Time For The Popehat Signal: Counsel In Vermont For Threatened And Harassed Blogger

You may also like...

77 Responses

  1. F121 says:

    The combination of middle-school level writing, use of private investigators to harass, and a universally scorned industry screams debt collectors.

  2. mojo says:

    "Universally loathed"?

    And it's NOT lawyers?

  3. mojo says:

    Must be congresscritters, then. But they're not an "industry.

    Hmmmm…

    Child molesters?

  4. manybellsdown says:

    I was thinking Telemarketers.

  5. Ken in NH says:

    Collection agencies. This sounds just like something they would do.

  6. Ken says:

    @mojo, I'd ask why you think child molesters are an industry, but I have a feeling I'm walking into a joke.

  7. naught_for_naught says:

    If it's legal-marketing consultants, I'll lend you a spork.

  8. John Kindley says:

    You lost me at "inadequately regulated."

    You're obviously talking about the porn industry, right?

    I feel sorry for this blogger, but hey, at least he gets to live in Vermont.

  9. Cabbage says:

    Fearless prediction: red light camera manufacturers

    I hope it is them, and I hope some lawyers trounce them.

  10. DES says:

    Used car salesmen? Search engine optimizers? Telephone sanitizers?

  11. Pete says:

    Pony Breeders?

  12. Dan says:

    It's the union that represents those bums who aggressively sell pixy stix at busy intersections for jesus. Go get 'em!

  13. Marc says:

    I may be able to help with the computer forensics.

  14. David says:

    Debt collectors, telemarketers, or, if he's writing about malfeasance close to home, the maple syrup cartel.

  15. Dan Weber says:

    If more than 1% of you disagree with my characterization of this industry I'll cut off my left nut with a spork.

    I like those odds!!! </homer>

    I can help with forensics stuff.

  16. mojo says:

    @Ken: Aw, you're no fun anymore.

  17. JJ says:

    Being a vermonter, I am pretty sure I know about this incident. Newtown / Aurora are the clues needed.

  18. Ken says:

    JJ: no. Not even close.

  19. JJ says:

    Looking at the laws for VT PI's Title 26 Chapter 59, it seems like most vermont laws, they are bare and very broad. It seems as long as you have gotten your license and don't pretend to be a cop you are all good. I find this all the time when reviewing traffic and criminal laws.

  20. Joe Pullen says:

    You had me at the "I'll cut off my left nut with a spork" quote. Count me in on internet forensics if needed – and I'll keep the results on the QT, or you can cut off my left nut with a spork.

  21. mojo says:

    Private prisons?

  22. SPQR says:

    "Universally loathed" – Methodists.

  23. Ken says:

    Sweet Christ you people are dense. I knew I should have posted this on Pinterest.

  24. sorrykb says:

    If we guess correctly, do we win a pony? (And…. "payday loans"?)

  25. Chiminycheroo says:

    "If more than 1% of you disagree " I think I see what you did there. That or I'm reading too much into it.

  26. naught_for_naught says:

    If it's not those cream-slingers, Ben & Jerry, then I'm going with banks.

  27. Garrett says:

    You can count me in for computer forensics as well.

  28. Ancel De Lambert says:

    Car insurance? Chemical manufacturers? Cat memes?! Alliteration police?!!!

  29. nlp says:

    Energy company. The big one that starts with an E.

  30. TomB says:

    Will this "spork cutting" be recorded and posted to Youtube? (you know, in case it happens)

    Oh, and it's dentists, no doubt. EVERYBODY hates us.

    Hell, even I hate me.

  31. TomB says:

    Or, it could be the guy pretending to have something to do with "On Press Inc", Ken's latest chew toy.

  32. Bear says:

    "If more than 1% of you disagree with my characterization of this industry I'll cut off my left nut with a spork."

    Dangerous promise. On most blogs, you could get >10% to disagree just to make you do it.

  33. TomB says:

    10% to disagree just to make you do it.">

    Meh, assuming he has a functioning right nut, it ain't nothin'.

    I mean, as long a there's Youtube.

  34. TomB says:

    I'll try that again:

    Dangerous promise. On most blogs, you could get >10% to disagree just to make you do it.

    Meh, assuming he has a functioning right nut, it ain't nothin'.

    I mean, as long a there's Youtube.

  35. Jonesy says:

    What's more universally loathed than politicians?

