DCP naming names again

[_3sheets2thewind]

someone post the screen cap, I would like to read the comments.

[_beastie]

No, sorry, it wasn't me.

But, I have to tell you all, I'm not convinced (sorry Wangchung, but to take your word for it, I'd have to actually know who you are, and I don't, so I don't have any reason to believe you) it's just a hair brained theory or a silly fantasy.

Consider this. You find out that some BYU Professor you don't even know accused you of cyber stalking him for six years on his blog. What would be your response?

Would it be to joke around with him? as Jason did, Saying 'apology accepted' and 'Dude, you're a hoot..". No, An innocent person would have a very different response--the expected response would be to strongly deny it and call him crazy and maybe threaten to sue the guy.

in my opinion, Jason's response seemed to take it as a game. A game he was familiar with because he'd been playing it for years....

At least, that's how I see it.

What could he POSSIBLY say that would convince you and the others that he is NOT scratch?

Seriously, this was a very bad idea for DCP, but within the character of his past postings. He's never been above insinuating that he knows secret, dark, information about individuals that would TOTALLY change our mind about those individuals, if only he were free to share it... but he's not, because he's an honor-bound person.

So he publicly names this individual whom he's accused of libel and hinted he will file a lawsuit against, without providing one SHRED of evidence. And when the individual denies the charge, his supporters say "well, why would you believe him?"

Do you honestly not see how this was a stupendously bad idea?

[_MsJack]

(Gonna keep referring to the person in question by his known handle, Chino Blanco, and omit his real name, because I don't know how he feels about his real name appearing here.)

Chino Blanco doesn't have to post any evidence that he isn't Scratch, because Dan, Pahoran et al. haven't provided a shred of evidence that he is Scratch. I don't know how they do things in New Zealand, but in this country, it's innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around.

Chino has known about the charges since they were first made, which probably explains how he took it all in stride.

It always struck me as an unlikely identification. I won't say that I know Chino well enough to rule it out entirely, but Chino had a pretty extensive knowledge of people and drama in the Bloggernacle, which I never saw duplicated by Scratch. In contrast, Scratch has an extensive knowledge of people and drama in LDS apologetics, which I never saw duplicated by Chino. If this is the same person, he's doing a really good job of acting ignorant of and disinterested in the other world when he switches identities.

I did a Sunstone panel with Chino this summer (it was a very large panel), and he barely said two words to me afterward. I would have expected a little more attention if Chino were Scratch. Why wouldn't Scratch say "hello" to the person who brought on the event which made his #1 on last year's list of "Mopologetic" happenings?

The blog post was a bad idea on Dan's part, but it's probably for the best that he removed it.

[_sock puppet]

*runs in, slightly out of breath*

Sorry I'm late.
So, DCP has named someone who he believes to be his malevolent stalker. Bu he got it wrong. Therefore defaming an innocent person. This defamation has been captured for posterity despite the blogs prompt removal if the iffending article. But Pahoran claims to know who Scrach is, whilst DCP is flailing around in the dark.

Did I summarise correctly?

How can it be defaming?

It would be quite the compliment to be conflated with Dr Scratch.

[_sock puppet]

Chino Blanco doesn't have to post any evidence that he isn't Scratch, because Dan, Pahoran et al. haven't provided a shred of evidence that he is Scratch. I don't know how they do things in New Zealand, but in this country, it's innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around.

That, MsJack, is the difference between courts of law and religious inquisitions. In the latter, the accused bears the burden of proving innocence to the religious choir.

[_Chap]

I am dazed and more than a little saddened by this thread. I thought we had reached the limits of DCP's implosion, but it appears we have not.

Has DCP no friends who can help him understand how unwise it is to keep on putting material into cyberspace that makes him look foolish and mildly paranoiac? (Well, it does seem that he did realize quite quickly that the post about Scratch's identity was a mistake, since he deleted it. Perhaps somebody he trusted managed to persuade him.)

[_TrashcanMan79]

But Pahoran claims to know who Scrach is, whilst DCP is flailing around in the dark.

Pahoran is as much in the dark as DCP.

[_sock puppet]

Think of all the many times DCP has here posted that what others, particularly Dr Scratch, have posted here are insignificant and meaningless because, DCP asserts, there is a little audience here, an 'echo chamber' of a few. He and his have even posted since he was sacked at MI by Bradford that MDB had nothing to do with that, just as they have claimed that MsJack's classic thread from the spring of 2011 had nothing to do with Schryver not being published by MI.

If he were to file a lawsuit, DCP and his would have to do an about face. DCP would have to prove the real influence of MDB, and in particular the influence of those posters he singles out to sue, and how that influenced and caused Bradford/MI to sack DCP. DCP would have to prove that his life has been damaged in some tangible, measurable way--over the top of his many online protestations to the contrary over the years.

DCP's failure to be discrete, to refrain from making statements that Dr Scratch and MDB generally are meaningless would come back to haunt DCP when cross examined.

A defense attorney would not even need to take DCP's deposition, but merely gather up a dozen or so of DCP's own posts from the internet to have all the fodder necessary to discredit His Pompousness on the witness stand, on the issue of damages.

The more I see of the FARMS old guard, the more I am reminded of the Gang that Couldn't Shoot Straight.

[_3sheets2thewind]

Didn't DCP defame chino blanco?
And defame the person on the easy coast?

[_lulu]

Didn't DCP defame chino blanco?
And defame the person on the easy coast?

Elements of defamation:
1. A negative false statement concerning another;
2. The unprivileged publication of the statement to a third party (that is, somebody other than the person defamed by the statement);
3. If the defamatory matter is of public concern, fault amounting at least to negligence on the part of the publisher; and
4. Damage to the plaintiff.