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!

Free Software Mag Interviews Sys-Con Publisher

Zonk posted more than 9 years ago | from the behind-the-weirdness dept.

The Media 279

NW writes "Tony Mobily, editor of the Free Software Magazine recently interviewed Fuat Kircaali, founder and publisher of Sys-Con Media. The interview revolves around the recent controversy surrounding the article written by Maureen O'Gara attacking Pamela Jones of GrokLaw."

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

Enterprise's finale begins in 30 minutes (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12525961)

And we're discussing some publisher?

Re:Enterprise's finale begins in 30 minutes (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12525985)

Unless a hot Vulcan in heat comes over to my house to crush my pelvis during exhuberant sex, I've seen the last anything Star Trek.

Montreal? (2)

Montreal!!hahahahaha (880138) | more than 9 years ago | (#12525962)

hahahahah

Re:Montreal? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526063)

Did you create a new account? Seriously you are about as funny as old man soup

Re:Montreal? (2, Insightful)

Montreal!!hahahahaha (880138) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526146)

My advice to you, my young "canadian" friend, is to watch some South Park.
Montreal?
muahahahahahaha

YOU FAIL IT, FUCKTARD (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526091)

I hope you move to Montreal and get cancer and die. Slowly.

A Chilling Effect (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12525981)

So O'Gara did a piece where she tried to find out who Pamela Jones really is, and now she's a pariah because people were upset by what was written.

It's chilling how an angry mob can effectively silence a person just because they didn't agree. I thought people in the open source community were more open minded than that.

This is really chilling and scary how people can bully others into submission over one opinion piece.

Re:A Chilling Effect (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526007)

An opinion piece is something that lists the name of her mother (not PJ) and also gives a street address along with pictures of the outside of where she lives? Get real.

O'Gara's piece was an attempt at a smear job by painting PJ as a crazy elderly Jehovah's Witness. Those in the SCO camp/pro-SCO people must be incredibly desperate to be resorting to tactics like that.

Re:A Chilling Effect (1)

__david__ (45671) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526195)

O'Gara's piece was an attempt at a smear job by painting PJ as a crazy elderly Jehovah's Witness. Those in the SCO camp/pro-SCO people must be incredibly desperate to be resorting to tactics like that.
And stupid too. Given SCO's CEO, good old Darl, is a Utah dwelling Mormon it's not really in SCO's best interest making fun of other people's religions. There's so many of ways to make a Mormon look like a crazy religious kook, do they really want to open that door?

Re:A Chilling Effect (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526287)

People open the Mormon door all the time on /, and Groklaw. Darl McBride's home address has also been published in these fora. Basically PJ is the figurehead for a group of very nasty fanboys, just keeping enough distance so she can feel wronged when someone turns it around on her.

Re:A Chilling Effect (4, Informative)

badasscat (563442) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526041)

This is really chilling and scary how people can bully others into submission over one opinion piece.

What MOG did was not an opinion piece; it was, in fact, illegal. PJ is, by her own words, considering her legal options right now, but nobody has the right to a) trespass in another person's home (as MOG all but admits she did in her article, commenting on how the interior of PJ's home looks, noting she was not home at the time), b) list the addresses and telephone numbers of relatives, and c) slander another person publicly with unverified information.

I note that you're an anonymous coward so you obviously do not want us to know who you are. I wonder why?

What MOG did was beyond sleazy; it was illegal, journalistically unethical and personally immoral, and if she was silenced for that, she has nobody to blame but herself.

Re:A Chilling Effect (0, Troll)

jjmartin540 (883913) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526078)

Am I the only one who thinks that DOS'ing someone's website is crummy and ILLEGAL ? Yeah, I read O'Gara's story, and yeah she wrote some pretty unprofessional, rude, and possibly illegal things, but the hackers trashed LinuxWorld, which only posted the story. In TFA the interview-ee says that its a NATIONALLY-syndicated column, so, even if somone were to DOS a site, why not DOS HER website?

Re:A Chilling Effect (2, Funny)

chotchki (856592) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526108)

Well its rather simple. To an inexperienced sys admin a slashdotting looks identical to a DDoS.

Re:A Chilling Effect (0)

Saeed al-Sahaf (665390) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526215)

An interesting thing about Groklaw is that if you post comments that PJ does not like you will get banned without even knowing it. You will see the comments, but no one else. Kind of a slimy thing to do, really. Sort of a LACK of jurnalistic integrety maybe???

Oh noes! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526251)

Hi there! It looks like you are voicing a dissenting opinion. Would you like to:

Get modded down

Get bitchslapped

Get temp-banned

Re:Oh noes! (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526359)

Hi, Clippy!

Re:A Chilling Effect (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526245)

60 Minutes does this kind of thing all the time. It's not illegal. Its not even immoral journalism, if there's a story there.