  36. somebody says:

    Considering what I've recently read on other sites about censorious asshattery, I'm wondering if you mean the alternative medicine industry, especially the segment of it that kills lots of people.

  37. George William Herbert says:

    This is fun, but other than jokingly suggesting he's referring to Lawyers (and before you throw poo, my father was a corporate attorney for 45+ years…and told more bad lawyer jokes than anyone else), I think that hypothesizing about the industry is a waste of time.

  38. John David Galt says:

    The few industries I can think of that ought to be universally hated, aren't. By a long shot. For instance, food nannies, both the ones with FDA credentials and the self-appointed kind.

    (If it's any of the professions in Defending the Undefendable, you'll need that spork — they do have customers, after all.)

    But on a hunch, I'll guess: patent trolls.

  39. Delvan Neville says:

    Looks like you have volunteers for computer forensics that are far less rusty than my skills, but I'm nonetheless happy to help and keep correspondence and findings private. dnevill at that mail service google runs.

  40. Matthew Cline says:

    Counsel in Vermont who might be willing to consult on a potential slander case against the private investigator and his employers. Telling people that the blogger is affiliated with a racist organization in an effort to silence him is not protected speech.

    To successfully do that, wouldn't he need to prove damages? That is, wouldn't at least one of his friends, coworkers or associates have to believe the allegations?

  41. Dave Ruddell says:

    Are they alleging he's a member of Friends of Hamas?

  42. AlphaCentauri says:

    It's hard to imagine that Ken would assume 99% of the people here would agree on anything.

    They say keep your friends close and your enemies closer. There may be a lot of profiteers from reviled industries following this blog ;)

  43. Shay says:

    @SPQR — Methodists? But…they have such a nice hymnal.

  44. Bear says:

    Dave Ruddell: "Are they alleging he's a member of Friends of Hamas?"

    Winnah!

  45. AlphaCentauri says:

    I'm guessing it's the drone aircraft development industry?

  46. James Pollock says:

    Put me down in "Ken's nuts should be a little worried about the checks his fingers are writing". Why? Because he's bet that 99% of "us" will agree with the characterization he's made of an industry. Those characterizations include (expressly without exaggeration):

    *Inadequately regulated.
    *Universally loathed.

    I think both of these are cause for concern. First off, there's the contention that any crowd that includes libertarians considers any industry "inadequately regulated". As for "universally loathed", well, that is a VERY high standard to meet. At first glance, it seems like "well, what about the people who are actually IN this industry?" but, no, that's not my concern… lots of industries exist where even the people in them loathe the industry. But, "universally loathed" requires that every single person takes an actual interest in the industry, enough to loathe it rather than take the far more common "meh" attitude. It seems to me that the closest to universal loathing would be the collections industry… nobody likes them, and even the people doing the work hate it… but the collections industry occasionally turns over a rock and finds somebody who can and will pay, which makes the owner of the debt happy, and therefore, in that transient moment, NOT loathing the industry. It's not much, but an industry that produces occasional "I get paid? Cool!" is not UNIVERSALLY loathed, just ALMOST universally loathed.

    Perhaps those of us who care should take up a collection to hire a defense attorney for Ken's nuts, to see if there's a technicality to this testicular death penalty. Or at least, to send flowers.

  47. Jacob says:

    Big Maple?

  48. G Thompson says:

    Universally loathed? hmmm I'd say the TSA but they thankfully are not universal.

  49. mojo says:

    I knew it, the SYRPLE BUND!

    Those ear-flappy hats and plaid coats don't fool me, no siree…

  50. Beth says:

    Inadequately regulated, universally loathed. If it's not debt collectors (which actually have SOME regulation but not enough) then it's gotta be payday lenders.

  51. Ken says:

    Okay. Okay. Fine. FINE. You people have broken me down.

    It's kittens. It's Big Kitten.

    They can haz any cheezeburgerz they want without government oversight. They ruthlessly eated cookies that are supposed to be for decent Americans. Without any oversight or anti-discrimination guidance they have unreviewable power to determine when it is hug timez.

  52. flip says:

    @Ken

    LOL! I love it… I must remember to check the internetz to make sure the local member of Big Kitten who lives in my house is not ordering cheezeburgerz without permission.

  53. goober says:

    Vermont Teddy bear?

  54. Beth says:

    I can't believe no one responded to "universally loathed" with "the cable company."

