Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

LinuxWorld Editorial Machinations

Hemos posted more than 9 years ago | from the as-the-worm-turns dept.

Media 498

James Turner writes "The editors of LinuxWorld Magazine have been fighting a quiet war with the publishers (Sys-Con Media) for half a year, trying to get hack-journalist Maureen O'Gara purged from their site. Well, with O'Gara's recent vile attack on Pamela Jones (which I won't give any more free publicity by linking to), enough is finally enough. In my latest blog, I've basically told Sys-Con that it's either her or me. I suspect, given the amount of page views O'Gara's tripe brings to the Sys-Con sites, that they'll choose her." James isn't the only one either.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Shame (4, Insightful)

gotpaint32 (728082) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476337)

Although journalism should be an unbiased thing, journalists are still part of a buisness whose incentive it is to make profit. Supply and demand. So do we blame the sensationalist writer, or the thousands of sheep reading the articles and demanding more. How are such articles from O'Gara tolerated in a trade mag like this. You would think the linux community would be more educated and less susceptible to this type of journalism, then again noting the anonymous cowards on slashdot, i take that back...

Re:Shame (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476365)

Maybe it is because she is a very hot cunt, while the whining "article"-submitter is a ugly fagot?

Re:Shame (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476415)

You haven't seen Maureen O'Gara have you...

Re:Shame (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476412)

You blaim the writer! Its obvious that a professional journalist should try to keep standards and ethics rather than writing bad articles! If this publication is intended to be a tabloid, catering for the lowest common denominator then fine, freedom of speech, but just don't expect to be able to command such good advertiser revenue, industry respect, or even your own good journalists!

Re:Shame (1)

walt-sjc (145127) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476464)

Are you saying that readers of LinuxWorld are demanding more trash articles from O'Gara? Funny, I though most Linux people think of her as a paid figurehead of MS / SCO / etc. and that her articles are bogus...

What I find MORE interesting is that the editors for LinuxWorld are going along with her crap. This anti-linux anti-OSS bias in a Linux magazine is mind-boggling. What are they thinking? Maybe a letter campaign to the advertizers would be effective.

Re:Shame (5, Interesting)

hal9000(jr) (316943) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476621)

RTFA. The editors are aparently trying to get rid of O'Gara. The problem is that their management seems to make the final decision, which is too bad.

You can help by sending emails to the publisher asking for her removal and drop your subscription and don't visit the site if they don't. Remember, if the publisher is keeping her around because she is driving dollars, you and the linux community can fire back by walking away with those dollars.

y-y-y-y (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476339)

Did someone say cat fight?

FP? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476340)

FP. Had to do it. No, i didn't RTFA.

OMG (1)

the Howard Dean Camp (748694) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476341)

These people are all losers.

Yeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaargh!

Link to the offending article... (1, Informative)

Chicane-UK (455253) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476360)

http://linuxbusinessnews.sys-con.com/read/83267.ht m [sys-con.com]

I don't wish to publicise this to be honest, but people should read this and see just kind of trash is being referred to in the article.

I don't see how this could even be considered journalism to be quite honest - and i'm NOT just talking about Slashdot! ;)

got text? (1)

Mr. Underbridge (666784) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476395)

I don't wish to publicise this to be honest, but people should read this and see just kind of trash is being referred to in the article.

Got fulltext? Link is nuked, and I'd rather not give them my ad revenue.

Re:got text? (2, Insightful)

dominux (731134) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476425)

or even the redacted text, ******* out the home address for a start.

Re:Link to the offending article... (4, Insightful)

RichMan (8097) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476411)

You do realize that the more people who view the offending article the more they are likely to publish stuff like this again.

They get paid by the viewer. The more viewers the better. This is why a lot of web news is no better than tabloid journalism, it brings in the page views.

Better that we all go cold turky on all sys-con links for a week or two.

Re:Link to the offending article... (1)

battlemarch (570731) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476444)

LOL,

Looks like the link is already slashdotted.

one way to counter-act that... (1)

aendeuryu (844048) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476605)

Find the website's advertisers and let them know that you are disappointed that they have chosen to sponsor the website's content, and that you won't be buying any of their products. Done politely, with a CC to the website operators, and often enough, you might get the reaction you want.

There's a corollary to that as well. If you want to help encourage content, and there's a website that publishes content you like, buy from the website's sponsors, and let them know why you're buying from them.

You just have to vote with your dollars and let them know that's what you're doing. Obviously, you could end up with some conflicts in that regard (Microsoft advertising on Slashdot, for instance), or you might decide that an advertiser's politics doesn't necessarily warrant your purchasing their products if their competitors have superior stuff. That said, if I were running a business, and paying money on advertising, and I found out that the reputation of the company I'm advertising with is benefitting or soiling my own, it'll make me re-evaluate my relationship with that company, either by sending them more money if it makes me look good, or cutting them off if it makes me look bad.

Large corps do this all the time. Why do you think Bill Maher's show got cancelled? No reason it can't work on the smaller scale.

one other thing... (1)

aendeuryu (844048) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476722)

It's worth noting that when I finally got the article, the advertisers for that story that popped up were Sybase [sybase.com] , MedAbiliti [mailto] , Yahoo hotjobs, and (drum roll...) Microsoft, who actually had TWO ads for Windows Server System.

Feel free to direct rage appropriately. I left out Microsoft because they probably don't care what we think anyway, and also yahoo because for the life of me I couldn't get their customer service contact info...

aw shit... (2, Insightful)

aendeuryu (844048) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476752)

Sorry, I mistook the MedAbiliti portion as an ad. See? One reason to read articles in full, even if they enrage you...

Sorry again...

Re:one way to counter-act that... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476786)

The advertisers on the page are:

www.revelation.com (advertising openinsight)
contact: info@revelation.com

oracle (get your free oracle database dev kit)(

Microsoft (Windows Server System)

Parasoft (parasoft automated unit testing and best practices)
contact: info@parasoft.com

Perhaps a note to each of these containing the url of the offending storry and asking if they want to be associated with the story.

Re:Link to the offending article... (1)

oirtemed (849229) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476638)

so the advertisers will pay through the roof for impressions that have no conversion because we refuse to do business with them. Eventually they pull their ads.

as much text as I could get... (5, Informative)

aendeuryu (844048) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476453)

A few weeks ago I went looking for the elusive harridan who supposedly writes the Groklaw blog about the SCO v IBM suit.

