[locke]

Originally Posted by Fizban Our seems rather accurate to me. Samson, prof1515, Delerak, KaVir and I seem to all have very similar positions. Collectively that would make it our position. PS: Splitting hairs? It might be appropriate to note that Fizban considers those who comment on another's word choice when losing a debate are usually pathological liars and thieves trying to change the topic.

I'm not losing the debate, I'm leaving it. Nothing has changed, so you are not a victor in it. I even talked to Hans Staerfeldt and he doesn't agree with you calling me a "thief" -- and I'm simply ending it because it is not a formal situation and it seems fruitless to argue with a bunch of idiots who nitpick and refute every single thing I say, and justify that by some illusory crime that has never even occurred. In your ****ed up world, punishment can be dealt for eternity for crimes that haven't even been proven, and part of that punishment is not listening to any contrarian evidence. Well, not only is that not fair, but it's harassment. Also, I didn't even come here to debate, I came here to announce.

Oh, and by the way, addressing OTHERS in the plural is not considered lying. Had you paid closer attention to my post, which you haven't done with any of my posts, you would notice that I mentioned only using "our" and "we" to discuss one-self is the criteria provided by the FBI.

[Samson]

Then please hurry up and go away, thief. We don't want you around here spreading your lies.

[locke]

Originally Posted by Samson Then please hurry up and go away, thief. We don't want you around here spreading your lies.

It is not a lie that I am holding a contest for builders.

It is not a lie that I'm re-releasing NiMUD under the AL 2.0 / CCA-3 BY-SA.

Goodbye.

[Fizban]

Originally Posted by locke It is not a lie that I'm re-releasing NiMUD under the AL 2.0 / CCA-3 BY-SA.

No longer even trying to lie and claim that doing so is not illegal?

Originally Posted by Locke I even talked to Hans Staerfeldt and he doesn't agree with you calling me a "thief"

I doubt that. Generally when making unlikely claims it is the responsibility of the one making said claims to provide proof.

Originally Posted by Locke Also, I didn't even come here to debate, I came here to announce.

A word of advice. When "announcing" in the future, you'd be best off never looking at your announcement again after posting said announcement instead of replying and digging your grave deeper.

Originally Posted by Locke Well, not only is that not fair, but it's harassment.

Callieg a thief and a liar a thief and a liar is harassment? And we're the ones in a ****ed up world?

Originally Posted by Locke Oh, and by the way, addressing OTHERS in the plural is not considered lying.

That's exactly what you jumped on Samson for doing.

Originally Posted by Locke using "our" and "we" to discuss one-self is the criteria provided by the FBI.

Cite.

[Samson]

Originally Posted by locke It is not a lie that I am holding a contest for builders. It is not a lie that I'm re-releasing NiMUD under the AL 2.0 / CCA-3 BY-SA.

Actually there's every chance it is a lie you're holding a "contest". It reads more like a scam to get people to build stuff for your dead game and steal it from them at the same time.

The second part is what makes you a thief, not a liar, but at least you're admitting it now.

[locke]

The presumption of innocence – being considered innocent until proven guilty – is a legal right that the accused in criminal trials has in many modern countries. The burden of proof is thus on the prosecution, which has to collect and present enough compelling evidence to convince the trier of fact, who are restrained and ordered by law to consider only actual evidence and testimony that is legally admissible, and in most cases lawfully obtained, that the accused is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. In case of remaining doubts, the accused is to be acquitted. This presumption is seen to stem from the Latin legal principle that ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (the burden of proof rests on who asserts, not on who denies).

Presumption of innocence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[locke]

Originally Posted by Fizban No longer even trying to lie and claim that doing so is not illegal?

I'm not lying. I haven't lied intentionally about anything. And, besides, you are not a judge, nor jury, nor authority on anything that has to do with your and Samson's unfounded claims. You're just some weird stalker who keeps berating me and insulting me and then saying I started it.

Originally Posted by Fizban (Regarding my claim that "if someone refers to oneself in the plural it is evidence of lying") That's exactly what you jumped on Samson for doing.

No, I expressed that the FBI field handbook for detecting liars reports that if you refer to YOURSELF in the plural you are probably lying or making something up. That's what he did. When I address a group, I can use the plural, when I address myself (aside from the cooperative work of myself and Chris Woodward), I am to use the singular pronoun "I". Samson used the term "our" to discuss what appeared to be his views. I realize that you hold a similar, unfounded opinion, but I don't think Kavir holds an identical view. Regardless, I expect you, Kavir and Samson to be d!ckheads because you have always treated me this way. The only person who isn't here to complain is Kyndig, who was told to leave me alone by the Pittsburgh Police because he was attempting to harass me by having me arrested. In their words, "It seemed like he was just out to ruin your life. We told him to leave you alone and to stop calling us."

I don't come to your website and harass you, why come here and harass me? It's free software and you are benefiting. STFU and be nice.