OGara tried to figure out if there was an IBM-PJ connection, failed and published a fluff piece about PJ's car anyway. That's just crap journalism and a shitty thing to do.

As for PJ, her little internet soapbox made here a "public figure" and now she learns this has real world consequences. She basically started this nasty bitchfight with OGara, no suprise that someone bothered figuring out where she lived. (Just as groklawers did with McBride's home address and phone number.)

Re:A Chilling Effect (4, Insightful)

bernywork (57298) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526311)

No, not quite, 60 Minutes doesn't turn around and say at 110 something street, you will find this. That's the boundary that got crossed, if they said "In this apartment block in downtown Missouri" or whatever it was, that wouldn't be going to far. To publish the information on the internet of someone who obviously wanted to keep their personal life out of what they do professionaly, that's the step too far.

Also the information was unverified. The whole thing to me sounds like a smear story, no matter which way you look at it.

Re:A Chilling Effect (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526332)

They don't say 110 Something Street nowdays, but 15 years ago they would park right in someone's front yard and tell you exactly where it was.

It was a smear story. However, (hypothetically) if O'Gara had found IBM pay stubs all over PJ's desk, then it would have been legitimate journalism. Therefore stalking her house was a legitimate journalistic tactic.

Re:A Chilling Effect (2, Informative)

putaro (235078) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526397)

I don't think anyone is really after O'Gara for trying to find PJ and have a face-to-face with her. The article (have you read the article?) is just crap, though, with lots of ad-hominem attacks, speculation, innuendo and addresses of people who may or may not be PJ and no real information of any kind. It reads like something an 8th grader would write after they got told off on-line.

Re:A Chilling Effect (4, Insightful)

gvc (167165) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526097)

Here's the Letter to Readers [sys-con.com] by LinuxWorld detailing the standards of journalism that O'Gara contravened.

Among them stereotyping by race, gender, age, religion, ethnicity, geography, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, or social status.

Re:A Chilling Effect (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526277)

There's also the part calling it "news".

How, precisely, was ANY part of that "news" or even relevant to ANYTHING to do with the SCO story?

Obviously, this guy hasn't been following along, and has made this decision for monetary reasons.

However, I still hope to clue him in, and would hope that people would be less hostile towards him, but rather do their best to help him to learn what was so upsetting about the piece.

As for the denials, well, actually they shouldn't be talking about this at all, but instead be talking with a lawyer. It's not good if they don't understand why the piece is so chilling.

Re:A Chilling Effect (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526329)

You can add Gender and Physical Appearance

Although MOG concedes she never met Pamela Jones (neither PJ of Groklaw or the Hartsdale's Pamela Jones), she calls her an "harridan".

Nice, very nice (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12525982)

Haha. Monty Python, do you get it ? It's funny, they named a programming language after Monty Python, they called it 'Python'. hahaha. It's funny, you see ? Do you get it ? Python, haha. It's very amusing to me.haha.it's very funny. Python!hahaha.it's funny do you see ?

My Rights Online? (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12525988)

How the fuck are MY rights affected by this stupid controversy?

Seriously, do the editors have any concept of what rights really are.

Re:My Rights Online? (1)

thundercatslair (809424) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526080)

Nope they don't, especially Zonk. If you want them to post your article just submit it under the "your rights online" section.

Your Rights Online? (1)

Narcoleptic Electron (883920) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526317)

You're obviously not Pamela Jones.

Your rights are not affected in the least, as long as you don't point out bad behaviour of an unscrupulous company, such as SCO, in a public forum. You don't have to worry about a Maureen O'Gara character coming after you and posting your private address and phone number on a very public website that may or may not be affiliated with said unscrupulous company.

In other words: as long as you watch what you say, your freedom of speech is not affected in the least.

Re:Your Rights Online? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526399)

I would say that PJ/Groklaw made it "personal" first.

If I started a slashdot journal dedicated to the moronic posts of "Narcoleptic Electron", publishing dozens of longwinded essays pointing out your numerous inaccuracies and false assumptions, and your hardheaded refusal to see things my way, would it bother you? How about if my legion of fans started ragging on you personally in the comments, calling you nasty names left and right and generally demonizing you?

Well, if I did all of that, I certainly wouldn't assume the magic shroud of Internet anonymity would protect me, and it wouldn't suprise me a bit if you showed up at my house one day. Having a secret public address is not a "right" of the Internet. Grok the law of the streets.

The Credibility of Groklaw (5, Funny)

dj245 (732906) | more than 9 years ago | (#12525990)

Lots of people seem to be attacking the credibility of Groklaw lately, this case was carried by several online media including The Register [theregister.co.uk] which seemed to side against Groklaw. A conspiricy by SCO perhaps?

In the event of such a conspiracy, I today announce my new cut-rate prices of my credibility.