The now-famous opinion-shaping open source leader Pamela Jones, aka "PJ," doesn't give conventional face-to-face interviews. Never has, near as anyone knows. All communication is virtual. Only one person in the world has ever claimed to have met her - in the pressroom at LinuxWorld in Boston complete with a Pamela Jones badge - and described her as a fortyish reddish-blonde who giggled a lot.

304 North Central Avenue, Hardsdale, NY[Photo: May 7, 2005 12:37 PM - 304 North Central Avenue, Hartsdale, New York. The last known address of Pamela Jones, as the superintendent of the building calls it, Ms. Pam Jones.]

Oh yeah? Wonder what cold crème she uses.

Pamela Jones is a 61-year-old Jehovah's Witness who lives in a shabby genteel garden apartment in desperate need of an interior decorator on a heavily trafficked commercial road at 304 North Central Avenue in Hartsdale, New York. Hartsdale is in Westchester and Westchester is IBM territory.

See, even though Groklaw treats cell phones like they were Kleenex and changes its unpublished numbers regularly, one number it left with a journalist led to this flat and - wouldn't you know it but - some calls from there had been placed to the courts in Utah and to the Canopy Group so obviously this just isn't any Pamela Jones.

Pamela has lived in apartment 1A for 10 years at least, according to the super, who says he's watched people move in, have children, and the children marry and move away.

Now, this isn't your usual anonymous New York apartment. It's practically a self-contained village where the super goes for the old ladies' groceries when there's snow on the ground and people know each other's business.

[Photo: May 7, 2005 12:41 PM - 304 North Central Avenue, Hartsdale, New York. The last known address of Pamela Jones.]

But the super didn't know much about Pamela except that she had a computer, worked at home (maybe sometimes) for a lawyer, was "paranoid" - his word - and "sensitive to smells."

He remembered how he was cleaning paintbrushes one day and she came running down the stairs screaming "Fire."

She was also missing and had been for weeks.

Nobody there knew where she was.

She had up and disappeared one day, and the super was worried about her. He said her son had dropped by and he didn't know where she was, and that some strange man that "nobody knew," as the super described him, had tried to get into her apartment while she was gone - the Medeco lock she had had installed on her door - something nobody else in the complex seemed to feel a need for - was more expensive than the door. But, as it happened, the super said, she had just sent in her rent in an envelope postmarked Connecticut.

Like an episode out of "Where in the World is Carmen San Diego," the trail led to 10 Bittersweet Trail in Norwalk, Connecticut, 24 miles away. Sure enough, parked in the driveway was Pamela's car, just as the super had described it, a dark gray '90s Japanese number with a bunch of Jehovah Witness pamphlets tossed on the backseat.

The woman at the house, Barbara Jones Sharnik, told a disjointed story. She didn't know Pamela, Pamela hated her, Pamela wasn't there, Pamela left her car there because it got bumped, Pamela left her car there because she left town, and so on.

Afterwards Barbara called the cops, and then the cops called the number we left with her and the cops said that she was Pamela's mother and that Pamela was on the run and had shacked up with her mother because she had gotten "threatening mail" weeks before and that she had just gotten spooked again because "people were getting hurt around [my] stories" and had lighted out for Canada.

[Photo: May 7, 2005 2:24 PM - 10 Bittersweet Trail in Norwalk, Connecticut. Mom's house, where PJ's car was last seen on this driveway.]

Odd, the subject of my stories - or any stories - never came up during our brief interview. I was just looking for Pamela.

That left Pamela's son, Nicolas Richards, who, as it happens, had been in the software business in Manhattan until - why, my goodness - things seem to have come a cropper right around the time Groklaw came into existence.

Nick and his ma were apparently involved together in Medabiliti Inc, an ISV, because one Pamela Jones with a Westchester phone number (914 761-7423) and a Medabiliti e-mail (pjones@medabiliti.com) was down as the director of public affairs on a Medabiliti press release dated April 14, 2003.

Nick, as it happens, has written under his own byline on a Groklaw sister site, GrokDoc, giving advice on technical writing. Nick and his wife Andrea live in fancier digs than his ma on East 76th Street off First Avenue, a neighborhood where apartments go for a couple of million bucks.

Now, according to one of Pamela's neighbors and fellow Jehovah's Witness, being a Jehovah's Witness is pretty much a full-time job in and of itself. Witnesses also don't usually get involved in worldly affairs.

So, is this story-spooked 61-year-old Jehovah's Witness with religious tracts in her backseat also the 90-hour-a-week writer of the voluminous PJ diatribes or is she a victim of identity theft?

TO BE CONTINUED...

Fantastic! (3, Insightful)

Mr. Underbridge (666784) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476511)

First, thanks for doing that, I assume you showered afterward.

Second, this actually a very good thing. Previously, whenever people would claim she wasn't professional, it sounded mildly of whining and an ad hominem attack intended to discredit the reporter. Even though the claims were probably true.

Now, one need only point to this article, which is absolute filth, and clearly betrays something substantially beyond bias.

Re:Fantastic! (1)

nenolod (546272) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476660)

Erm, no. The claims were not true. You can tell by the way that it was written.

Re:as much text as I could get... (2)

wvitXpert (769356) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476529)

Dear god that's awfull writing. You couldn't get a C in 9th grade english with that.

Re:as much text as I could get... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476553)

Only one person in the world has ever claimed to have met her - in the pressroom at LinuxWorld in Boston complete with a Pamela Jones badge

Strange. If only one person in the world has ever met her, I would have put good money on it being her mother.

Re:as much text as I could get... (1)

coolGuyZak (844482) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476700)

I wonder if PJ is even going to dignify it with a response. (Or has she already?)

Re:Link to the offending article... (5, Insightful)

Kiaser Zohsay (20134) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476504)

Don'y give them any unneccessary page hits.

Use the Google cache [64.233.161.104] of the article instead.

The article's sources (2, Insightful)

Calibax (151875) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476521)

It seems likely that Maureen O'Gara (or someone) employed a private detective to investigate Pamela Jones. The article shows that quite a lot of information was obtained from the super of PJ's apartment building.

Perhaps someone should have a gentle word with this individual not to be quite so open when discussing the affairs of the tenants. After all, a portion of their rent money is used to employ him, and I'm reasonably certain that no part of his job description includes making private details about his (indirect) employers available to anyone who just happens to turn up and asks him politely. However, if he was paid for his information, he really should be terminated.

From MOG's description of PJ's apartment, I'm wondering if the super even let someone look around.

Re:The article's sources (3, Interesting)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476549)

> It seems likely that Maureen O'Gara (or someone)
> employed a private detective to investigate
> Pamela Jones.

