Re: Quatloos

[Satori]

I've seen a lot of adversarial (or more often merely ethically spurious) behavior on the part of some members here, and heard much attributed to Quatloos. Being recently arrived I don't know what a Quatloos is, but evidently there's some government smearing going on given what I've been hearing. Someone has suggested displaying the IP addresses of these people and exposing them. Much as I don't desire to give my time to discussion of fractious behavior on the part of these people, as that distraction from relevant matters into spurious arguments, logical fallacies and rational cul de sacs seem to be the motivation for the behavior in the first place, I wanted to offer a suggestion on dealing with federal encroachment effectively.

As counterintuitively as it might seem, I suggest application of the law to deal with the matter. I realize that this is perhaps an unfamiliar area for many reading the forum. Nonetheless, I wish to present a method utilizing the law.

I suspect this is a private system, not subject to undesired federal monitoring nor tampering. A notice to that effect, IP address detection, and enforcing a claim via commercial liens would seem not only to be an effective means by which to deal with the matter, but also a means of supplying FRNs with which to maintain the system.

It seems so basic that I wouldn't have mentioned it otherwise, but it seems to present a substantial difficulty for Sui Juris users. Perhaps there is a blind spot only I can see into; more likely the concept is unsound in some way or some remedy is already in the works. I merely offer the notion should it be desired.

- Satori

[Admin]

That's an interesting suggestion. I can't formulate an opinion as to the methods of your solution as I am not that familiar with law as my counter-part Jason is but I can say that it may be overdoing it. I honestly don't think it requires that kind of attention. Thanks for your concern though.

Originally Posted by Satori

I've seen a lot of adversarial (or more often merely ethically spurious) behavior on the part of some members here, and heard much attributed to Quatloos. Being recently arrived I don't know what a Quatloos is, but evidently there's some government smearing going on given what I've been hearing. Someone has suggested displaying the IP addresses of these people and exposing them. Much as I don't desire to give my time to discussion of fractious behavior on the part of these people, as that distraction from relevant matters into spurious arguments, logical fallacies and rational cul de sacs seem to be the motivation for the behavior in the first place, I wanted to offer a suggestion on dealing with federal encroachment effectively.

As counterintuitively as it might seem, I suggest application of the law to deal with the matter. I realize that this is perhaps an unfamiliar area for many reading the forum. Nonetheless, I wish to present a method utilizing the law.

I suspect this is a private system, not subject to undesired federal monitoring nor tampering. A notice to that effect, IP address detection, and enforcing a claim via commercial liens would seem not only to be an effective means by which to deal with the matter, but also a means of supplying FRNs with which to maintain the system.

It seems so basic that I wouldn't have mentioned it otherwise, but it seems to present a substantial difficulty for Sui Juris users. Perhaps there is a blind spot only I can see into; more likely the concept is unsound in some way or some remedy is already in the works. I merely offer the notion should it be desired.

- Satori

[idknow]

Originally Posted by Admin

That's an interesting suggestion. I can't formulate an opinion as to the methods of your solution as I am not that familiar with law as my counter-part Jason is but I can say that it may be overdoing it. I honestly don't see any problems that require that kind of attention. Thanks for your concern though.

Providing a link to a copy of the access.log at the bottom of the pages (next to sitemap) would be easy;

perhaps also scrubbing the file of "the usual" guests and members who are well known or silent.

[Admin]

Sorry ID, link to access.log is quite unconventional, even more than the tarball.

[idknow]

Originally Posted by Admin

Sorry ID, link to access.log is quite unconventional, even more than the tarball.

nonsense and crapith you're not trying.
we're not talking about putting the access file in the tree raw.

and as for the tarball, it took you this long to finally imply "no"?

come on, why cant it be done?

did you try?

define the word "try".

how much of an effort did you attempt in "trying"?

lol

define "unconvential"?

the Tao of Unix *IS* about being unconvential!!!


you failed as root/sysadmin, and guru,
hand in your root passwd!!!

roflmao

you're a BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD op!

rofl

[David Merrill]

Perhaps there is a blind spot only I can see into;

That always pieques my interest! The more I read the opening post here the more fascinating it is.