For $20, I will state in any highly moderated slashdot comment that Groklaw may not be entirely correct and all sides of the issue must be looked at.
For $40, I will embed subliminal messages into comments stating that Groklaw is evil and SCO is good.
For $80, I will crapflood articles with SCO propaganda.
and for $699, I will state that I too have purchased linux liscences for my company so we don't have to worry about the legal liabilities and also, Groklaw sucks.

All Prices USD, effective date 13 Friday 2005.

Re:The Credibility of Groklaw (0, Offtopic)

chucks86 (799149) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526061)

How much is it to threaten giving up Microsoft products in order to get them at cut-rate... then sell the unopened products at an inflated value?

Re:The Credibility of Groklaw (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526334)

Priceless?

Re:The Credibility of Groklaw (1)

PygmySurfer (442860) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526375)

Lots of people seem to be attacking the credibility of Groklaw lately, this case was carried by several online media including The Register which seemed to side against Groklaw. A conspiricy by SCO perhaps?

Why is everything a conspiracy around here? MS funded SCO's bullshit lawsuit. SCO is funding this crazy lady's attack on our precious PJ. Much as slashdot might want it to be so, the world isn't out to get open source and everything slashgeeks hold near and dear.

Re:The Credibility of Groklaw (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526400)


Why is everything a conspiracy around here? MS funded SCO's bullshit lawsuit. SCO is funding this crazy lady's attack on our precious PJ. Much as slashdot might want it to be so, the world isn't out to get open source and everything slashgeeks hold near and dear.


Well duh... if everyone were out to get open source, they wouldn't need conspiracies and bribes. The bribes are there because everyone LOVES open source, and they will only oppose it if given obscene amounts of cash! :)

Re:The Credibility of Groklaw (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526411)

Linux is governed by the Marxian Doctrine of Historical Inevitability. Anyone opposing Linux World Domination must be a collaborationist gangster!

If I am Elected President... (3, Funny)

John F. Kerry (801779) | more than 9 years ago | (#12525992)

If I am elected President, I will submit a bill to Congress outlawing Maureen O'Gara!

Re:If I am Elected President... (2, Informative)

fred fleenblat (463628) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526079)

I get the humor, but just for the record, that would be a Bill of Attainder [wikipedia.org] and unconstitutional.

Interview summary: (5, Funny)

Sheetrock (152993) | more than 9 years ago | (#12525993)

I'm sorry if the article offended you nuts.

That's Yoda (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526058)

Green on the outside, not on the inside.

"Do, or do not. There is no try." [starwars.com]

Ph.D. or no Ph.D, Spock of Vulcan usually went by "Mr." not Doctor. Doctor Spock wrote baby books.

Re:That's Yoda (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526301)

He [slashdot.org] knows [slashdot.org] that [slashdot.org] and [slashdot.org] is [slashdot.org] just [slashdot.org] a [slashdot.org] troll. [slashdot.org]

Re:Interview summary: (1, Insightful)

ameoba (173803) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526185)

I think it's more like "I don't really care what anyone thinks as long as we're making money on it".

Must be a Republican.

Slashdotting != DDoS (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12525996)

From the article:

I am not interested in offending our readers or in driving them away. I do wish that they had tried to work with me to find a solution before the fanatics out there launched DoS attacks for days even after we pulled the story. Our Web sites remained under constant attack from Monday through Wednesday, for three days. We lost thousands of dollars in revenues during the past three days. We are trying to recover from the biggest cyber attack in history any media company was ever subject to!

In Korea, only old people call a Slashdotting a cyber attack.

N. vs. S. Korean /. victims (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526083)

North Koreans can't withstand Slashdotting, as they rely on carrier pigeons for connectivity, and the military has orders to shoot pigeons on sight.

South Koreans with their multi-deca-megabit-per-second connections to their homes have no such problems.

If so, that leads to an amusing question. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526168)

If slashdot was in fact the supposed "DDOS" he spoke of, could slashdot sue him for slander?

Re:Slashdotting != DDoS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526208)

DOS? I was just trying to a) read the article in question, and b) write a polite letter to the editor there telling them that I thought it was an article in bad taste and should never have been published. I tried a few times to find email addresses at Sys-com.con, and never got back anything intelligible. I'm sure that a significant fraction of the hits they were receiving were equally benign.

He still doesn't get it (4, Insightful)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526018)

If somebody published an article with names and addresses of my family members, as well as a description of my car and the inside of my apartment, I would certainly interpret that as a threat, just like the old "We know where you live!" cliche. In fact, I would attempt to have the author and publisher charged with a hate crime, since I am in a bi-racial marriage, which people have been killed for in the past! There is a thin line between free speech and threatening speech; Moron O'Gara crossed it.