It seems much more likely that O'Gara made the whole thing up. There is no reason to believe that a single word of it is true.

Similar case for Clear Channel Radio (4, Interesting)

rebill (87977) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476595)

WHAS Radio (and Clear Channel Entertainment) fired [64.233.161.104] John Ziegler a few years ago because of similar personal attacks against a fellow "personality".

Up until that point, his talk-show was the highest rated program in the market, and he was getting a pass on a lot of his attitute because he did bring in the advertising money.

But he also went too far, and ultimately got punished for it.

So, here's how we help get rid of Ms. O'Gara:

Check the local bookstores and supermarket magazine racks. For any company that carries this magazine - write them a letter of COMPLAIN about Ms. O'Gara.

misuse of the word hack (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476369)

Why is it that common people always use the word hack in a negative sense? If you mean to say that she lacks ability, why not just say inept, unprofessional, clueless or some similar word?

Re:misuse of the word hack (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476381)

It makes it a lot easier to insult the person while coughing. *COUGH* HACK *COUGH*

Re:misuse of the word hack (4, Insightful)

91degrees (207121) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476448)

Why is it that common people always use the word hack in a negative sense? If you mean to say that she lacks ability, why not just say inept, unprofessional, clueless or some similar word?

It's been a popular term amongst journalists for quite a while now to refer to a talentless writer.

Re:misuse of the word hack (5, Informative)

Bill Dimm (463823) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476748)

Why is it that common people always use the word hack in a negative sense?
From a dictionary [reference.com] :
hack writer - n : a mediocre and disdained writer

Those silly "common people"...

Re:misuse of the word hack (1)

mabinogi (74033) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476813)

The word 'Hack [wikipedia.org] ' has long been used to mean either someone who is payed to write other peoples opinions, or alternatively someone who is lacking in skill.
This usage long predates computers, and is certainly the correct word in this context.

Blog?? (0, Flamebait)

DogDude (805747) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476388)

You're "telling" your employers that you're quitting via a blog? And you're a "senior editor"? Wow. When my employees are ready to leave, they tell me face to face, as opposed to writing it on some virtual diary that nobody reads. Doesn't seem to be a very effective way of communicating your point... something you should know if you're a "senior editor". If they *do* read your blog and take you seriously, I hope for your sake that you have another job lined up.

I thinknhe got it just right (2, Funny)

CdBee (742846) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476400)

Its a techy site. I bet the owners spend more time reading slashdot than reading their mail.

Re:Blog?? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476421)

He's not telling the employers, he's telling the readers. That way, when Sys-Con management fires him and the new editor gives us a line of BS about how happy he was here, but has left for bigger and better things, we will know the truth.

Re:Blog?? (5, Insightful)

ledow (319597) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476423)

Well, the fact that he says that the LinuxWorld staff have been calling for O'Gara to go for a while suggests that they already know his objections and, I assume, he has told them this in person by now.

I think he's just trying to protect his professional reputation by stating, openly and publically, that he is challenging LinuxWorld on this issue. That's quite brave, but if they do "call his bluff" and let him go, his reputation will be intact... he stated an ultimatum in public, they refused. Much better than giving the ultimatum in private, being pushed out and then loads of rubbish being wrote about why he'd left.

Spoiled little kids (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476440)

This is like a bunch of spoiled fucking kids on the playground.

I'm taking my ball and going home.

Jesus Christ, you are an adult (the editor). If you don't like your job find another but don't act like some spoiled little bitch.

Hi, Maureen (2, Funny)

JPelorat (5320) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476479)

Eat any good marine iguanas today?

Re:Hi, Maureen (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476544)

What are you talking about?

Do you really think whatever her name is would spend her days here posting as an AC on a random comment to try and make the point that the blog guy is acting like a fucking 8 year old who didn't get his way?

Man, get some thicker tinfoil for your hat.

Don't cry, Maureen (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476669)

Wow, struck a nerve there, I see.

There's no tinfoil, you dumb cocksucker. This isn't about a conspiracy. At least use the right aphorism.

Re:Don't cry, Maureen (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476744)

You hurt my feelings with your accusations.

Either you go or I go.

Taco, IP ban this AC or I'm not goign to post anymore.

See the paralell?

Re:Blog?? (3, Insightful)

Rahga (13479) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476446)

It's obvious that this is well beyond the phase where talking to whatever holding company that controls the publication would have an effect. Rather, this is just a step below slander... It's a strong word, and this is the same effect, just that in this case there is more than enough evidence against the party that they are really trying to get thrown out, and the holding company probably saw no reason to take action (ethics? HA!) until there was the possibilty that advertising clients would take notice to bad stuff going on over there.

Re:Blog?? (3, Insightful)

cnelzie (451984) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476472)

Perhaps as a boss, you would understand that by submitting a story to Slashdot, this statement becomes a very public and potentially very embarrassing situation for the publisher involved.

This bold move on the part of the Senior Editor in question makes his ultimatum quite clear to his employer and at the same time makes his ultimatum something clearly in the public space. By doing so, we will very clearly know why he or the alleggedly offensive reporter (I have never read any of her work.) changes employment status.

Re:Blog?? (2, Interesting)

radish (98371) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476505)

I'm sure they already know all about his issues with them. This is making it public, putthing THEM on the spot for their behaviour. As he says, he's making it clear to the community at large that he doesn't want to be associated with them/her. How better to do that than in public?

Re:Blog?? (1, Interesting)

goldspider (445116) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476516)

I concur.

If I were the hiring type, I'd certainly be less inclined to hire somebody that drags personal internal squabbles into a public cat fight.

While O'Gara's 'article' was very wanting of professionalism, this public griping isn't much better.

Re:Blog?? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476688)

If I were the hiring type, I'd certainly be less inclined to hire somebody that drags personal internal squabbles into a public cat fight.

That depends... O'Gara's continued presence could be seen to impugn his personal integrity, and some employers might like people who stand up to protect themselves.

Re:Blog?? (3, Insightful)

liquidpele (663430) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476611)

He's not quitting, he's trying to get her fired so he doesn't have to.
To do that, he needs attention and support, via his blog in this case. Take a chill pill

Re:Blog?? (4, Insightful)

czei (121516) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476646)

To be "employed" would require payment, and no LinuxWorld editor, senior or otherwise receives any money. That's right, they work for free. There is no office.

