Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Gary Dobry Subpoenas 41 SI Aliases -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill Ulrich who wrote (359)	1/25/2002 9:09:08 AM
From: Wayne Rumball	Respond to of 1136

LMAO Bill. Oddly enough I was listening to Arlo Guthrie's Alice's Restaurant at the same time I read your post. Your post looks like good lyrics for one of his songs......

To: Bill Ulrich who wrote (359)	1/25/2002 3:59:43 PM
From: Q.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1136

Alternative explanation of the subpoena: Suppose you've been stalking somebody for a number of years, and you really want to annoy her. What better way than to upset a few dozen of her friends by splattering their names and credit card numbers all over the internet? Sound like it would really rattle somebody's chain? Here's how to do it: Supposing you happen to already be involved in some unrelated civil action, you ask your lawyer to write a subpoena and send it to a clerk who always rubber stamps it. Total cost, outside of the lawyer's time, is less than 100 dollars. You might as well get some benefit out of all your legal effort, right? The subpoena will get issued, and it will go to just one party, SI in this case. Now here's the fun part: there's no additional effort involved in adding more and more John Does to the list that appears on that subpoena. There's a very powerful multiplier effect here: a small incremental effort is successful in annoying lots more people. As a stalker, you get a good bang-for-the-buck that way. Even if your subpoena gets quashed, you've still succeeded in rattling a lot of chains. There's nothing new about this abusive scheme. It's been used before, for example by CIO. And I can't see any way to prevent it, either.