Re:He still doesn't get it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526115)

look at at it this way the fabulous MOG claimed she was being harassed because some people telephoning her up until *GASP* 1130pm! and she goes on a shakedown of her 'enemy' and attacks her in a 'news report' and destroy her right to privacy.

I thought Slashdot was against hate crimes... (1)

Kill all Muslims (845937) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526136)

...because hate crimes imply that a crime against one type of person is worse than the same crime against another type of person, in effect charging you for (real or perceived) motives in addition to the the actual crime committed. This is the part where your typical Slashbot is supposed to make a comparison to 1984's thought-crimes. Although I do find it quite humorous that I am posting this comment under this particular account of mine.

Re:I thought Slashdot was against hate crimes... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526172)

Of course, the moment it leaves your brain its no longer a "thought" crime.

The purpose of "hate crime" laws should be simply to establish motive. Turning a "sorry, I didn't mean to burn that cross in your yard" case into a "damn, I shoula tied you to it!" case.

Re:I thought Slashdot was against hate crimes... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526233)

I hate hate.

Re:I thought Slashdot was against hate crimes... (4, Insightful)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526263)

I used to disagree with "hate crime" laws but then I realized their point. Yes, most people don't commit violent crime because they love their victim. But that's not the point.

The purpose of Federal hate crime legislation is to give the Federal government authority to go in and investigate should the local enforcement NOT do his/her job because said prosecutor, police and justice agrees with the crime because they too hold those prejudices. There are places where a crime against blacks or gays might not be thought of as a biggie and swept under the rug. In most cases, I wouldn't like encroachment of federal power, but it IS a human rights issue and at this point, the local justice system would be broken so someone needs to step in.

The man is an ass. (0, Flamebait)

AltGrendel (175092) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526398)

As in:

horse's ass
Pronunciation: 'hor-s&z-
Function: noun
often vulgar : a stupid or incompetent person : BLOCKHEAD

The guy's not sorry at all (3, Insightful)

asifyoucare (302582) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526027)

This guy cannot see anything wrong with the O'Gara article!

The boycott is still on (and that goes for his nutty mother too).

Big time. (5, Insightful)

khasim (1285) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526286)

From TFA:
The "editorial board members" of LinuxWorld are appointed from among the leading professionals and participants of the Linux community at large.
Well, that's just sweet. But what does it have to do with anything?
LinuxWorld's independent advisory board and the core editorial team(s) have full editorial decision-making authority in everything that goes to print.
But MOG doesn't appear in print. Her articles are posted on your web site.

So what does anything about "print" have to do with this story?
They funnel that passion into the accurate and unbiased editorial content that you look for in the pages of our magazine(s) every month and in every new issue.
Still, not in print so why are you talking about this?
We believe that a magazine such as LinuxWorld, supported by hands-on participants and leading industry experts, offers real-life editorial content that you will not find elsewhere.
Hey! I can write this "note" and try to turn it into a free ad for my wonderful magazine.
Our compensation and deep satisfaction is in knowing that we are providing a valuable service that benefits Open Source, Linux, and everyone in the industry.
Yep. If I ever need to find PJ's mom, I'll know the site that provides that "valuable service".
This is how LinuxWorld differentiates itself from other venues.
Yep. Linux Journal certainly wouldn't publish that, even on its web site. Nor any other technical publication.
On the pages of LinuxWorld you read articles written by the most knowledgeable and experienced professionals in the world.
Did I mention the part about turning this into a free ad?
Last but not least, we are pleased to announce that with the launch of our new Web site, we now made all our archived content and past issues available online.
Thanks for having me on the show, did I mention my new web site? Can I do a quick plug for it?
Please be sure to take a look at the "LinuxWorld Topics" section of our new Web site to explore our archived content grouped under a rich number of categories.
I'm real sure I mentioned the free ad time. Right?
Before I end my note, I would like to take this opportunity to share with you our publishing guidelines.
End your note? You haven't even gotten to the subject.
We believe in the Golden Rule.
Give us the gold and you make the rules.
In all our dealings we strive to be friendly and courteous, as well as fair and compassionate.
This was not a single article. Read the past ones. You'll see an ongoing stream of hatred.

But those were okay to put on your sites.
We treat sources, subjects, and colleagues as human beings deserving of respect. We show compassion, show good taste, and avoid pandering to lurid curiosity.
Hmmmm..... You might need to check this page then - http://linuxbusinessnews.sys-con.com/read/49228.ht m?CFID=39636&CFTOKEN=75BBE516-14D5-139B-BC4011A448 3558B3 [sys-con.com]