The big problem with the Maureen O'Gara articles is while she has no affiliation with LinuxWorld, all of the Sys-Con Linux subject articles from other publications show up on the LinuxWorld website, giving readers the impression she writes for LinuxWorld. Every time O'Gara writes an article, not only do the Linuxworld editors get all upset that her crap is showing up on their website, they receive a boatload of nasty email that assume they ok'd it!

Why don't the editors just do something about it? Well, in the new world of "journalism", Sys-con central decides what goes on the websites, and the magazine editors only have a say over what goes in the print version.

Technical magazines never used to pay much for articles-- when I was writing articles $750 was average, but I'd spend weeks working on it. Now there's so many people still out of work they'll work for free just to keep a foot in the tech. industry somehow.

Re:Blog?? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476750)

"When my employees are ready to leave, they tell me face to face, as opposed to writing it on some virtual diary that nobody reads"

Er, well, considering that the LinuxWorld editorial staff is unpaid and all work independently, with no "Sys-Con" offices, it's quite difficult to actually resign face-to-face, as you suggest.

You expect James to fly to New Jersey just to tell the publisher this?

Re:Blog?? (1)

Eggplant62 (120514) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476801)

And you know he didn't say something face-to-face to his employer how exactly?

I love self-righteous assholes, they always know everything about things they've never been witness to.

Re:Blog?? (2, Insightful)

dubl-u (51156) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476814)

You're "telling" your employers that you're quitting via a blog? And you're a "senior editor"? Wow. When my employees are ready to leave, they tell me face to face, as opposed to writing it on some virtual diary that nobody reads.

First, he's not telling them he's quitting. It's an ultimatum: Do X or I quit.

Second, given the phenomenon of the Slashdot Effect, I'm thinking that somebody has now read it.

Third, this is known as an open letter [wikipedia.org] and is a common technique when there's a public aspect to a private issue.

A little background? (0, Redundant)

goldspider (445116) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476389)

Well, with O'Gara's recent vile attack on Pamela Jones (which I won't give any more free publicity by linking to)

I haven't been following this particular soap opera. Since the submitter is unwilling to share O'Gara's article with us, could somebody else post a link?

I'd like to read both sides of the story and decide for myself what/who is right or wrong, thank you very much.

Re:A little background? (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476525)

Yes. It strikes me as odd that someone would criticise another as a bad journalist, and then offer no evidence to back up his claim. Makes it seem like more of a petty disagreement than an actual criticism of journalistic integrity or ability.

Re:A little background? (1)

dyfet (154716) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476551)

I tend to agree that the way this article was posted with the expectation of "insider knowledge", or the idea that all the facts are already presumed to be "well known". That makes it impossible for someone unaware of the past history or prerequisite knowledge to understand why this is significent. I wish the submitter had done a better job in this regard or that somebody had put together a "faq" which could be referenced. But I completely agree with his reason for not putting a link to that site.

probably a good idea.... (2, Interesting)

zogger (617870) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476392)

...to have another job lined up first before this sort of "line in the sand" comment to your employer. Of course this being the net, you and your other disgruntled editors can just start your own zine pretty easily.

Some background (2, Informative)

Sanity (1431) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476413)

Can be found in this [corante.com] article.

DictionarySearch 0.6.3 and Maureen (2, Funny)

JPelorat (5320) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476417)

Apparently the Dictionary Search extension for Firefox, when you do a context menu search on the word 'hack', gives you this page:

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=maureen%2 0o'gara [reference.com]

Whoops, it's GoogleBar search, not the other one (1)

JPelorat (5320) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476445)

bah

Re:DictionarySearch 0.6.3 and Maureen (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476452)

No entry found for maureen o'gara.

Did you mean marine iguana?


Brilliant! I'll use that from now on to refer to Maureen O'gara...

Re:DictionarySearch 0.6.3 and Maureen (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476648)

No entry found for maureen o'gara.
Did you mean marine iguana?

No, but I can see how you could make that mistake.

LinuxWorld Magazine (2, Insightful)

Craig Maloney (1104) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476419)

I've picked up and flipped through LinuxWorld magazine on several occasions. On all occasions I put it back right where I found it. LinuxWorld Magazine looks like yet-another journal trying to capitalize on the Linux hype. With a writer like Maureen O'Gara still on the payroll, their fragile credibility crumbles. James, if there's anywhere that will have you, run with a quickness to it.

Re:LinuxWorld Magazine (2, Informative)

czei (121516) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476684)

Point One: Maureen O'Gara doesn't write for LinuxWorld, but another Sys-Con publication. People just assume because she writes on Linux topics and works for Sys-Con, that she writes for LinuxWorld, which isn't the case.

Point Two: No one on the LinuxWorld editorial staff is paid, its all volunteer because they love Linux.

Doesn't LinuxWorld have a mediocre track record? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476442)

My memory may be failing me, but if I recall correctly, wasn't there an issue about LinuxWorld displaying advertisements for Microsoft products, or more specifically the infamous Microsoft Get the Facts [microsoft.com] campaign, promoting Windows Server System 2003 as a better alternative to the leader of the Linux enterprise distributions, Red Hat Enterprise Linux? (Whether or not this is true is not the issue, and is another discussion for another thread.) As I say, I am not sure if I recall the event correctly.

Re:Doesn't LinuxWorld have a mediocre track record (1)

cHiphead (17854) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476482)

Both Microsoft and EV1 Servers (the guys that paid SCO and tried to backtrack after the user forums exploded) are advertised on the front page. LinuxWorld has always been the premier sellout. Its nice to see someone finally having a ethical epiphany, but its just a BIT late. Hopefully none of the editors whom support MS advetising will get picked up by Linux Journal.

Cheers.

Re:Doesn't LinuxWorld have a mediocre track record (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476592)

Thanks for the reply, I was somewhat unsure about this as it seemed rather dodgy that a site called LinuxWorld would display Microsoft advertisements. Not really surprising is it, considering that they have sellout "journalists" such as Maureen O'Gara on their team. Who next, Laura DiDio? They'll be as subtle as the Daily Mirror supporting Labour.

Why is this story... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476451)

...on the front page of Slashdot?

Re:Why is this story... (1)

baomike (143457) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476718)

If you don't know just go back to sleep. We'll call you in 10 years.

O'Gara Needs to Go (5, Interesting)

jcm (4767) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476454)

I am amazed that Sys-Con would continue to allow Maureen O'Gara to write. They must be desperate for the controversy that her articles cause, because I really see no value in them after reading a couple of them this morning. The worst article [sys-con.com] , and the one in question, tries to paint quite the negative picture of Pamela Jones' sanity and lifestyle. Instead it leaves me questioning O'Gara's ethics and sanity. Quite the smear campaign on the part of O'Gara.