  55. Dave Ruddell says:

    The cable company? But they provide a wide variety of high-quality entertainment options at a reasonable price! What's to loathe?

  56. TomB says:

    Anybody know who James Pollock works for?

  57. Dan Weber says:

    It's hard to imagine that Ken would assume 99% of the people here would agree on anything.

    Yeah, we have lots of people arguing weird minority opinions here. One of the things I like, FWIW. I'm curious as to what we'd (almost) all agree on.

  58. Jeff says:

    I hope its the company that robo-calls my cellphone 3 times a day.

  59. James Pollock says:

    "Anybody know who James Pollock works for?"

    I do.

  60. Ancel De Lambert says:

    "It's kittens. It's Big Kitten."
    I was right! Run in terror of their pwecious whiskers!

  61. John Fast says:

    Probably telemarketers. My second choice, collection agencies. Either way, Jeff will have called it.

  62. JR says:

    The closest guess I can make based on some basic googling would be SEO.

  63. perlhaqr says:

    Going with James Pollock's rules lawyering, I kind of have to agree that to hit "universally loathed", it would almost have to be Mojo's guess of "Child Molesters", as an industry. Which pretty much means the TSA. Or those boarding schools where rich parents send their bratty kids when they say "no" once too often, to be electroshock therapied into obedience. I can't think of anyone who has anything nice to say about them. Then again, that could be a "Nixon won?" sort of selection bias.

  64. Joe Pullen says:

    I WISH sincerely Jeff was right – who knows – telemarkers are likley the most universally despised, but it looks like the kerfuffle going on right now with one of the largest violators going after their critics looking for pro bono help is in CA jurisdiction so that's probably not it.

    On the other hand how I wish it was. I just received 2 "account services" calls yesterday. Seriously please tell me there is a place in Hell for these idiots.

  65. M. says:

    Call center outsourcing? Medical collections? That "APPLY DIRECTLY TO FOREHEAD" quack cure? Oh oh oh oh…Christmas muzak?

  66. M. says:

    …The Boston Red Sox?

  67. Ancel De Lambert says:

    BEAAAARS!

  68. James Pollock says:

    I'm still on collections. Possibly because of my own experience, wherein collectors robocall me daily demanding money from my ex-wife (who I divorced over 11 years ago, and who was never listed under her current name at my number). Of course, the message tells me that if I'm not (her), this call is not for me… but they don't provide any way to contact them to tell them to stop *&$% calling me.

  69. M. says:

    TLC? The Kardashians? OK, you said you were talking about an industry, so I'll stop now.

    Does the IRS count as an industry?

  70. En Passant says:

    James Pollock wrote Feb 21, 2013 @8:46 pm:

    I'm still on collections. Possibly because of my own experience, wherein collectors robocall me daily demanding money from my ex-wife …

    Just between you, me and teh intarwebz, there is some chance you can stop these robocalls, at least temporarily, with a technical fix.

    Short form: Record an "out of service" Special Information Tone [Wikipedia.org] and "this number is no longer in service" (or similar) message as your answering machine greeting. Then let your answering machine take the call.

    Depending on the particular robocall hardware and software your tormentors are using, it might remove your number from its calling list.

    Tritone conventions, with useful (and sometimes hilarious) messages are available on teh intarwebz. Google is useful for finding them.

  71. James Pollock says:

    "Just between you, me and teh intarwebz, there is some chance you can stop these robocalls, at least temporarily, with a technical fix."

    The problem is that every six months or so, they sell the debt to a different collector, who starts over.

  72. Robert says:

    Hmm. Just a WAG but I'm gonna say "Towing Companies".

  73. wgering says:

    Perhaps those of us who care should take up a collection to hire a defense attorney for Ken's nuts…

    I know a guy from the firm of Cup, Ballguard & Jockstrap.

  74. wgering says:

    As for the industry, I'm going with marketing/advertising.

  75. andrews says:

    I suppose the problem with most of our guessers is that they have not actually been up there. I have personally been up near Vermont, and so feel pretty confident.

    Of course it is an added, possibly unfair, advantage that we have the same loathed tourist industry here. If anything, we have more tourists than Vermont ever dreamed.

    Get over it. Wait for tourist season, when it is (or should be) legal to harvest them.

  76. James Pollock says:

    Tourists are strictly catch and release. What you do, see, is clip their wallets each time they get caught…