I was drawn to Quatloos which is a website forum that's focus is to debunk various kinds of scams, by the boast they had a team of attorneys organized there for investigative purposes.

I've seen a lot of adversarial (or more often merely ethically spurious) behavior on the part of some members here, and heard much attributed to Quatloos. Being recently arrived I don't know what a Quatloos is, but evidently there's some government smearing going on given what I've been hearing.

I am supposing that you came up with such a fascinating suggestion because you have not spent any time reading on the Quatloos forum:


http://www.quatloos.com/

However the logical trail led to revealing people's email addresses and possibly legal names for suits? Talk about a slippery slope!

A notice to that effect, IP address detection, and enforcing a claim via commercial liens would seem not only to be an effective means by which to deal with the matter, but also a means of supplying FRNs with which to maintain the system.

All in all, at first glance I say you are taking cyberspace way too seriously. The first thing to do is review some competent form of Rules of Evidence to help clear your head. Judge Roy Bean and I are a great example, and I suppose I am guilty of appearing to come off too seriously. Judge Roy Bean is not his name and he knows that David Merrill Van Pelt is only my name for the purpose of standing withing the system you loosely call federal. [I agree in that you must be a federal employee with a government-issued ID to get into a federal enclave courthouse. In other words citizen of the US = federal employee.]

So you propose to joinder them all and lien them in order to produce fiat FRNs? Cool but that has been worn out. Leroy Michael SCHWEITZER for one was a pioneer teaching people to become private bankers over the weekend courses he taught in the middle of nowhere, Montana state.

http://friends-n-family-research.inf...y_on_bills.wmv

There was a fellow - Rich Johnson is what we called him. He had a "flypaper case" based in what you are talking about. I called it that because every prosecuting judge would get stuck with commercial liens for being in collusion. The common law of the publications through the clerk and recorders' offices was sound and these judges/magistrates were having real problems buying and selling due to the blemishes on the record. So they put Rich in jail, I think it was for the audacity of buying a Corvette for his son's graduation gift with a Comptroller Warrant from the Montana Freemen. He sent me a letter and the Sheriff covered the postage and marked it legal mail - this was tacit admission that I was Rich's attorney. Rich's letter had nothing to do with that; I don't even remember the contents. I constructed a release of the liens and signed and sealed it from the superior court of common law. However it required Rich's signature and service (through the deputy on the ward) on the court to take effect. The attorneys were basically curing out notice like you propose above.

In other words, now that I had been notified I was considered Rich's attorney; after 30 days or so they would have considered my (Rich's) acquiescence permission to abolish the liens - permission that had come down from superior court of the people. http://friends-n-family-research.inf...nsminger_2.jpg So I had to respond to give Rich the opportunity to hold on to his liens. He could have served the release on the court through the guard, a qualified process server, unsigned by himself. However he just glanced at it and threw it away. That is how obsessed even from jail he was at keeping the liens in place.

So within a couple months, at my authorization, the General Assembly formed statutes about liens on public officials and influencing officials that will get you into the jails. The principle is two wrongs do not make a right.

The failure of NorWest Bank where Leroy cured out his $200m in funds might be the next perfect example. [I saw a woman place her hand on the wall of the NorWest building and pray for God to destroy it. So maybe Leroy had nothing to do with its downfall. Maybe NorWest was Smote.] Counterfieting money is a crime retained legal only within the criminal syndicalism of the Federal Reserve Act. Congress failed to adjourn sine die and so the convention of Jekyll Island is the seed of that syndicalism. The honest members of Congress were hoodwinked as the Masons call it. They were home enjoying Christmas and Hannukah with thier families.


Regards,

David Merrill.

P.S. I am certain the Quatlosers reading this thread would get a much bigger kick if we cured our liens against the (perceived) libels in Quatloos, the fraud currency of the original Star Trek episode. They would enjoy that even though it would elucidate the nature of FRNs eloquently.