So, Pamela Jones could perhaps be a 61-year old Jehovah's Witness who lives in a not so nice apartment. What does that have to do with anything? O'Gara finishes the article hinting that perhaps it is all stolen identity, though she didn't present a news story that would lead you to that conclusion.

I spent the first 23 years of my life as a Jehovah's Witness. I do not believe I am scarred in anyway because of it. If anything, I think I have a lot more respect for my fellow human beings and in general have a deep desire to be a good person. Sure the methodology of learning about the religion is a bit like brainwashing, but they have their religious beliefs like most religions. They just are more strict about the belief and the punishment if one does constantly violates them. If you are going to have faith, I think most religious people would appreciate the JW's strictness.

Did the religion make me paranoid? No. Does it take a lot of your time? Yes, but if you are going to devote your life to being religious then it probably should take a lot of time. Personally I appreciated science too much to put so much faith in religion. I still believe that if any religion has it right though, it is probably the JW's. They read the bible and do what it says. They refuse to pick up arms against another human, they punish sinners through disfellowshipping (total cut off until they have repented of their sins), and they make worship the primary thing in their life not allowing anything else to come first. There are obviously more devoted JW's than others, but that is true of any religion.

So, after reading the crap that passes for journalism from O'Gara, I personally can't wait to see her unemployed. Perhaps she can go get a job at the National Inquirer.

Holy Cow!!! (-1, Flamebait)

JRHelgeson (576325) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476455)

You mean, O'Gara is a liberal journalist? GHASP!! WTF do you think the entire country is getting bent out of shape regarding journalists. O'Gara is just one of thousands of loony reporters that choose to report their opinion rather than fact.

The New York times had 38 cover stories on abu ghrab prison scandal, yet an illegal immigrant murders a mother of three and her three children by BURNING them to death and nobody bats an eyelash. When asked, the NYT says they don't want to "Expose the public to such horrors."

Give me a break!

Re:Holy Cow!!! (1)

Cyberax (705495) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476545)

Maybe O'Gara should write a nice article about connection of one of Slashdot reader's signature (the one that says something about "set a man on fire") and this brutal murder?

Re:Holy Cow!!! (3, Insightful)

radish (98371) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476576)

WTF has O'Gara being a money grabbing slimeball got to do with her being "liberal" or otherwise? What has any of this got to do with Abu Gharab? Or your apparent xenophobia? This is about journalistic ethics and personal decency. She is not being criticized for reporting her opinion, she's being criticized for publishing a personal attack complete with personal details and even a home address!

Newspapers would be very boring indeed if all they contained were hard facts. Some informed opinion is what turns a dry list of times & events into something worth reading, and worth thinking about.

Re:Holy Cow!!! (4, Insightful)

dukerobillard (582741) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476618)

Times had 38 cover stories on abu ghrab prison scandal, yet an illegal immigrant murders a mother of three and her three children by BURNING them to death and nobody bats an eyelash.

See, in a democracy (or even in a republic), when the government violates the law, the people need to know so they can decide whether it's time to change governments. When an individual criminal violates the law...well, it's still news, but it doesn't have the same level of import and urgency.

Re:Holy Cow!!! (4, Insightful)

aziraphale (96251) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476674)

Morally repugnant acts undertaken in front of the world by soldiers who are supposed to be carrying out the democratic will of the American people, in breach of international law - and the question of how and when they will be held account for those actions - seem like they add up to a pretty big news story to me. Bigger than the fact that there are individual evil people in the world who individually do evil things and they sometimes get caught and punished for doing so. Reporting on specific incidents of domestic crime should not generally be the stuff of frontpage NYT news, because it isn't world-changing.

The fact that, to you, the immigration status of a murderer (or an accused murderer - I'm not familiar with the case, so have no idea if a verdict has been handed down) seems to be of greater import than their mental state, or possibly even guilt, leads me to suspect that you believe that this appalling individual act should have been reported more widely to draw attention to what you maybe perceive as a wider problem with illegal immigrants. Sadly, that simply suggests you have a fundamental problem figuring out what facts are relevant, and makes me glad that it's not you in charge of editorial policy on a major international newspaper.

James Turner rocks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476463)

Because of what I've heard about OGara I'm boycoting Linux World in favour of other Linux magazines. If O'Gara leaves and Linux World makes a turn for better, I promise they'll get at least one more subscriber.

Thanks James! We really need to draw the line somewhere and have values that we're not willing to let go.

Maureen O'Gara: This Is YOUR Life... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476484)

I have a feeling we're about to learn every detail of Maureen O'Gara's personal life. Including the results of her latest gynecological exam. With photos. No, make that live video.

Brilliant, Maureen. (Not.)

Re:Maureen O'Gara: This Is YOUR Life... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476560)

is she going to be the newest "tubgirl"?

Sys-Con isn't slashdotted. (3, Informative)

bmo (77928) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476495)

It's been down since somewhere around 2am.

--
BMO

Text of Offending Article (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476503)

Exclusive: Who Is 'PJ' Pamela Jones of Groklaw.Net?
Pamela Is A 61-Year-Old Jehovah's Witness Who Lives In A Shabby Genteel Garden Apartment In Hartsdale, New York

By: Maureen O'Gara
May 7, 2005 09:15 PM

A few weeks ago I went looking for the elusive harridan who supposedly writes the Groklaw blog about the SCO v IBM suit.

The now-famous opinion-shaping open source leader Pamela Jones, aka "PJ," doesn't give conventional face-to-face interviews. Never has, near as anyone knows. All communication is virtual. Only one person in the world has ever claimed to have met her - in the pressroom at LinuxWorld in Boston complete with a Pamela Jones badge - and described her as a fortyish reddish-blonde who giggled a lot.

304 North Central Avenue, Hardsdale, NY[Photo: May 7, 2005 12:37 PM - 304 North Central Avenue, Hartsdale, New York. The last known address of Pamela Jones, as the superintendent of the building calls it, Ms. Pam Jones.]

Oh yeah? Wonder what cold crème she uses.

Pamela Jones is a 61-year-old Jehovah's Witness who lives in a shabby genteel garden apartment in desperate need of an interior decorator on a heavily trafficked commercial road at 304 North Central Avenue in Hartsdale, New York. Hartsdale is in Westchester and Westchester is IBM territory.

