollar for every time a parent expressed something like this, I bet I'd be pretty well off.

    not to live in a dump like California or Nevada.

    Heh, that's a bit of overkill, isn't it?

    your sons and daughters will contend with ours, for all eternity.

    That's some seriously myth-worthy stuff, right there. I look forward to seeing "Popehat 2050: The Fight for Freedom!"

    At the end of the day, all of the morals in the world…. don’t save lives.

    Uh, I'm pretty sure they help do just that. Certainly not the only thing that makes a difference, and I think people weigh too heavily on intentions over efficacy at times, but I find it hard to believe that morals don't help just a bit with saving lives.

    If you want to make an omelette, you must crack a few eggs.

    And if you want to earn your "Defender of Logs" award, you have to crack a few internet scammers.

    Perhaps I’d believe you if you donated all of your earnings to a good cause, like, say, Hurricane Sandy, and lived out the rest of your life in a monastery.

    Heh. Really now, point 9 is just WAY over the top. You'd think Ken was some sort of ancient, vengeful deity here, and ol' Craig here was the legendary hero.

    @Ken: Now they seem to think you're Catholic, for the obvious reason.

    Also, there's a new name listed: Monica Foster.

  107. darius404 says:

    Hm. I think I have some unended blockquotes there. Darn.

  108. efemmeral says:

    You know you are pointed in the right direction when you miss your goal yet hit a thousand other targets. Clearly, Dumb and Dumber cannot hear you, but the effort you put into reaching them was far from wasted. Look at these comments! Your post reminded Popehat readers – that very smart, articulate, accomplish group of people who contribute, who matter – that all humans are complex and to proceed accordingly. Well done, Dopefat.

  109. leo marvin says:

    My guess is that a lot of the time if someone fails a background check, they never hear about it, they just never get called back.

    But hold on. Whenever things don't go your way, isn't the default assumption it's Obama's fault? If not, I've gotta find some new blogs.

  110. AlphaCentauri says:

    "I’m a misanthrope, who doesn’t like people in general. I have good reason to hate people for no reason at all"

    @Joe Pullen — That phrase jumped out at me too. In someone who also reports that he has panic attacks and somatiform disorder, I have a hunch he's been a victim of something himself in the past.

    There are a some brain functions that form early in life and can't be gained later if a child misses the critical period of development — language and vision, for instance. I wonder if someone who is a sociopath as a result of childhood abuse is even capable of changing if he wanted to.

  111. Richard says:

    You know, somehow it doesn't surprise me that he doesn't see the inherent contradiction in "I have good reason to hate people for no reason at all."

  112. Joe Pullen says:

    @Darious404 -unfortunately Monica is not new. She is a washed up whacko ex-porn star buddy of Crystal Cox.

  113. flip says:

    I still can't access the site, but I presume all pretence of having a lawyer in their midst has gone out the window?

  114. Tali McPike says:

    Is somebody archiving Trolldown, it case they actually get a lawyer who tells them to send it down the memory hole?

  115. Kevin says:

    @Tali Probably, but in case nobody else is, I saved a copy of it just now.

  116. Caleb says:

    Murum aries attigit.

    This. This is why I love this blog.

  117. Malecus says:

    Maybe it's just me, but I have this notion at the back of my skull that these guys are going to trump Carreon. They're going to double-down time and again, never realizing how deep they're getting themselves into. It'll be a blitzkot of stupidity and sociopathy.

  118. Kevin says:

    I'd just like to state for the record that the "Kevin" who just posted a comment on Trolldown is not me.

  119. ChimpZilla says:

    I wonder if this will end in a recursive double-down loop of stupidity and sociopathology that will lead them to trying to accuse the accusers (oops, they're trying that already) and filing frivilous ethical complaints and motions for sanctions…
    I see it being another one of THOSE cases

  120. efemmeral says:

    Yes, alphacentauri, and Fetal Alcohol Syndrome, but these speculations must move to the back burner. What matters, right now, is stopping them. It’s time for Randazza, Popehat, and Associates to eat their spinach and focus the troops.

  121. Tali McPike says:

    @Kevin, I figure we can assume that, as it would appear now that only "supportive" comments are going to be approved.

  122. Tali McPike says:

    Also, thanks for grabbing Trolldown. I have a feeling it could be useful in the future…

  123. darius404 says:

    Except for TD Kevin (not be confused with PH Kevin), all the comments I've seen there appear to be mocking him and his site. When I saw, "Thank you for your hard hitting expose." I just cracked up. I just don't believe that comment, with it's phrasing SO like a sarcastic comment, is serious.