Yep, Linux Business News on the sys-con.com site. And if I may post some of the hate there:
Whatever you think of his politics, McBride may have a point or two. How come such an influence peddler is so mysterious?
So, PJ is "mysterious".
The name PJ is apparently a nom de plume or, in this case maybe it's a nom de guerre.
Maybe it stands for "Pam Jones".
When she was having some beef or another with SYS-CON Media and she was invited to come on Internet television, she demurred saying she was "shy." Odd, she doesn't write like she's shy.
Given that you posted her Mom's address and pictures of her house, I can say she has reason to avoid you.
(Since I have some skin in the game because of the way I'm knocked around regularly by Groklaw, I've been out PJ hunting too and I've yet to come upon this fortyish reddish-blonde creature, but I've certainly met some interesting people along the way.)
"Knocked around regularly"?
Well, nobody whatever their political stripe would mistake Groklaw for journalism.
I could.
By definition, journalism is nominally "objective," even as practiced by Dan Rather. There is nothing objective about what Groklaw says or the reaction it gets. Opinion maybe, but not journalism.
PJ posts facts with references. That is about as objective as you can get. She has her opinion about the facts.
Nothing in the world is as black and white as Groklaw paints the SCO v IBM case, despite all the opportunities presented by SCO, a press agent's nightmare, unless perhaps it's a cartoon or maybe a Tom Mix western.
Are you getting the idea yet? And that guy says that there is a "harm no one" policy?
Groklaw ain't the result of a 40-hour week either, so if PJ has a day job it's hard to figure where she gets the time.
Yet it seems that PJ is who she is and NOT a front for IBM.

Anyway, the best line is at the end.
Sounds like a serial killer taunting the cops to catch him.
Now, what was it he said about sys-con?
We believe in the credo of "do no harm to any person." We pursue the truth but not at the cost of hurting someone or trying them publicly without giving them the opportunity to respond.
It seems that he doesn't even read his own sites.

I'm going to say that he's been more than happy with the page hits that MOG's been generating with her anti-Groklaw/PJ hate filled articles.

Now that she's gone too far, he's quick to say that they have high standards.

Bullshit. Call their advertisers and tell them that you won't buy anything from anyone who advertises on any sys-con site.

This is not a single article. This is the cap to a long running stream of hatred, lies and innuendo.

Huh? Does this man use his own dictionary? (4, Interesting)

davidwr (791652) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526033)

Read the interview. I think this man is either underqualified for the job of CEO of a media enterprise, or is pretending to be.

Either that, or he's purely in the business-as-in-corporate side of things and not the business-as-in-journalism side of things. If that's the case, he shouldn't have been asked to approve O'Gara's ("I decided to publish the article"), or anyone else's works, that job should go to people with editorial responsibilities.

Here's my "favorite" example of confusing statements:
In one part, speaking of Pamela Jones being a blogger not a reporter, he says "The reporter's job is to report news." In another, speaking about O'Gara's hack job, he says "I decided to publish the article. It was published because it was an accurate news story." Are you as confused as I was?

My least-favorite part, if true and I sincerely hope he's mistaken (I think he's confusing a DOS attack with the /. effect):
"The reason why we decided to pull it [O'Gara's hack job] was that when the content, style and the language of the story was perceived as offensive by a group of the readers, a denial-of-service attack was launched against our entire company, interfering with all of our publications and all of our readers."

Re:Huh? Does this man use his own dictionary? (3, Informative)

man_of_mr_e (217855) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526196)

I think their servers are capable of withstanding a slashdotting, as they've been listed in numerous articles before this. In order to bring down a site with that kind of infrastructure, it's got to be a deliberate attack.

Re:Huh? Does this man use his own dictionary? (1)

Lifewish (724999) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526276)

Personally, I'll believe it as and when I see the logs. There are plenty of people out there with both the means and the inclination to launch a DoS attack against syscon. I very much doubt that any significant number of them take Groklaw seriously.

Re:Huh? Does this man use his own dictionary? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526318)

How about the group that DDOSed SCO? Or are we still in denial about that happening?

Sorry to inform you, but nobody gives a flying fuck about Mareeen O'Gara or SysCon except Pamala Jones and her thralls. (As evidenced about the 100s of groklaw articles published about those noname losers.) And a lot of those fuckos feel seriously wronged and may not have one's normal moral boundries in place.

Re:Huh? Does this man use his own dictionary? (2, Insightful)

rhizome (115711) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526376)

Sorry to inform you, but nobody gives a flying fuck about Mareeen O'Gara or SysCon except Pamala Jones and her thralls. (As evidenced about the 100s of groklaw articles published about those noname losers.)

Yeah, dude. Obviously.

And a lot of those fuckos feel seriously wronged and may not have one's normal moral boundries in place.


I suppose you'd like us to adopt the moral compass of an anonymous poster with a chip on their shoulder? Way to go, champ.

Re:Huh? Does this man use his own dictionary? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526423)

Is that supposed to be a comeback? Try harder.

Re:Huh? Does this man use his own dictionary? (1)

Lifewish (724999) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526386)

How about the group that DDOSed SCO? Or are we still in denial about that happening?

