The O.C. blogosphere took a turn down a very dark road today when Chris Prevatt, over at the Liberal OC Blog, decided to “out” an anonymous blogger he disagreed with, using the same Sitemeter software that we use here at the Orange Juice.
Apparently a local Santa Ana businessman commented anonymously on a story regarding homosexuals. He made the comment that,
Thursday night should be great. Thanks
It’s Derek Tran all over again. Well kind of. Good stuff Vern.
Thank you very much for all your hard work on bringing us the truth, you are a good man Vern.
[…] post was originally published on this […]
I give Schumer credit for that, for steering serious money to Dr. El-Sayed's campaign, and maybe for a few more…
Oh wow I was completely unaware of this and feel terrible now. Thank you for the update, Vern. Nevertheless, like…
According to the Register Lou had a heart attack over the weekend, and then had open-heart surgery on Tuesday, same…
Thank you for providing that link to his current status. However, just given his history of being disingenuous with his…
Colom has won with NO help from the Democrat establishment. Bright side he got to make his own ads like…
It’s rough, too, being in bed with Turks. Lawrence of Arabia didn’t like it one little bit.
Art:
“I did post sitemeter data a few weeks ago showing that someone at the law firm Patrick Munoz works at was reading our blog. But that is a far cry from what Prevatt did today. He crossed a line that should not have been crossed.”
How again is posting the site meter data identifying an IP address any different? I disclosed the same exact information. The only difference is that I pointed out that someone from a particular business was posting homophobic comments on TheLiberalOC.
And yes Clinton signed DOMA, and I strongly disagree with that decision.
Are you not the same Art Pedroza who was responsible for outing “John McReckinridge” over on the the Yahoo Citizens site?
If I remember correctly “McReckenridge” was actually a staffer at Lou Correa’s office posting under an assumed name. You were the one that used his IP address to track him down and out him.
If I remember correctly someone lost their job over the whole deal.
How soon we forget ehhh Pedroza.
Poster 2,
No. I did not track the IP address of Correa’s staffer. The Yahoogroups site is not a blog and does not use Sitemeter. One of the other readers, who worked with computers, tracked it.
The issue in that case was a Correa staffer using government resources and blogging on government time under a fake name, while he ripped people in Santa Ana. It was a major scandal actually.
I seem to recall that many fingers at the time pointed at Chris “Shallow Hal” Leo as the culprit, but I think another Correa staffer took one for the team.
Leo no longer works for Correa. He left Correa’s employ after his “Shallow Hal” scandal.
Chris,
No. It is quite different. It is one thing to show that someone is reading a site. Anyone can dig that up using Sitemeter. It is quite another to do what you did. To purposefully research an IP address in order to put the screws to someone because you disagree with their opinion.
Let’s look at this another way. Would the ACLU, of which I am a member, agree with what you did? I don’t think so. I think they would object strenuously. And I don’t think they would find fault with what I did.
As for Clinton, it is pretty funny how he voted for DOMA and NAFTA and NOW we find that Hillary disagrees. Where was her disagreement when it would have counted? I realize you are an Obama supporter, which I appreciate. However, shame on those who support the Clintons and ignore the DOMA decision. It does appear to be a deal-breaker.
Art,
Lets be clear, you did to Rutan & Tucker what Chris did to his blogger, he and you outed the business domain. Thats all…
In you case the reader didn not come back, we assume…
on OCBLOG this freak outed himself, that was his choice not
Chris’s. You’ve read his comments and I trust you found them as reprehensable as most of us did. That said, this blogger chose to out himself (if truthful) before message was sent to the business. If truthful, so be it, that is the decision made by the business. If not, then negative impact is felt by the comapany for unauthorized comments.
#5,
Not at all. It is one thing to show that someone is reading a blog. It is another thing altogether to purposefully investigate an IP and out someone because you disagree with their comment.
I have a feeling Sean Mill goaded Chris into doing this. Mill knew that the businessman in question contributed to the No on Measure D campaign. For Mill this was all about getting revenge, as is usually the case with his postings.
Yes, Chris made an error in judgment, but let’s get real here. If you have the so-called ‘courage’ to stand by your convictions, why post anonymously anyway? Spewing hate with the protection of anonymity sounds a lot like leaving an IED on an Iraqi supply road. It’s simply cowardly. Outing is bad, but rhetorical terrorism is worse. Ethically, I’d have to call this one a draw.
SMS
Oh, and by the way… I also think this was a setup. Chris may have mistakenly taken the bait, but I’m totally against entrapment in any form.
SMS
Sarah,
You must be new to SA.
People who don’t want to deal with all the petty retaliation, post anonymously.
Thanks anonymous. I’ve been posting on message boards since people still dialed into BBSes in the early 90’s, and I’ve even moderated a few, but yes I’m new around here. Back then there was not such thing as anonymity. I guess the rules have changed… CONSIDERABLY! I see your point when we’re talking about those who post legitimate, justifiable opinions and not propaganda, but in this case the pettiness (and I still say cowardice) seemed to came from the anonymous party. I don’t think it’s right and I really do think it was a set-up. Overall I agree with you, but this just seems like a very unique situation to me.
SMS
#2
Art Pedroza did not expose John McReckinridge. I suspect you knew that, but wanted to sling a poison arrow at Pedroza.
Shame on you!
Art-
Chris has me on moderation again because it’s a lot easier to stifle one person’s opinion than many… the easy way out, so I thought you would find this interesting.
_____
Chris-
Thanks for deleting my post in my own defense, but leaving up the attacks against me. That was so very kind of you. Once again, and shortly after a similar scandal, you have used censorship as a weapon to serve your own interests. It