See, even though Groklaw treats cell phones like they were Kleenex and changes its unpublished numbers regularly, one number it left with a journalist led to this flat and - wouldn't you know it but - some calls from there had been placed to the courts in Utah and to the Canopy Group so obviously this just isn't any Pamela Jones.

Pamela has lived in apartment 1A for 10 years at least, according to the super, who says he's watched people move in, have children, and the children marry and move away.

Now, this isn't your usual anonymous New York apartment. It's practically a self-contained village where the super goes for the old ladies' groceries when there's snow on the ground and people know each other's business.

[Photo: May 7, 2005 12:41 PM - 304 North Central Avenue, Hartsdale, New York. The last known address of Pamela Jones.]

But the super didn't know much about Pamela except that she had a computer, worked at home (maybe sometimes) for a lawyer, was "paranoid" - his word - and "sensitive to smells."

He remembered how he was cleaning paintbrushes one day and she came running down the stairs screaming "Fire."

She was also missing and had been for weeks.

Nobody there knew where she was.

She had up and disappeared one day, and the super was worried about her. He said her son had dropped by and he didn't know where she was, and that some strange man that "nobody knew," as the super described him, had tried to get into her apartment while she was gone - the Medeco lock she had had installed on her door - something nobody else in the complex seemed to feel a need for - was more expensive than the door. But, as it happened, the super said, she had just sent in her rent in an envelope postmarked Connecticut.

Like an episode out of "Where in the World is Carmen San Diego," the trail led to 10 Bittersweet Trail in Norwalk, Connecticut, 24 miles away. Sure enough, parked in the driveway was Pamela's car, just as the super had described it, a dark gray '90s Japanese number with a bunch of Jehovah Witness pamphlets tossed on the backseat.

The woman at the house, Barbara Jones Sharnik, told a disjointed story. She didn't know Pamela, Pamela hated her, Pamela wasn't there, Pamela left her car there because it got bumped, Pamela left her car there because she left town, and so on.

Afterwards Barbara called the cops, and then the cops called the number we left with her and the cops said that she was Pamela's mother and that Pamela was on the run and had shacked up with her mother because she had gotten "threatening mail" weeks before and that she had just gotten spooked again because "people were getting hurt around [my] stories" and had lighted out for Canada.

[Photo: May 7, 2005 2:24 PM - 10 Bittersweet Trail in Norwalk, Connecticut. Mom's house, where PJ's car was last seen on this driveway.]

Odd, the subject of my stories - or any stories - never came up during our brief interview. I was just looking for Pamela.

That left Pamela's son, Nicolas Richards, who, as it happens, had been in the software business in Manhattan until - why, my goodness - things seem to have come a cropper right around the time Groklaw came into existence.

Nick and his ma were apparently involved together in Medabiliti Inc, an ISV, because one Pamela Jones with a Westchester phone number (914 761-7423) and a Medabiliti e-mail (pjones@medabiliti.com) was down as the director of public affairs on a Medabiliti press release dated April 14, 2003.

Nick, as it happens, has written under his own byline on a Groklaw sister site, GrokDoc, giving advice on technical writing. Nick and his wife Andrea live in fancier digs than his ma on East 76th Street off First Avenue, a neighborhood where apartments go for a couple of million bucks.

Now, according to one of Pamela's neighbors and fellow Jehovah's Witness, being a Jehovah's Witness is pretty much a full-time job in and of itself. Witnesses also don't usually get involved in worldly affairs.

So, is this story-spooked 61-year-old Jehovah's Witness with religious tracts in her backseat also the 90-hour-a-week writer of the voluminous PJ diatribes or is she a victim of identity theft?

TO BE CONTINUED...

Great... next please... (-1, Troll)

Wannabe Code Monkey (638617) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476514)

I don't know who you are, I don't know who Maureen O'Gara is, I've never heard of Sys-Con Media. And I've never cracked open the pages of LinuxWorld. And I certainly don't give a crap about your recent blog entry/whining [linuxworld.com] .

And what if I wanted to read what this horrible Maureen O'Gara has to say... oh can't do that because "I won't give any more free publicity by linking to [it]". Great, thanks, I'm happy for you that slashdot is your personal pulpit.

Am I the only one that finds it incredibly aggravating when someone submits a slashdot article that just points to their own blog because of an entry they just wrote? If you have something interesting to say then people will find it and link to it themselves. It just seems to pathetic to do it yourself.

\firsnt (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476515)

have left in The curtains @flew people alReady; I'm [samag.com] in the

I love the smell of blog in the morning (1)

WormholeFiend (674934) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476536)

smells like... a flamewar

Much better coverage of this story... (-1, Offtopic)

selectspec (74651) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476543)

I read a much better article [whocares.com] on this story in WhoCares Magazine.

Yeah Right (-1, Troll)

rudy_wayne (414635) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476548)

O'Gara is a kook and totally unprofessional, and I can't understand why a magazine called "Linux World" would pay someone who is so clearly and vehemently anti-Linux. But, critisism of her coming from some dirty hippy [blackbear.com] doesn't exactly carry a lot of weight.

Lowest tabloid trash.. (4, Insightful)

spludge (99050) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476562)

So I just read the article (thanks previous poster for the link). I can't believe that Sys-Con would publish this trash. What sort of lowlife reporter is O'Gara, that she would stoop to ripping up someone like that in an article? There isn't a single thing about linux in there, it's all about Pamela Jones' personal living arrangements (with her home address!) and her religious leanings. There is no story there at all.

I think if I read this article on the site without looking at the other articles I might have though I was reading some of the lowest form of tabloid.

Thanks....now I know what not to read!! (1)

Boogiesbunny (881293) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476601)

Mindless self promotion of self...My book/magazine collection of fireplace ready burnables are ready for the toss.

Likely A Complete Fabrication (5, Insightful)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476607)

Some people here appear to be assuming that there is some truth in the O'Gara article. It seems much more likely that everything in it originated in her imagination.

It's barely possible that she investigated a Pamela Jones: the wrong one.

Full text of offending article (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476616)

From the Google cache of the original page:http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:t5F0lsD5UW sJ:jdj.sys-con.com/read/83267.htm+read/83267.htm&h l=en&lr=&client=firefox&strip=1

Exclusive: Who Is 'PJ' Pamela Jones of Groklaw.Net?
Pamela Is A 61-Year-Old Jehovah's Witness Who Lives In A Shabby Genteel Garden Apartment In Hartsdale, New York
By: Maureen O'Gara
May 7, 2005 09:15 PM

A few weeks ago I went looking for the elusive harridan who supposedly writes the Groklaw blog about the SCO v IBM suit.

