stalking

The Excellent (and Slightly Salty) Food Blogger Linda Miller Nicholoson on Dealing With Threats in Comments

The mildly naughty-leaning Seattle food blogger Linda Miller Nicholoson of Salty Seattle, who I just stumbled upon a day or two ago, wrote a very smart post about dealing with some kind of animal rights or possibly food-allergy troll who not only heaped the usual loads of invective on her but also threatened to both her and her child.

It's a pretty cool, level-headed post about the impact it had on her, how she located details about the commenter (including the street address associated with the originating computer's IP address) decision to go public with those details, and advice on where and how to report such computer-based threats to the appropriate local and federal authorities including a specific agency website set up for reporting not only online frauds and hacks but internet-based threats such as these.  (The Internet Crime Complaint Center.)

You should read the whole post both for context and specifics but I'd like to highlight what one of her commenters said

I got one of these comments as well (though not as troubling) with the email charles’dot’bollinger at gmail’dot’com. Both names sound similar to Charles, or Chuck.

Methinks this is that same trollish DocChuck that has been harrassing SteamyKitchen and Pioneer Woman for a long time. I know he DOES in fact live in Florida, and seems to search around for mentions of famous bloggers and attack the blogs that do the mentioning — it seems he might be googling the peanut butter pie phenomenon. Think of him as the Westboro Baptist Church of internet trolls :(

Source: Salty Seattle

This is what happens when you go public with your cyber demons -- you not only discover it's not just you, you also inform other targets that it's also not just them!

It's important to realize that no victim is ever obliged report or even publicize his or her troll's behavior.  And in fact most of the time folks deal by just moderating such comments or blocking the sender.  Although sometimes they also take down their blogs.*

But while it's ok to keep such threats quiet, by going public you can often multiply both the pressure on one's tormentor and provide solidarity and relief to other victims.  Who may in turn provide solidarity, relief, and solid suggestions, to you.

Anyway, I should also mention that Nicholoson's more typical fare, Gourmet orSaveur quality posts about food that range from philosophy to comfort to haute cuisine to molecular gastronomy, is pretty good reading.  And as a nominal sex blogger I appreciate her flip attitudes and sometimes very cute salacious analogies.  Definitely worth a look.

Update: I just noticed that Nicholoson is also the sponsor of what looks like an annual fundraiser/photography-contest site, NudieFoodies.  Again, mildly salacious while staying pretty safe for work.  Nicholoson's got the right attitude, incidentally -- for her own entry she made a bikini from marshmallow Peeps!

*For sad but obvious reasons this has been a common response among anonymous sex bloggers.  For even sadder reasons, at one time there was at least one fairly popular sex blogger who decided the best way to rise through the ranks was by smearing, stalking, and even threatening more popular competitors unless or until they dropped out!


Tags:

Funny How "Insane" Stalkers and Shooters Behave Perfectly Sensibly When it Comes to Things Like Cab Fares and Bus Transfers

Danny of sex, art, and politics says

““The individual turned out to be a cab driver who went into the safeway with him because he needed change to pay for the cab,” Dupnik told Fox News in an interview Sunday afternoon.”

- Person Of Interest In Gifford Shooting Was Loughner’s Taxi Driver | TPMMuckraker

Really? You’re going to shoot up a crowd and you can’t just give the cabbie your large bill?

Source: sex, art, and politics

Weird I know.  I remember riding to campus on the city bus.  This guy, Michael L. Pimentel gets on and comes down the center aisle with his transfer in his teeth while he shifted zipped his jacked and hitched his backpack back on.

20 minutes later in the campus cafeteria he emptied his automatic pistol into Elisa Tissot, murdering the girl he'd been obsessively stalking for months.  Then he walked back out to the bus stop and sat down.  He told the cops he'd meant to shoot himself but he hadn't counted his shots right. Presumably he still had that bus transfer in his pocket.

So who knows.  Maybe Loughner thought he'd use the change to take another cab for his getaway.


Tags:

"Lover's Quarrel" and Other Very Poor Turns of Phrase

Echidne of the Snakes says

An early item on the murder at Henry Ford Community College in Dearborn, Mich., described it like this:

A WWJ reporter on the scene says a male student appears to have shot a woman, then turned the gun on himself at Henry Ford Community College in Dearborn, Mich.

WWJ reporter Pat Sweeney has information that it was a lover’s quarrel in which the gunman shot his girlfriend, then himself.

Emphasis mine. Using that term appears to be very bad journalism. Was there evidence of a quarrel? Note that ‘a quarrel’ is not the same thing as a man walking in and killing a woman with a gun. At least to me it means something different.

She said it here.

I’m… pretty sure in most cases like this the topic of these kinds of “lovers quarrels” are about how restraining orders don’t do much to protect the lives or safety of those who request them in the face of someone who’s delusional and obsessed about “our chances of making this work.”

When I was in my 20s I rode the city bus to college. A few stops from mine a guy got on the bus, asked for a return-trip transfer, and as he walked past me towards the back I remember thinking he looked kind of stressed. Just a few minutes after we all got off the bus he went into the cafeteria and shot to death a girl he’d gone out with, once, maybe a year before.

When I was in my 30s I worked with an aggressive, grudge-bearing, and not as hot-shot as he thought he was intern. One weekend he mentioned he was going back to his hometown. He didn’t show up for work on Monday. On Tuesday one of his other officemates showed up ashen-faced saying he’d shot to death a young man who was going out with “his girl.” Who he’d actually never gone out with at all but had been obsessed with for, again, more than a year.

In each case they’d intended to kill themselves afterwards but for various reasons they both failed.