Again, I'll believe it when I see the logs. Until then, I'll treat it the same way as I do SCO's magical disappearing code in linux.

Sorry to inform you, but nobody gives a flying fuck about Mareeen O'Gara or SysCon except Pamala Jones and her thralls.

I think you misinterpreted me (my fault). When I said "There are plenty of people out there with both the means and the inclination to launch a DoS attack against syscon" I was referring to your common or garden script kiddie, as opposed to anyone with an emotional involvement with the case. Sorry, I should have worded that more clearly. I'd agree with you that pretty much the only people who care what Maureen O'Gara is saying are those she does a hatchet job on.

And a lot of those fuckos feel seriously wronged and may not have one's normal moral boundries in place.

My personal experience of the groklaw crowd is that, on average, they're noticeably more moral than, for example, the slashdot crowd. There's a far higher signal to noise ratio and considerably less obscenity and trolling. Certainly there's less chance of a groklawer doing anything nastier to MOG than sending her an annoyed letter. This is just my opinion, so your mileage may vary.

That article was linked all over the web. (1)

khasim (1285) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526346)

I'm sure it had a LOT more hits on it than her other articles.

Not much for an apology (5, Insightful)

heli_flyer (614850) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526051)

From reading the article, apparently it's not the complaints from the readers, nor the complaints from the advertisers which prompted him to pull the articles. The only reason he pulled the article is the DDOS attacks. He still doesn't seem to understand what he did wrong.

Yeah this is worse than nothing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526094)

There is an entire community of persons directly or indirectly harmed by Ms. O'Gara's ceaseless and frequently slanderous public relations work for big business. By accusing this community of people of hacking/terrorizing him into pulling Ms. O'Gara's pieces, it's worse than if he'd just left the articles up in the first place.

Re:Yeah this is worse than nothing (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526269)

Who are these people who were "hurt"? Emotionally fragile fanboys? The toadys who hang out at Groklaw?

It's rather ironic how much Groklaw yells about FUD, but if you wade into the comment sections, the shallow FUD about Sun and Microsoft goes from wall-to-wall from those lamers.

Re:Not much for an apology (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526142)

I don't think they were DDoS. When PJ published her story called Intimidation, I wanted to read the article to know what it was about so I Googled for it. Their website was slow as hell. I guess that I wasn't the only one who wanted to read the article (millions read Groklaw).

Then the story hit Slashdot and a Slashdot Effect ensue.

So DDoS of traffic from both Groklaw and Slashdot ?

Pretty ironic that the guy who don't see what he did wrong felt he was attacked.

Fucking idiot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526164)

If I was responsible for the DDOS attacks (I'm not), and had stopped them because they stopped publishing O'Gara, then I'd start the DDOS right back up if I read that.

Re:Not much for an apology (3, Insightful)

brennz (715237) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526235)

Mr. Kircaali is *FULL OF IT*. I have several emails from his advertisers expressing their discontent with the content of MOG's attacks on PJ He is tap-dancing, to make himself the victim. Instead, he should be looked at the kid in the corner wearing the dunce cap, obviously for making disruptions.

Re:Not much for an apology (4, Insightful)

HorsePunchKid (306850) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526372)

Exactly. It's not an apology at all. It's like running over someone in a crosswalk and then saying, "I'm sorry you didn't get out of the way quickly enough." Fuat Kircaali does not believe even in the slightest that there was anything ethically questionable about the article, or he wouldn't have run it.

Pathetic. Anything for some extra traffic, I guess. They certainly got more hits from me than they ever have in the past. At the expense of never getting any more in the future, though. I hope it was worth it, Fuat!

What an ass (5, Insightful)

instantkarma1 (234104) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526066)

To paraphrase..."There was nothing ethically or morally wrong with the story. It was factual. However, many of our idiot readers.....errr..customers, got their panties in a was about it. I see no problem publishing personal attacks against people, including their physical address and making fun of their religion, but I'll be damned if some of our readers aren't prudes."

This guy is absolutely classless. I think I'll pass on anything put out by them in the future.

Re:What an ass (1)

uofitorn (804157) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526297)

I read the entire article, what you just said was neither insightful nor funny.

** POST FOR COLLATION** (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526068)

* A NOTE *

Will persons interested in whining about the "your rights online" section occasionally containing articles which do not directly relate to the idea of rights on the internet please do so as a reply to this comment, instead of as a top-level comment. That way the rest of us may easily ignore you.

Thanks, your cooperation is appreciated.

You hear that deafening clattering noise? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526081)

That's the noise of any public goodwill earned by Sys-Con deciding to stand for journalistic integrity, being undone by the Sys-Con CEO's big mouth

MOG did not know it was the *right* PJ (5, Insightful)

One Louder (595430) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526087)

Even in the "article" itself MOG admits that she didn't know for sure if she had tracked down the actual PJ, and even implied that this "Pamela Jones" might have been the victim of identity theft.