The now-famous opinion-shaping open source leader Pamela Jones, aka "PJ," doesn't give conventional face-to-face interviews. Never has, near as anyone knows. All communication is virtual. Only one person in the world has ever claimed to have met her - in the pressroom at LinuxWorld in Boston complete with a Pamela Jones badge - and described her as a fortyish reddish-blonde who giggled a lot. 304 North Central Avenue, Hardsdale, NY[Photo: May 7, 2005 12:37 PM - 304 North Central Avenue, Hartsdale, New York. The last known address of Pamela Jones, as the superintendent of the building calls it, Ms. Pam Jones.]

Oh yeah? Wonder what cold crème she uses.

Pamela Jones is a 61-year-old Jehovah's Witness who lives in a shabby genteel garden apartment in desperate need of an interior decorator on a heavily trafficked commercial road at 304 North Central Avenue in Hartsdale, New York. Hartsdale is in Westchester and Westchester is IBM territory.

See, even though Groklaw treats cell phones like they were Kleenex and changes its unpublished numbers regularly, one number it left with a journalist led to this flat and - wouldn't you know it but - some calls from there had been placed to the courts in Utah and to the Canopy Group so obviously this just isn't any Pamela Jones.

Pamela has lived in apartment 1A for 10 years at least, according to the super, who says he's watched people move in, have children, and the children marry and move away.

Now, this isn't your usual anonymous New York apartment. It's practically a self-contained village where the super goes for the old ladies' groceries when there's snow on the ground and people know each other's business.[Photo: May 7, 2005 12:41 PM - 304 North Central Avenue, Hartsdale, New York. The last known address of Pamela Jones.]

But the super didn't know much about Pamela except that she had a computer, worked at home (maybe sometimes) for a lawyer, was "paranoid" - his word - and "sensitive to smells."

He remembered how he was cleaning paintbrushes one day and she came running down the stairs screaming "Fire."

She was also missing and had been for weeks.

Nobody there knew where she was.

She had up and disappeared one day, and the super was worried about her. He said her son had dropped by and he didn't know where she was, and that some strange man that "nobody knew," as the super described him, had tried to get into her apartment while she was gone - the Medeco lock she had had installed on her door - something nobody else in the complex seemed to feel a need for - was more expensive than the door. But, as it happened, the super said, she had just sent in her rent in an envelope postmarked Connecticut. Like an episode out of "Where in the World is Carmen San Diego," the trail led to 10 Bittersweet Trail in Norwalk, Connecticut, 24 miles away. Sure enough, parked in the driveway was Pamela's car, just as the super had described it, a dark gray '90s Japanese number with a bunch of Jehovah Witness pamphlets tossed on the backseat.

The woman at the house, Barbara Jones Sharnik, told a disjointed story. She didn't know Pamela, Pamela hated her, Pamela wasn't there, Pamela left her car there because it got bumped, Pamela left her car there because she left town, and so on.

Afterwards Barbara called the cops, and then the cops called the number we left with her and the cops said that she was Pamela's mother and that Pamela was on the run and had shacked up with her mother because she had gotten "threatening mail" weeks before and that she had just gotten spooked again because "people were getting hurt around [my] stories" and had lighted out for Canada. [Photo: May 7, 2005 2:24 PM - 10 Bittersweet Trail in Norwalk, Connecticut. Mom's house, where PJ's car was last seen on this driveway.]

Odd, the subject of my stories - or any stories - never came up during our brief interview. I was just looking for Pamela.

That left Pamela's son, Nicolas Richards, who, as it happens, had been in the software business in Manhattan until - why, my goodness - things seem to have come a cropper right around the time Groklaw came into existence.

Nick and his ma were apparently involved together in Medabiliti Inc, an ISV, because one Pamela Jones with a Westchester phone number (914 761-7423) and a Medabiliti e-mail (pjones@medabiliti.com) was down as the director of public affairs on a Medabiliti press release dated April 14, 2003.

Nick, as it happens, has written under his own byline on a Groklaw sister site, GrokDoc, giving advice on technical writing. Nick and his wife Andrea live in fancier digs than his ma on East 76th Street off First Avenue, a neighborhood where apartments go for a couple of million bucks.

Now, according to one of Pamela's neighbors and fellow Jehovah's Witness, being a Jehovah's Witness is pretty much a full-time job in and of itself. Witnesses also don't usually get involved in worldly affairs.

So, is this story-spooked 61-year-old Jehovah's Witness with religious tracts in her backseat also the 90-hour-a-week writer of the voluminous PJ diatribes or is she a victim of identity theft?

TO BE CONTINUED...
Published May 7, 2005 -- Reads 197 -- Feedback 2 Copyright © 2005 SYS-CON Media. All Rights Reserved.

Our response to Linuxworld should be (1)

brennz (715237) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476651)

A boycott!

Re:Our response to Linuxworld should be (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476797)

Obviously, the slashdot version of it should be called a "girlcott", because thats what /. users are boy, er, girlcotting anyway.

Daytime TV (1)

sallgeud (12337) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476656)

When did slashdot become a format for spewing daytime drama that contains nothing pertinent between two people nobody knows. Sure, I enjoy highschoolishness just as much person... which is to say, not at all... but when I want this kind of drama, I can tune into Days of Our Lives.

off topic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476664)

I don't see why anyone would hire James Turner in any web related project when his 'company' website [blackbear.com] rapes every rule in the book.

Sekrit Identity (3, Funny)

poena.dare (306891) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476678)

Apparently, no one has realized yet that Maureen O'Gara is actually Jeff Gannon/Gucket in a dress.

Wait a second... (1, Funny)

DingerX (847589) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476728)

How do we know there really is a Maureen O'Gara either? Maybe she's a victim of identity theft too! After all, I followed that linky from the yahoo people search, keyed them in, gave them my credit card, and they gave me this address [wikipedia.org] . I went there and asked if they knew a Maureen O'Gara, and was told that she was a Mormon, or her descendents would baptize her as one. Being a Mormon, even one in the future, is a full-time job. Pretty nice digs though.

PJ's Take - Lets Move On - Dont Feed the Monkey (5, Informative)

WillRobinson (159226) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476732)

from http://www.groklaw.net/comment.php?mode=display&si d=20050507193419581&title=&type=article&pid=311460 #c311509 [groklaw.net]
PJ's take lets move on:

Authored by: PJ on Sunday, May 08 2005 @ 10:45 AM EDT
I agree. The person who originally suggested you all
go and look used a Long Island, NY, IP address, and
guess where you-know-who lives?