P.P.S. You may find a booklet interesting; Rethinking Boundaries in Cyberspace - A Report of the Aspen Institute Internet Policy Project by Erez Kalir and Elliot E. Maxwell, 2002.

[Satori]

Originally Posted by Satori

I've seen a lot of adversarial (or more often merely ethically spurious) behavior on the part of some members here, and heard much attributed to Quatloos. Being recently arrived I don't know what a Quatloos is, but evidently there's some government smearing going on given what I've been hearing.

Originally Posted by David Merrill

I am supposing that you came up with such a fascinating suggestion because you have not spent any time reading on the Quatloos forum:

Interestingly enough, I was provided with that notion through posts in the Sui Juris forums from other members. Specifically, the member named suijuris, who if not the sysop, seems at least to be a very senior member of the Sui Juris community by all appearances:

Members, there have been a growing number of attacks on this site over the past few weeks. Lies are being spread by people determined to fit this entire community into a box and apply false labels as a psychological tactic to quarantine us from the general public.

That was the opening paragraph in the first post in a thread started by suijuris, entitled, "Smear Campaign Against Suijuris Community".

http://www.suijuris.net/forum/genera...community.html

Granted, I don't think I've seen Quatloos mentioned specifically in the entire thread, let alone the post. Perhaps my association came from The Great Owl in the same discussion:

Then again, it could be agent provocateurs. These parasites are like a cancer and completely beyond redemption.

Or idknow:

well, why not post the IP's of *.gov and other trouble makers?

But it's probably far more likely that I drew an association inductively, and gladly so. suijuris posts about the community being attacked. Someone mentions agent provocateurs, which had already crossed my mind. Sovereignty types are commonly villified by federal agents and those over whom they have influence (such as LeRoy Schweitzer was). Meanwhile we have members of a community whose purpose is to "debunk" areas of law research. We have members whose screennames I don't even have to invoke for them to come to mind, who appear on the forums in response to strategies and theories put forth by other users, cast dour doom and gloom notes that would make the Care Bears villains or the Wicked WItch of the West instantly retire in a dismal sense of abject professional failure, support it all with nothing more than a haughty attitude of personal superiority generated by being fully in accordance with the Court of Everybody Knows, and then generally either disappear from the discussion when asked for a basis, or return again for another round with a similar ray of sunshine.

Yes, I'm definately connecting dots on this. But it's difficult to resist when they're so painstakingly numbered.

However the logical trail led to revealing people's email addresses and possibly legal names for suits? Talk about a slippery slope!

I don't believe I suggested making email addresses public. I was including idknow's suggestion of revealing IP addresses of .gov members to debunk "debunkers" with federal agendas, and including it as part of a concept of establishing identity as part of a lawful claim.

All in all, at first glance I say you are taking cyberspace way too seriously.

Perhaps. I tend to take any forum of peacable assembly and free speech seriously when it comes to encroachment or possible encroachment from those with ulterior motives. Particularly when motivation for those in government to do so. The local newspaper recently ran front-page stories on a local peaceful protest which was infiltrated by government agents who then attempted to incite more violent forms of protest. The provocateur was ignored of course, but due to his comments many of those who were at the meetings for the first time misjudged the nature of the group because of the provocateur's comments and did not return. In short, a devious slander of the group's character by government agents had occurred (if memory serves it was a plainclothes police officer) and the police recently deemed the practice to be just fine.

I also take seriously a pattern of posts on the part of some members which is difficult to construe as not being intentionally designed to invoke fear imagery on the part of readers new to the forum. Unlawful abuses by those in the system against oneself are not a pleasant subject to contemplate; certain users repeatedly, if not as a matter of constant practice, throw just that into the faces of those reading the forum. That, essentially, is the only content their messages have unless the parrotting of what Everybody Knows can be considered content. I've encountered in my life those who use such techniques intentionally for psychological intimidation (and fascist states love to do that; consider the informant programs the Nazi government used to discourage free speech and public assembly in their regime) so perhaps I'm overly sensitized to the behavior. I choose to think I'm simply more cognizant of it. That choice on my part is quite intentional.