Given that, why plaster the address and pictures of a potentially innocent party across the Internet?

What about the mother? She's not a party to Groklaw in any way, she's not a blogger, a reporter, or anything, yet her address and pictures of her house ended up in the "article".

I'm sorry - I see nothing ethical here.

that clarifies things (4, Informative)

iggymanz (596061) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526096)

The CEO is content to run a "tabloid trash" type of website, where reporters can harass and intimidate people. That answers everything.

Well, somewhat. (2, Funny)

DietCoke (139072) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526278)

If that "tabloid trash" ends up getting back to their advertisers, they aren't content to run with it. This is like ringing the doorbell and running... they get off by publishing something like this, but when it offends the public sensibilities they retreat as fast as possible.

I'm glad that they canned MOG, but talk about a lack of balls... the damage was already done. They were just tired of being called jackasses, and thought that pulling the article would stop it.

Jackasses.

legal issues, as always (2, Insightful)

fred fleenblat (463628) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526122)

People should keep in mind that Mr. Kircaali really doesn't have the option of fully admitting and apologizing for anything. That would just open up him and his company to a giant lawsuit.

He has to forcefully deny any wrongdoing to remove the possibility that at a later trial, a lawyer could just just hand the apology/admission to a jury and say "Here's the evidence, he admitted to it, please make them give PJ $1 (holds pinky to lip) MILLION dollars"

Re:legal issues, as always (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526296)

So you're saying he does have the option of doing the right thing. It's just that the consequences are undesirable.

Doing the right thing is often difficult and complicated, if you're caught doing the wrong thing. Living rightly in the first place usually avoids this kind of problem.

Re:legal issues, as always (2, Interesting)

putaro (235078) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526327)

Bull crap. There's a big difference between opening yourself for lawsuits and being a tool. He goes well beyond being cautios. For example, he says that the only reason he pulled the story was because there was a DOS attack against his servers. He could have just said "In my judgement the story was reasonable but many of our readers and other staffers disagreed so we chose to remove it". If anything, he's really opened himself for a lawsuit by publicly endorsing O'Gara's invasion of privacy and stalking rather than disavowing it as a mistake she made that slipped through the system.

I'm going to miss Maureen (5, Funny)

ErikTheRed (162431) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526133)

I mean, who else writes stuff that you can read something on your screen that makes your scream:
"WHORE! YOU GODDAMN FUCKING BILL-GATES FELCHING, DARL McBRIDE COCKSMOKING WHORE!"
There's just something so cathartic about that.

Oh, wait, Forbes is still printing Daniel Lyons. Never mind.

Fuat Kircaali, leave him alone (1)

perrye (619347) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526181)

Yes, there is one residence listed, but lets not stoop to the level he expects at least a few among this community to lower them selves to.

That said, when he does say that his phone rings off the wall, we may wonder how many of those calls are from the other camp, trying to put the OSS comunity in a bad light. There would be no way for us to prove it either way.

Help stop "the biggest cyber attack in history" (4, Informative)

DrJimbo (594231) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526188)

He has suffered enough. Add the following lines to your hosts file:

127.0.0.1 coldfusion.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 dotnet.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 eclipse.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 issj.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 itsolutions.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 jdj.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 linux.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 linuxbusinessweek.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 mxdj.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 pbdj.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 symbian.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 weblogic.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 webservices.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 websphere.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 wireless.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 www.sys-con.tv
127.0.0.1 xml.sys-con.com
127.0.0.1 www.linuxworld.com
127.0.0.1 www.sys-con.com

Re:Help stop "the biggest cyber attack in history" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526197)

Thank you. I wanted that list for exactly that purpose.

That's not really an Interview.. (2)

BackOrder (592581) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526210)

I've eagerly read this interview but as I've devoured the words it seemed to me Mr. Kircaali was becoming aggressive in his answers. Up to a point where he finally complained about his media company being DoSsed. He did put emphasis on the fact they've had experienced the biggest cyber attack in history of any media company (which, I would like to remind you, sounds like SCO words in the past).

This raised a question in my mind - what this interview was for? He did not seem to really care about the case nor he did not really excuse himself to have allowed O'Gara's article being publish.

The questions were repetitive and they never got where the reporter wanted the interview to go. Kircaali has been evasive in his answers about the topic of interest (PJ, Groklaw, O'Gara's work, etc). He was nonethelesse quite exhaustive on his report of being attacked and threatening emails sent to his customers.

It just leaves me on the feeling he is upset because he's losing a great deal of money. Someone should remind him that he decided to publish O'Gara's article.