  124. darius404 says:

    And has anyone noticed that his post tags mention specific pron sites/networks? Has Randazzo ever done any legal work for any of those names, or is this just more "Marco and Polohat work for the Porn Mafia" stuff? I'm assuming the latter, but am asking in case anyone here has knowledge to the contrary.

    On a more serious note, do his mentions of these porn networks in relation to his posts, that assert the porn industry is run by the mafia, run into any legal issues of their own?

  125. Tali McPike says:

    I meant on this new post. Only positives are being shown on this recent post.

  126. darius404 says:

    One last comment (I don't like making serial comments), why in the blazes are his posts tagged "european union"? When it was just "Marco and Polohat work for the Pron Mafia" I chocked it up to a ridiculous gambit by someone who really expects people to believe him. But now I'm wondering if he isn't a genuine conspiracy theorist. The idea that the world is run by a set of criminal/political gangs (Big Porn) involved in world politics and economics sometimes coincides with racial disparagements (against Jews, for instance, and we have some evidence of that).

    On a lighter note, I'm happy to note that it seems Trolldown has taken my comment at least partially to heart. One of the tags for the newest post is "polo".

  127. Tali McPike says:

    @Darius404 yeah I saw the "polo" and did a little happy dance for you :)

  128. darius404 says:

    @Tali

    Ah. I noticed it was the only comment, but it's hard to know who's submitted comments without someone speaking up. I will say, however, it took an inordinate amount of time for my comment to be posted there. I had come to a similar conclusion to yours, Tali, that my post was deemed too negative or sarcastic and wouldn't be posted. I officially posted it yesterday, but I didn't see it at all today. However, when I got home tonight, there it was. I just don't think the site administrator is very attentive to it's comment approval queue.

  129. Tali McPike says:

    Yeah, Satirical Takedown Lawyer also tweeted that his comment (which, it appears, was posted before the one that has been approved) was not approved. So I think it is more than just not being attentive to the comment Que

  130. Tali McPike says:

    Dang it! I managed to hit enter with 2 letter left. 2 Letters! The universe is apparently out to mildly inconvenience me tonight!

  131. "Perhaps I’d believe you if you donated all of your earnings to a good cause, like, say, Hurricane Sandy, and lived out the rest of your life in a monastery. Some days, I think about it myself."

    tl;dr: Look at me: I THINK about doing good things, and I'm the bad guy? My job is HARD and I get headaches when people get fired because I want to make money. MY WORK IS HEALING PEOPLE.

  132. darius404 says:

    Satirical Takedown Lawyer

    Hmm. It's obviously the name. We should let Mitigated/Mediated Takedown Lawyer try. He'll slip right under their radar, and then send a proton torpedo down their thermal exhaust port.

  133. darius404 says:

    MY WORK IS HEALING PEOPLE.

    Yes, yes it is. Healing them OF THEIR JOBS.

  134. Chris R. says:

    Another thing based on the IP address being linked to Craig / Chance: http://stopforumspam.com/ipcheck/75.70.221.14

  135. Chris R. says:

    Also reviewing that IP Address edits on wikipedia I found gems like this:

    1. He kept trying to change the link to isanyoneup.com to isanyoneup.tv (which is Craig Brittain registered with address and all)
    2. He tried linking MLK Jr's page to the n word.

  136. Chris R. says:

    Another gem.

    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/music_blog/2012/04/naked-musicians-online-is-anyone-up-shuts-down.html

    There are more articles with comments from fake facebook accounts out there. Apparently Craig likes masquerading as a girl on facebook.

  137. Ken says:

    Date night. Nice dinner, then Book of Mormon. (I have to spend that Big Porn mafia blood money somehow.)

    I read Craig's new post during intermission. It nicely kept the tone of farce constant.

    Don't necessarily expect updates for a while, but don't assume nothing's happening.

  138. Ian W. Hill says:

    So, this is minor stuff, really REALLY minor compared to Trahan/Brittain's other stuff, but just to keep the information flowing about these people — some of this was going around on Twitter but for those who haven't seen it and want more to enjoy their popcorn with (and I know some of you have checked out Trahan's musical pursuits, and may not know about his literary ones).

    Chance Trahan eliminated the Twitter account he was using, but he can now be found at @TalonLives.

    This account is more specifically connected to Trahan's page at ninjatale.com, where he has published the first five chapters of a short story about a young man named Chance whose father was a ninja assassin. There's also a Facebook page promoting his story. His Twitter indicates he's planning on selling future chapters of the story through an app.