If we make the above assumption, we may deduce that
this was done for one of the following reasons:

1. to get you guys mad so you would act like "extremists" so
MOG and the mob can attack you again;

2. to get me mad so I sue her for slander, thus revealing
where I really live;

3. to set me up for the next "suicide" -- over my
"distress"
over "losing" my privacy. I have had some, including one
ex SCO employee, suggest this latter scenario as being
plausible. It seems not everyone in Utah thinks the
"suicides" were suicides.

Just in case 3 is true, let me state for the record that I
couldn't care less what MOG thinks of me, even if what
she wrote were true. I also don't care what anyone else
thinks. I'm proud of who I am and the choices I've made
in my life. I don't even care if Groklaw came to an end
tomorrow. I have no ambition, never have, didn't do
Groklaw to become famous or rich, so I truly don't
care. I would never commit suicide over anything, because
I think it's wrong, and I surely wouldn't over anything MOG
wrote, for I hold her in the deepest disdain, when I'm not
laughing at her.

redacted article (no addresses) (4, Informative)

dominux (731134) | more than 9 years ago | (#12476760)

mods, please can you nuke the copies of the article posted with addresses and phone numbers.

From the Google cache of the original page:http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:t5F0lsD5UW sJ:jdj.sys-con.com/read/83267.htm+read/83267.htm&h l=en&lr=&client=firefox&strip=1

Exclusive: Who Is 'PJ' Pamela Jones of Groklaw.Net?
Pamela Is A 61-Year-Old Jehovah's Witness Who Lives In A Shabby Genteel Garden Apartment In Hartsdale, New York
By: Maureen O'Gara
May 7, 2005 09:15 PM

A few weeks ago I went looking for the elusive harridan who supposedly writes the Groklaw blog about the SCO v IBM suit.

The now-famous opinion-shaping open source leader Pamela Jones, aka "PJ," doesn't give conventional face-to-face interviews. Never has, near as anyone knows. All communication is virtual. Only one person in the world has ever claimed to have met her - in the pressroom at LinuxWorld in Boston complete with a Pamela Jones badge - and described her as a fortyish reddish-blonde who giggled a lot. [address removed], NY[Photo: May 7, 2005 12:37 PM - [address removed], New York. The last known address of Pamela Jones, as the superintendent of the building calls it, Ms. Pam Jones.]

Oh yeah? Wonder what cold crème she uses.

Pamela Jones is a 61-year-old Jehovah's Witness who lives in a shabby genteel garden apartment in desperate need of an interior decorator on a heavily trafficked commercial road at [address removed], New York. [removed] is in Westchester and Westchester is IBM territory.

See, even though Groklaw treats cell phones like they were Kleenex and changes its unpublished numbers regularly, one number it left with a journalist led to this flat and - wouldn't you know it but - some calls from there had been placed to the courts in Utah and to the Canopy Group so obviously this just isn't any Pamela Jones.

Pamela has lived in apartment [removed] for 10 years at least, according to the super, who says he's watched people move in, have children, and the children marry and move away.

Now, this isn't your usual anonymous New York apartment. It's practically a self-contained village where the super goes for the old ladies' groceries when there's snow on the ground and people know each other's business.[Photo: May 7, 2005 12:41 PM - [address removed], New York. The last known address of Pamela Jones.]

But the super didn't know much about Pamela except that she had a computer, worked at home (maybe sometimes) for a lawyer, was "paranoid" - his word - and "sensitive to smells."

He remembered how he was cleaning paintbrushes one day and she came running down the stairs screaming "Fire."

She was also missing and had been for weeks.

Nobody there knew where she was.

She had up and disappeared one day, and the super was worried about her. He said her son had dropped by and he didn't know where she was, and that some strange man that "nobody knew," as the super described him, had tried to get into her apartment while she was gone - the Medeco lock she had had installed on her door - something nobody else in the complex seemed to feel a need for - was more expensive than the door. But, as it happened, the super said, she had just sent in her rent in an envelope postmarked Connecticut. Like an episode out of "Where in the World is Carmen San Diego," the trail led to [address removed], Connecticut, 24 miles away. Sure enough, parked in the driveway was Pamela's car, just as the super had described it, a dark gray '90s Japanese number with a bunch of Jehovah Witness pamphlets tossed on the backseat.

The woman at the house, Barbara Jones Sharnik, told a disjointed story. She didn't know Pamela, Pamela hated her, Pamela wasn't there, Pamela left her car there because it got bumped, Pamela left her car there because she left town, and so on.

Afterwards Barbara called the cops, and then the cops called the number we left with her and the cops said that she was Pamela's mother and that Pamela was on the run and had shacked up with her mother because she had gotten "threatening mail" weeks before and that she had just gotten spooked again because "people were getting hurt around [my] stories" and had lighted out for Canada. [Photo: May 7, 2005 2:24 PM - [address removed], Connecticut. Mom's house, where PJ's car was last seen on this driveway.]

Odd, the subject of my stories - or any stories - never came up during our brief interview. I was just looking for Pamela.

That left Pamela's son, Nicolas Richards, who, as it happens, had been in the software business in Manhattan until - why, my goodness - things seem to have come a cropper right around the time Groklaw came into existence.

Nick and his ma were apparently involved together in Medabiliti Inc, an ISV, because one Pamela Jones with a Westchester phone number ([Phone number removed]) and a Medabiliti e-mail ([email removed]) was down as the director of public affairs on a Medabiliti press release dated April 14, 2003.

Nick, as it happens, has written under his own byline on a Groklaw sister site, GrokDoc, giving advice on technical writing. Nick and his wife Andrea live in fancier digs than his ma on East 76th Street off First Avenue, a neighborhood where apartments go for a couple of million bucks.

Now, according to one of Pamela's neighbors and fellow Jehovah's Witness, being a Jehovah's Witness is pretty much a full-time job in and of itself. Witnesses also don't usually get involved in worldly affairs.

So, is this story-spooked 61-year-old Jehovah's Witness with religious tracts in her backseat also the 90-hour-a-week writer of the voluminous PJ diatribes or is she a victim of identity theft?

TO BE CONTINUED...
Published May 7, 2005 -- Reads 197 -- Feedback 2 Copyright © 2005 SYS-CON Media. All Rights Reserved.

Wasn't this in Linux Business News, though... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12476780)

...not LinuxWorld Magazine, in which case isn't the Title of this thread misleading?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?