So you propose to joinder them all and lien them in order to produce fiat FRNs? Cool but that has been worn out. Leroy Michael SCHWEITZER for one was a pioneer teaching people to become private bankers over the weekend courses he taught in the middle of nowhere, Montana state.

Your posts are always chock full of research and shared experience. I don't know that I can agree with you that the concept is "worn out", though. Unless you mean in a statutory sense; but if that's so, then there's no point in logging into Sui Juris to discuss the other concepts which have been statutorily "worn out" through the passing of various forms of legislation. The legislation you mentioned seems little different than a presumption judges attempt to make against one in court; they are to be refuted, established as unlawful... but not accepted.

But the concept was only shared with the Sui Juris community on the basis that it was Free To Good Home, as it were. I just wanted to respond to demonstrate where my reasoning was coming from, and that as far as inductive logic I'm generally aware that I'm using it and do so by choice (misreads aside, David )


- Satori

[David Merrill]

I like your style Satori:

My excursion over to Quatloos for nearly a year makes me in my own mind an expert. I realize that there are some suijuris folks familiar with them there longer that I.

The captivating feature there for me was the escapism. Not that they are fools - they congregated there by some real scams I suppose. But then I consider the Strawman Redemption a scam. Actually anything that would make two wrongs into a right really falls into that class by my form. To sum up my research there I would tell them something I can easily prove to be true and then not provide the proof. Just blurt it like everybody knows... Then I would see what tricks and spins they would put on things in order to deny the truth. MADDOG made some commentary about juxtapositioning ridiculous with the factual so as to make the factual seem rediculous. I simply call it escapism and denial; but it really comes down to protectionism of the status quo.

Maybe the most captivating aspect of Quatloos for me was a captive audience of attorneys and attorney-types. I mean they were not about to give up the forum to little old me. I concluded the experiment by supplying the links to the documentation and then they could no longer tolerate me the village idiot. They wanted me out of there.

I don't believe I suggested making email addresses public. I was including idknow's suggestion of revealing IP addresses of .gov members to debunk "debunkers" with federal agendas, and including it as part of a concept of establishing identity as part of a lawful claim.

Well, I think that nobody has ever known me anything but David Merrill over the Internet. Since I have no birth certificate, SSN or bank account etc. I may have invented what you are talking about. And certainly I know people by their true identities who continue writing under pseudonyms and I have learned not to look down on them for it.

I suspect this is a private system, not subject to undesired federal monitoring nor tampering. A notice to that effect, IP address detection, and enforcing a claim via commercial liens would seem not only to be an effective means by which to deal with the matter, but also a means of supplying FRNs with which to maintain the system

What you describe is to elevate the court of Internet chatter to the level enjoyed by the mailbox/USPS since it became the Postal Service of process - the expeditious form of the district courts handling the disputes and contract offers between the Israelites (government/government employees) and the Noachides (people who have subject themselves unwittingly to the court of the mailbox/USPS). Last Known Address is fair notice of presentment/offer.

But like you find above from the wise administration, true identity in cyberspace is far away. Even posting tarballs and email addresses would be offensive. I like my email to stay clean but for only relevant emails that I am interested in and am pleased to tell you that two out of three or so are that way now.