[locke]

Re: "dead game"

People still play my game. In fact, Ponnet scored very highly and complemented it because it is a good game. It has an original storyline, some interesting interactions, and a large world to explore. Last I looked the player base had expanded and we have at least one daily active player.

[Threshold]

Originally Posted by locke The presumption of innocence – being considered innocent until proven guilty – is a legal right that the accused in criminal trials has in many modern countries.

This is a forum. This is not a criminal trial. We are private citizens. We are not the government. You have no right to a presumption of innocence from private citizens.

The specifics of your situation and issue are of no direct interest to me, but I dislike it when people extrapolate legal rights designed to protect them from the government onto dealings with private citizens. The same goes for people who think free speech applies to web forums and similar silliness.

[KaVir]

Originally Posted by locke The presumption of innocence – being considered innocent until proven guilty – is a legal right that the accused in criminal trials has in many modern countries. The burden of proof is thus on the prosecution

Were the Diku team to take you to court for copyright infringement, it would be a civil case, not a criminal one, and therefore there would be no "presumption of innocence". They would only need to prove "preponderance of evidence" - just enough evidence to make it more likely than not that the fact the claimant seeks to prove is true. This is explained in the links you posted.

[Samson]

Originally Posted by locke The presumption of innocence – being considered innocent until proven guilty – is a legal right that the accused in criminal trials has in many modern countries. The burden of proof is thus on the prosecution, which has to collect and present enough compelling evidence to convince the trier of fact, who are restrained and ordered by law to consider only actual evidence and testimony that is legally admissible, and in most cases lawfully obtained, that the accused is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. In case of remaining doubts, the accused is to be acquitted. This presumption is seen to stem from the Latin legal principle that ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (the burden of proof rests on who asserts, not on who denies). Presumption of innocence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What you describe here is the presumption of innocence in a criminal trial. Copyright infringement on the level you're committing it at is a civil matter, and we've long since met the preponderance of evidence required to render judgment and find for damages. You yourself have even admitted to the violation. I doubt there would be much effort needed to win an actual case against you.

Originally Posted by locke No, I expressed that the FBI field handbook for detecting liars reports that if you refer to YOURSELF in the plural you are probably lying or making something up. That's what he did.

Except I wasn't referring to myself. I was referring to myself, Fizban, Delerak, and prof1515 who all clearly hold the belief that you are a thief and a liar. The evidence of course has already condemned you, but you still refuse to see it.

Regardless, I expect you, Kavir and Samson to be d!ckheads because you have always treated me this way. The only person who isn't here to complain is Kyndig, who was told to leave me alone by the Pittsburgh Police because he was attempting to harass me by having me arrested. In their words, "It seemed like he was just out to ruin your life. We told him to leave you alone and to stop calling us."

We always treat you this way because you always show up every year making irrational demands based on zero evidence claiming everyone and his dog owes you credit for code you didn't even write. BTW, you are aware it would be dead simple to verify that ridiculous claim about Kyndig? My money is on that never happening.

I don't come to your website and harass you, why come here and harass me? It's free software and you are benefiting. STFU and be nice.

Because you came here making irrational demands of the community and tried to lay claim to a couple dozen codebases based on some ridiculous claim that you and you alone wrote the OLC that's in them. Disinformation campaigns tend to be met with resistance. If you'd come here and posted something that was factual and accurate, you'd probably not have heard from anyone at all about it.

[Delerak]

Originally Posted by KaVir Were the Diku team to take you to court for copyright infringement, it would be a civil case, not a criminal one, and therefore there would be no "presumption of innocence". They would only need to prove "preponderance of evidence" - just enough evidence to make it more likely than not that the fact the claimant seeks to prove is true. This is explained in the links you posted.

Haha. I hate to use the stupid net lingo but... PWNED!

[locke]

Originally Posted by Threshold This is a forum. This is not a criminal trial. We are private citizens. We are not the government. You have no right to a presumption of innocence from private citizens.

Actually, I'm afforded many rights by the government with respect to private citizens.

Whoever falsely assumes or pretends to be an officer or employee acting under the authority of the United States or any department, agency or officer thereof, and acts as such, or in such pretended character demands or obtains any money, paper, document, or thing of value, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Pa. Cons. Stat. tit. 18 § 2709, 2709.1 . . . 4 terroristic threats, for harassment and stalking, for grading 5 of theft offenses and, for harassment AND STALKING by 6 communication or address; . . . 8 § 2709. Harassment and stalking. 9 (a) Harassment.--A person commits the crime of harassment 10 when, with intent to harass, annoy or alarm another, the person: 11 (1) [he] strikes, shoves, kicks or otherwise subjects 12 [him] the other person to physical contact, or attempts or 13 threatens to do the same; [or] 14 (2) [he] follows [a] the other person in or about a 15 public place or places; or 16 (3) [he] engages in a course of conduct or repeatedly 17 commits acts which [alarm or seriously annoy such other 18 person and which] serve no legitimate purpose. 19 * * * 20 (f) Definitions.--As used in this section, the following 21 words and phrases shall have the meanings given to them in this 22 subsection: 23 "Course of conduct." A pattern of actions composed of more 24 than one act over a period of time, however short, evidencing a 25 continuity of conduct. The term includes lewd, lascivious, 26 threatening or obscene words, language, drawings, caricatures or 27 actions, either in person or anonymously.

