Hacker News Reader

Comment by cooldeal | Hacker News Reader

>I called Florian as a corporate shill here more than a year ago based on publicly available information. I believe him "outing himself" is more recent.

So if Florian made up a pseudonym like PJ did, and posted articles only with it, he would have avoided your scrutiny of publicly available info and "outing" and all that, right?

>Put up evidence or shut up.

There is no way for the common person do that,

So the moral of the story is there is that Florian should made sure that there was no public information about him like PJ very successfully did and he would've been shielded from all the shill accusations like PJ is now? It's funny to to see Groklaw lob the accusations while not revealing anything about PJ that will allow someone to do some research like you did.

View on HN

Not really.

The thing about the Internet and anonymity is that an anonymous web of trust really can tell you who someone is better than some single professional achievement. Both Florian and pj have a "trail" because if you work with people you can't avoid a trail. Pj's trail will tell you basically who she is just as Florian's will. Florian may have a blog titled "open source patents" but his trail of activity as corporate consultant tells a different story. Further, Mueller's efforts to spin information using his supposed open source credentials required that his identity be known and touted. As far as I know pj has always let her research speak for itself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pamela_Jones

> but his trail of activity as corporate consultant tells a different story.

So.. as I said, if he hadn't associated his blog with his corporate consultant activity, he would be doing just fine right? The pseudonym's trail would've simply not have his original identity in it.

>As far as I know pj has always let her research speak for itself.

Mueller could also have just let his research speak for itself while hiding behind a pseudonym.

If an anonymous blogger posts what Florian does, his named would be dragged through the mud by the same people who are commenting here who would be asking him to disclose who he is and who pays him. Yes or no?

If it weren't for you meddling kids...

PJ isn't a pseudonym, it is her initials. Also, we have known that Pamela Jones was PJ since 2005, long before Oracle even bought Sun, let alone sued Google.

So basically, and please excuse the language, you appear to be talking complete and utter shit.

Slight;y off topic, but I'm confused. I thought PJ was retiring from Groklaw and yet most of the postings in this case have been signed PJ. Is "PJ" now just a moniker for an admin account on the site or is Pamela Jones active again?

Well, the postings have been signed 'anonymous', but the title has been signed PJ, so I doubt that it is an admin account unless their servers are setup really weirdly and wrong and back to front and stuff.

But yes, Pamela was reactivated specially for this case. It took a little over three days to warm the reanimation capsule back to room temperature after retrieving it from the catacombs beneath Geneva Airport. Apparently Pamela was extremely annoyed. She had been hoping to stay dormant until at least 2063, so that she could make a killing on some SpaceX investments. Or so I am told.

For this case, it looks like things were split roughly half and half - PJ commenting on the transcripts from the court room, and Mark commenting on the filings on the docket. This is more activity from PJ that I would have expected given her semi-retirement, but it was always clear that she would be maintaining at least some level of activity with the sit.

"There is no way for the common person do that"

Perhaps not, but I'm pretty sure that the firm of Boies, Schiller & Flexner should have been able to find some evidence by now, since this is the second trial where PJ has documented their loss in exquisite detail.

Why, exactly is it OK for you to make up a pseudonym and libel Ms. Jones?

I demand disclosure. Your full name, your address, your phone, bank, and tax records for the past year, social security statement, and a sworn affidavit that you have never been paid by, had any financial interest in, or were related to anyone with an interest in, IBM, SCO, Oracle, Google, Novell, and any media outlet that has ever given critical or favorable coverage to any of these companies.

If you don't comply within 24 hours, I'll assume you're simply a troll and paid shill.

Edit: Downvoters may want to consult "cooldeal"'s other comments on this very page for context. I'm simply demanding of him what he demands of others.

>libel Ms. Jones?

See, this is the exact attitude I am talking about. Anyone even questioning PJ's funding sources is immediately vilified, hated on and modded down to death. While the same about Florian are modded up to the sky and it's totally okay to do that since he's not batting on your side, even if he's the one that has disclosed his interests.

Since you've attempted to deflect instead of disclose, I now assume you are a hypocrite in Oracle's employ.

That would be an unfair assumption, you should be careful in putting down to deceit, that which can also be explained by incompetence.

"There is no way for the common person do that"

Eh? Of course there is. It is called investigatory journalism and it is a lot of work.

Also, I think you may have the moral of the story wrong.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com