I also take seriously a pattern of posts on the part of some members which is difficult to construe as not being intentionally designed to invoke fear imagery on the part of readers new to the forum. Unlawful abuses by those in the system against oneself are not a pleasant subject to contemplate; certain users repeatedly, if not as a matter of constant practice, throw just that into the faces of those reading the forum. That, essentially, is the only content their messages have unless the parrotting of what Everybody Knows can be considered content. I've encountered in my life those who use such techniques intentionally for psychological intimidation (and fascist states love to do that; consider the informant programs the Nazi government used to discourage free speech and public assembly in their regime) so perhaps I'm overly sensitized to the behavior. I choose to think I'm simply more cognizant of it. That choice on my part is quite intentional

I would rather learn about Judge Roy Bean (whatever his name is) in the safety of an I/O buffer/keyboard between us. Lately though I am starting to think he is not here to badger but to edify. He speaks enough like a black-robed attorney/actor that I believe he is or was a real judge in true life. And he seems to be spilling it before us in a harmless forum-of-little-consequence what we will come across on the other side of an unintrusive weapons-search at the courthouse door. JRB provides contrast to the facts of history and law so that I can point out the nature of his perspective as collection agent for the Bank and Fund. I say this in contrast to Prof who showed here from Quatloos the same time but does not care enough about people injuring themselves with half-arsenals to stick it out. Sometimes I think JRB is doing the same thing I was doing at Quatloos from the opposite perspective. If he is a currently active attorney in a black robe, I even imagine him using his suijuris education to do his job more compassionately to the poor sovereign stupid enough to walk into his domain/courtroom where he gets to play God.

As to "worn out"; the concept of curing and collecting liens against public officials is considered illegal. I am dealing with some of the admissions around false oaths and failure to activate offices. There was a poster who turned up upon pressing the issue an oath that professed to be 26 years nunc pro tunc! Things like that. The elusive nature of talking heads in cyberspace makes the idea of libels and countersuits a little more than vague. But I do enjoy your point about newcomers getting a bad impression by these trolls. Speaking for myself, I am a little bit disturbed by the notion I brought JRB and others here but only for that reason - good point.



Regards,

David Merrill.

[Satori]

Originally Posted by David Merrill

What you describe is to elevate the court of Internet chatter to the level enjoyed by the mailbox/USPS since it became the Postal Service of process

Alas no, I can't claim credit for that idea. It would appear to be the results of your own ingenuity as you attempted to process my meaning. Very interesting regardless.

All I was suggesting was using the IPs to establish (not make public) the locations people were internetting from in an attempt to isolate apparent agent provocateurs via their IP. From there, basic internet commands can determine whether they're accessing from .gov sites or wherever. It's a little bit of hide-and-go-seek, and a little bit of catch-as-catch-can. Once one has established the location of the miscreant, a standard commercial lien can be served upon their meat address, which can be determined from their IP, the proceeds going to Sui Juris.

But there was insufficient interest in implementation, so I merely clarify my intended meaning. I'm much more interested in your concept of internet process service. Either my idea, or yours, or a combination of both, would have fascinating and lucrative applications with regards to internet spamming.

When one receives spam, whoever is spamming them generally also sells their email address to other parties, who do likewise. The bulk of spam email increases almost exponentially, and all of it is directly or indirectly the fault of the first party who sold the address to the others. A quick-and-dirty commercial lien to at least the first party, with a set amount listed for each piece of unrequested email received, could be financially viable. Starting with a fresh, unknown email address is a simple matter to do, and signing up with a few online companies who take your information with a solemn guarantee not to sell it to others can generally be relied upon to bring about just that. It's a simple, convenient way to make FRNs through the internet and do everyone else a service in the process. I originally got the idea from some states legislating a $500 fine for each piece of unsolicited business email. Talk about bringing home the bacon; "What kind of bait are you using to catch your pigs?"



- Satori

[weishaupt1776]

Originally Posted by Satori

I was including idknow's suggestion of revealing IP addresses of .gov members to debunk "debunkers" with federal agendas, and including it as part of a concept of establishing identity as part of a lawful claim.

We get some interesting IP's which I check out from time to time.

Most of 'em aren't logged in and all you see is the .gov IP

How about this.

Any one who posts here that you are convinced is a fed, PM me and I'll let you know privately yay or nay only wheter it's dot gov or not, but that's it - -no ip's.

Most likely it'll be a waste of time either way, because the one;s I've checked, don't alwys check out like you think