    By the way, I figured that it was unlikely that the photo Trahan was using as his "Ninja Tale" logo and avatar was his own, so a simple search led me to the actual photographer, who has the photo labelled "Attribution, Non-Commercial" under Creative Commons. There is always the possibility that Trahan has gotten permission from the photographer or Getty Images to use it for an ultimately commercial purpose without attribution. What do you think?

    I've informed the photographer about this. He may not care in the slightest (he's based in the UK, among other things), but I thought he should know.

  139. Matthew Paris says:

    Dear god these people are simply evil. I am sorry for beating a dead horse, but I guess I will never cease to be shocked by how terrible humans can be.

  140. Eric R. says:

    @Ken – By all means, play things very close to the vest. Especially knowing that C&C have been reading your posts. I'm sure nobody here would like to see those idiots gain any advantage through a revealing comment. I, for one, will happily await any updates with an anticipation similar to waiting for Christmas morning.

  141. Shane says:

    And I will spam senseless garbage to throw them off the trail.

    Don't thank me … just doing my part for the environment.

  142. If Marc was Thursday and Ken was Friday, that must mean that today is MY turn to be subjected to the Trolldown throwdown.

    I can't wait. I wonder what his "source" will tell him next? Hopefully not about Obama's management of this whole affair. Hey, is this thing on?

  143. Nicholas Weaver says:

    The forum spam from Chance's IP (and 719x.com is one of his domains hosted on the badness server) is probably from the "My Great Website" business's SEO business.

  144. Kevin Kirkpatrick says:

    "Update: I've just read an email exchange between "David Blade" and a victim. Never mind. Murum aries attigit. "

    Um – any chance anyone can link to or post the content of this email exchange? I assume it's posted to one of Chance's websites and would go searching around for it – but I just can't handle the stench of the place.

  145. Randy says:

    I would guess its a private email exchange and will stay tgat way. Most likely someone seeking help shared it with them.

  146. Chris R. says:

    In his posts he claims he no racist because he hates people equally. I've seen that logic before, mainly from white supremacists and teenage discontents. If you aren't racist though, why would you use racism in your hate. Using handles like "Jew Oven" sound pretty specific to me.

  147. NickM says:

    When his daughter asks him that, it will be over a telephone handset, and there will be thick glass between them.

  148. M. says:

    I am truly looking forward to the finale of this.

  149. SA says:

    @Eric R – That's the downside of crowdsourcing your research. You end up losing control of who knows what you've found out, with the subsequent risk of things being taken down before preservation.

    Crowdsourcing isn't bad, but where the Internet and legal issues are concerned, it's a delicate balancing act.

    To quote PotO out of context, "A prudent silence is wise"

  150. Ancel De Lambert says:

    I tried reading that Troll Down post, but tr;dr. Too retarded, didn't read.

  151. StephenM3 says:

    Ahahaha, oh man.

    "Right? Wrong? Admirable? To who? At the end of the day, all of the morals in the world don’t fill stomachs, they don’t build homes, they don’t save lives. If you want to make an omelette, you must crack a few eggs."

    This reads like a hacky story villain, the kind that I'd normally dismiss as being oversimplified and unbelievable. This guy.

    To be honest, I'm beginning to think he has some real psychological problems. He seems genuinely paranoid.

  152. SA says:

    This reads like a hacky story villain, the kind that I'd normally dismiss as being oversimplified and unbelievable.

    Crap, and here I had hopes of using that for a BBG-goes-on-monologue at the next game night.

  153. efemmeral says:

    During this lull would someone please elaborate on the issues surrounding Ken’s comment: “Neither Marc nor I can do anything to prevent the criminal justice system from getting involved, either.” If the criminal justice system was to become involved how would that affect these women? Could a criminal case usurp a civil case? Could information uncovered in a civil trial be used in a subsequent criminal trial? These questions are elementary but I’m hoping someone can provide a glimpse of the bigger picture for those of us in the dark.

  154. wgering says:

    Ken: I'm waiting for you to tell me that this whole thing is some sort of pony- and/or taint-related hoax. It would be easier than accepting that people like this exist.

    "Popehat: robbing you of your innocence since 2005."

  155. Jack B. says:

    @effemeral: IANAL, but if the criminal justice system gets involved, it will only bolster any civil cases, not usurp or trump them.

    Also, if the criminal courts get in on the action (especially the feds), Craig and Chance will soon be longing for the good old days when they were simply being mocked on the internet. "We're sorry. We won't do it again" might come in handy when it's time to sign a plea agreement*, but it's not going to do a damn thing to stop a criminal prosecution.