Recently, a number of states have passed strong cyber bullying laws that are designed to protect from being harassed, threatened and humiliated online. These laws represent a crucial step towards National anti-cyber bullying laws which will protect all ages in every corner of the country.

Originally Posted by NVCV.org Bullying and Harassment “Someone is picking on me.” What Is It? Bullying is when one person hurts or threatens someone in their peer group. Anyone can be a bully, and bullying can be carried out in different ways. Physical bullying may include shoving, pushing, and hitting. Words and non-verbal behavior can also be used to hurt someone by spreading rumors, taking part in gossip, or threatening someone with looks, notes, or pictures. Bullies may choose to pick on peers who are smaller or younger than they are, or who are from a different race or culture, or they may pick on someone who is different in some other way.

The law which allows you to get a restraining order defines harassment as "repeated, intrusive or unwanted acts, words or gestures that are intended to adversely affect the safety, security or privacy of another, regardless of the relationship between the actor and the intended target." (M.S. § 609.749, Subd. I). Criminal harassment is defined as "engag(ing) in intentional conduct which the actor [harasser] knows or has reason to know would cause the victim, under the circumstances, to feel frightened, threatened, oppressed, persecuted, or intimidated; and causes this reaction on the part of the victim. (M.S. § 609.749, Subd. I). Such conduct can include following or pursuing you, returning to your property without your consent, making repeated phone calls, inducing you to make calls, causing your phone to repeatedly ring, repeatedly mailing or delivering unwanted letters, objects, or gifts to you.

Originally Posted by NVCV.org According to the National Center for Victims of Crime (NCVC), cyber stalking is "threatening behavior or unwanted advances directed at another using the Internet and other forms of online and computer communications." Cyber bullying is similar to cyber stalking but draws its distinction through demographics. Instead of adults targeting other adults or children, cyber bullying involves minors targeting minors.

[T]he injury of discriminatory denial of access through maintenance of a hostile environment can arise from single acts of discrimination on the part of many different individuals. To deal with a form of abuse that is repetitive to its victims, and hence constitutes the continuing injury of harassment to them, it is necessary to prohibit the individual actions that, when added up, amount to institutional discrimination. 115

[locke]

Originally Posted by Samson Because you came here making irrational demands of the community and tried to lay claim to a couple dozen codebases based on some ridiculous claim that you and you alone wrote the OLC that's in them.

This is a boldfaced lie. I never claimed I wrote it alone. Chris Woodward and I wrote OLC and that has always been my position.

It's not "irrational" to request credit, nor to provide a means by which builders can win a contest that benefits charity.

Also, it's not "Disinformation Strategy" to release source code or hold a contest, period.

[Samson]

No, it's not a bold faced lie. Evidence has mounted that what really happened is Chris wrote the OLC, died, and you ghoulishly latched on to it to try and make a name for yourself. You've been doing it for well over 10 years now.

So yes, it's irrational to request credit for code you didn't write.

It's also disinformation to hold a "contents" under false pretenses. It's pretty clear you're simply trying to trick people into writing your areas for you. No doubt because you couldn't hire a builder the proper way because we all know what a lying thief you are.

[locke]

Originally Posted by Samson No, it's not a bold faced lie. Evidence has mounted that what really happened is Chris wrote the OLC, died, and you ghoulishly latched on to it to try and make a name for yourself. You've been doing it for well over 10 years now. So yes, it's irrational to request credit for code you didn't write. It's also disinformation to hold a "contents" under false pretenses. It's pretty clear you're simply trying to trick people into writing your areas for you. No doubt because you couldn't hire a builder the proper way because we all know what a lying thief you are.

Dude, I've had an ongoing relationship with his parents since his death. Right before he died when he was wasting away in his bed he said he loved me. He supervised the release as I supervised the project and completed the editors. You don't know Chris, you've never met Chris, and your opinions (which is all they are, opinions) are wrong, wrong wrong. How dare you criticize the situation which you know nothing about -- the only person who is spreading disinformation is you and frankly I hate you. I'm removing you from NiMUD's "HELP THANKS"

[Samson]

Good, because I don't want my name associated with your code thievery - especially since I don't endorse your behavior one bit and this whole ghoulish obsession you have with Chris is frankly quite disturbing to see.

[Lasher]

I really wanted to stay out of this, but this goes beyond your usual "argument over code license" debate.

There is enough doubt about this codebase that a user innocently downloading it and assuming they have it under one license could be in for a shock down the line.

I'm not declaring anyone right or wrong in this thread, but there's enough risk to our users that NiMUD can no longer be promoted here.

The thread is locked and a 'moderator note' has been added to the first post.