I’m sure sometimes, somewhere, someone kills a lover in a genuine “lovers quarrel” from time to time. But I’m also sure that the “sometime” isn’t in the middle of the day and the “somewhere” isn’t a college classroom. Especially when the “with something” isn’t a shotgun.

In the bitter irony department? The shooter would most likely be highly gratified to have his one-victim rampage described in Romeo and Juliet terms. Whereas his victim might have felt like she was in something closer to Alien.

The reporter and possibly his sources almost certainly was trying to avoid the situation in Virginia a few years back where what appeared to be a no-big-deal/routine “lover’s quarrel” turned out to be prelude a campus-wide massacre. But considering the classic stalker’s state of mind “lovers quarrel” is exactly, exactly the wrong turn of phrase.


Tags:

Looks like Facebook's "Beacon" poses a horrific privacy risk


Photo by Flickr user plynoi. Used under a Creative Commons license.

So I’d been thinking about trying out this Facebook thing. Recently I’d noticed several sex, politics, and relationship-oriented bloggers and site operators have been setting up Facebook groups, and since a lot of people go there I thought maybe I’d get an account so, at least, I could hook up with those other groups and… do whatever the heck Facebook would to be useful for.

Now comes word from the venerable and highly-respected-in-tech-circles InfoWorld.com that Facebook’s owners are adamant that they’ll never back down on their new Beacon software’s information collecting and sharing feature.

Facebook’s CEO and Founder Mark Zuckerberg has profusely apologized for missteps in the design and deployment of the Beacon ad system, but he remains unrepentant about what privacy advocates consider a particularly egregious feature.
InfoWorld Podcast

Absent from Zuckerberg’s mea culpa Wednesday is any indication that Facebook plans to modify the system’s ability to indiscriminately track actions of all users on external sites that have implemented Beacon.

...

Even critics of Beacon had generally assumed that the ad system limited its non-Facebook tracking and data reporting to Facebook members who were logged on to the site.

However, in the past week, CA security researcher Stefan Berteau stunned many when he reported that Beacon tracks all users in these external sites, including logged-off and former Facebook members and even non-Facebook members, and sends data back to Facebook. He also found that logged-in Facebook users who declined having their actions broadcast to their friends still had their data sent to Facebook.

Beacon, already blasted for weeks by privacy advocates like MoveOn.org and the Electronic Privacy Information Center, as well as by concerned Facebook users, has come under renewed attacks as a result of the findings from Berteau’s independent research.

Facebook confirmed that this broad user tracking function remains untouched in Beacon, despite the changes announced Wednesday, a spokesperson said in an e-mail.

Inforworld article here.

It allegedly tracks you even if you opt out with their little “Don’t append stories about what you’ve purchased, browsed, or accidentally stumbled upon on arbitrary external websites to your profile” feature in their “Privacy” settings section. That only prevents the sites from telling your friends about what you did while you were there.

Under the agreement with external sites Beacon allegedly continues to track you even if you’re not actively logged in to Facebook at the time. In fact Facebook will continue to track you via Beacon even if you quit the service!

They’ll even received purchase and other information from cooperating websites of people who’ve never, ever been facebook members, but, of course, they won’t (yet) have all the personal profile information (a.k.a. your identity) such as family, social, and professional affiliations plus all the intensely personal questions about, say, your first kiss or your mother’s maiden name…

...and, assuming you don’t have an account, they won’t be able to tie you to all your friends and all their “friends” to these arbitrary websites.

So anyway, the point I’d like to make about Facebook accounts for bloggers is that even if you’re not concerned for your own privacy — and for you it might be perfectly reasonable not to be concerned about that for yourself — it’s still the courteous… responsible… even decent thing to consider whether any of your on-line friends have reason to be concerned about their privacy, have reason to fear being traced as friends of anyone who browses sites and makes the purchases you make or leaves the comments you make… people who might be worried about stalkers (stalking being a form of OCD, stalkers can be stunningly persistent, creative and resourceful) or involved in lawsuits or custody disputes… then do your friends a favor and think twice before establishing or tying your Facebook account even peripherally to anything where privacy might be an active concern.

—-

Techno-twit note: On the face of it this Beacon thing looks a lot like a real version of the 90’s-era controversy over website “cookies.” The difference being that cookies were scandalous because websites could store your personal information on your computer. (Don’t worry though, thanks to lots of activism and legislation, website operators were obliged to stop storing your personal information on your PC… where it was inaccessible to other websites and, if you turned off your machine and/or deleted your cookies, was inaccessible to the original website as well. So now, almost universally, website operators store your personal information on their databases… where no amount of cookie-deleting will erase it.) And if cookies were a complete and utter false alarm, this Facebook business seems a lot more ominous. Yes, yes, they say the won’t share or sell your information outside the system, but given the ping/ping-back nature of its communication with outside vendors there’s no reason (beyond your personal faith in their respect for your privacy and faith that they’ll always resist temptation to earn a great deal of money) to believe they wouldn’t share your advertisement “personalization” information (i.e. your identity) to anyone willing to pay for it.

With any luck I’ll get to look back and say “sheesh, I was such an alarmist to go off like that.” And who knows, maybe Beacon is the sort of revenue-generating feature that’ll help Facebook grow large enough that, like Google or Amazon, they’re not really in reach of “interested party” organizations like Tom Cruise or Mitt Romney’s activist religions or Rupert Murdoch’s conservative-government-suck-up enterprise. If any or all of that comes to pass, and if it turns out that my concern is unfounded, then I’ll very cheerfully issue mea-culpas and otherwise admit I’m descended from Chicken Little.

Until then, however, I’d recommend using virtual condoms and other common forms of online sex safety when using a Facebook-related account to hook up with other sex-related friends.


Tags:

User login