    *Of course, considering the massive pile of evidence indicating their absolute lack of remorse, "We're sorry and we won't do it again" probably won't hold much water when it comes to plea bargaining.

  156. Suzanne says:

    Fitting – I'm reading from work today and tried to see the trolldown post – it was stopped by the nanny filter – reason – pornography.

  157. James Pollock says:

    "If the criminal justice system was to become involved how would that affect these women?"

    They might be called to testify at a trial. The closer they live to where the trial is held, the more likely that becomes.

    "Could a criminal case usurp a civil case?"
    No, the two are unrelated. The reason there aren't more civil suits following criminal prosecutions is that criminals usually don't have very much in the way of assets, and thus can't pay a judgment when they lose.

    "Could information uncovered in a civil trial be used in a subsequent criminal trial?"
    Yes. Usually civil plaintiffs let the state go first, because that way the state pays for developing all the evidence and establishing guilt, with those matters settled the civil suit is faster (and therefore cheaper for the plaintiff.) Sometimes the state is slow to move on a criminal matter (due to other priorities/budget constraints/good-ol'-boy network problems) and the plaintiff goes first.

  158. Ghost says:

    Boy howdy, this is fun.
    Ken, if you can't post the letter from "David Blade," (which, by the way, sounds like a character from a ninja story where you name the protagonist after yourself), can you give us a paraphrase, or a snippet of a quote (that of course, doesn't give away too much)? It's always interesting to study how evil works in the minds of idiots…

  159. Tali McPike says:

    It would appear that Trolldown, isanybodydown, and takedownhamer are all down again. While I am sure that it is not because Craig/Chance had a change of heart, I can't help but hope that this is a good thing.

  160. darius404 says:

    @Suzanne

    That makes sense, since the site repeatedly mentions not only the word "porn", but multiple porn network in it's post tags (Reality Kings, Brazzers, etc.).

    On a related note, Trolldown has gotten a makeover. Snazzy!

  161. AlphaCentauri says:

    The sites are up for me at present.

  162. Tali McPike says:

    @alphacentauri then are for me now too. They weren't this morning

  163. Ken says:

    See new post.

  164. Cephas Australoscepticus says:

    I normally try not to make stuff up out of whole cloth, nor accuse people of being what they're not; but there's just too much collateral evidence for me to stay out of this any more.

    Let's say, for he sake of argument, that C & C have a physical/emotional relationship, or perhaps a subjugated desire for that that they can't allow themselves to act on. All of a sudden, many little jarring things click into place!

    For example,
    – Craig's involuntary and quite possibly genuine panic when "David" appeared to have been considered as a legitimate target by Marc early on;
    – the creepily similar language use;
    – the almost proud advertisement of the fact that Chance (who's the 'bad' webmaster in the original lawyer page) is a longtime friend of Craig's, even though that relationship being outed by Craig must surely have raised many suspicions about why it was even mentioned on the site;
    – the eerily similar phrases and language patterns used by both boys when they lost their tempers;
    – the shared 'victimhood' as ethnic and pron participants and later as workers – not only in the same industry, but on the same website!;
    – the bizarre fact that only women seem to have begged (or, at least, had their requests made public) to be taken down, while no men have been mentioned whatsoever;
    – the even more bizarre attitude towards every single woman who tried to have themselves removed (although that could easily be an artefact of psychological problems, or just rampant misogyny too);
    – and of course the elephant in the room, the actual fact that nude males are prominently listed on the site.

    There's much more, but I'm utterly petrified about Chance's "daughter" in all of this. Nothing appears to be what it seems, and if I'm even half right, this is a much bigger kettle of fish than it appeared to be.

  165. Quog says:

    Horrifying, truly horrifying. I'm glad you and others are working to destroy these people, Ken of the Elegant but Silly Hat.

  1. November 2, 2012

    […] I have to hand it to Ken, he is a really outstandind individual. I have to applaud him for this post […]

  2. November 2, 2012

    […] Update:  "I've just read an email exchange between "David Blade" and a victim.  Never mind.  Murum aries attigit." […]

  3. November 10, 2012

    […] take a bow Craig Brittain and Chance Trahan, you two are filth. Share this:TwitterFacebookGoogle +1EmailLike this:LikeBe the first to like […]

  4. November 13, 2012

    […] lashes out: Chance has taken to ranting on Twitter.  See Ken White's post here and images from Twitter […]