Spam? (1)

arose (644256) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526213)

I sent her an email but I haven't received an answer yet, I must admit... Here is the phone number for G2 Computer Intelligence, 516 759-7025. Most unknown emails go to spam boxes these days, at least in my case.
He filters unknown emails for a publicly stated email account? If his email isn't stated it has no relevance to the question.

discussion with Fuat Kircaali (5, Interesting)

brennz (715237) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526221)

My email ("A problem with your advertising + SYS-CON Media website") was quoted in that interview. I'd like to set the record straight on what Fuat Kircaali discussed with me. I sent out email to SYS-CON advertisers, questioning them if they knew about the article. A few hours later I received a call from him. First he was yelling at me "I want to speak with the chairman of $MYEMPLOYER" Then he started threatening to sue me. It was only then that I said I he could easily discuss this with my lawyer. Only after his verbal tirade continued, did I choose to end the conversation with him. His claim that people "needed legal counsel" is a joke. He was threatening to sue people, they no doubt replied "speak to my lawyer". Mr Kircaali treated me in a manner which I find unbecoming of a CEO / publisher. He also did not know the definition of slander/defamation either. Another legal newb attempting to intimidate people. gg.

Re:discussion with Fuat Kircaali (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526381)

I couldn't find copies of the offending O'Gara articles, but that interview did reek of a reality distorting bubble.

Re:discussion with Fuat Kircaali (1)

X (1235) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526409)

Copies are available on O'Gara's sites, as was mentioned in the article. For example:

http://www.clientservernews.com/ [clientservernews.com]

unethical ... and cowardly and disloyal (4, Interesting)

wes33 (698200) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526229)

in the immortal words of Fuat Kircaali:

"The reason why we decided to pull it [O'Gara's hack job] was that when the content, style and the language of the story was perceived as offensive by a group of the readers, a denial-of-service attack was launched against our entire company, interfering with all of our publications and all of our readers."

Leaving aside the incredible moral blindness of missing what was wrong with the O'Gara article, this guy admits he is willing to dump "entertaining" and "accurate" reporters because of a DOS attack. Nice guy to work for ...

What a piece of work is Fuat Kircaali.

Maureen O'Gara did accuse PJ of being a thief (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526239)

Maureen O'Gara carelessly tossed the accusation that there was some Identity Theft going on, with PJ as:

A) The Victim
B) A willing accomplice
C) Herself, but not really Pamela Jones
D) All of the above, more wild accusations to come in our next mogwash piece.

Completely apart of the deliberate slurs and slants, criminal accusations make for straightforward Defamation cases.

Mr. Kirkaali says that PJ should not fear thieves, but seems blissully unaware that his own jourmalist accused Pamela Jones to be a thief, and published it on-line.

Maybe he need someone to explain Remedial Ethics 101 to him.

Christ (1)

Junichiro Koizumi (803690) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526243)

I have no idea what any of this means, and I feel I am a better man because of it.

Shameful (4, Insightful)

ChaosDiscord (4913) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526247)

So the publisher admits that he pulled the article not because it was ethical, but because he was being DOSed. So they first lack the ethics to realize that publishing someone's home address and the address of their elderly mother is wrong, then bend over when attacked. That's shameful. This publisher has shown that he fundamentally does not get it. I strongly support his first amendment right to publish that article, but he's still a sleazebag. I'll be avoiding the entire SysCon family of magazines as I can't trust them to do good journalism.

Reminds me of something earlier in the SCO saga (2, Interesting)

mcc (14761) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526255)

So is this the new trick, if you're in a situation where you kind of look like the bad guy and you're trying to deflect attention, just claim somebody DDOSed you?

Show His Hand Quite Clearly (1)

Mateo_LeFou (859634) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526268)

"A group of individuals (mostly with anonymous emails) contacted all our customers."

I presume he's talking about sys-con's advertisers. This is not journalism in the fourth-estate sense; it is simply another cynical business model. Do what it takes to deliver up the eyeballs to the advertisers.

In this respect, I can't see why O'Gara was let go -- presumably it's because she indirectly caused what they think are DoS attacks, and you can't @#$$% with the revenue stream.

I picture Ned Beatty here. Anyone with me?

It's about money... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526293)

...and nothing else. He printed the article because he was getting paid to do so. He pulled it only when he thought he was losing money by not doing so.

Any other noises he's making are just BS.

World's leading i-technology magazine publisher (4, Funny)

Chuck Chunder (21021) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526326)

Well that makes sense, surely everyone else would be too embarrassed to call themselves an "i-technology magazine publisher".

I suppose it could be worse, they could be an "i-technology e-magazine net-publisher".

Who is Fuat Kircaali? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12526338)

Who is Fuat Kircaali?
By Maureen O'Gara

Friday May 13, 2005 - A few weeks ago I went looking for the elusive asswipe who allegedly publishes the Sys-Con family of bird cage liners.

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.

Oh yeah? Wonder what cold crème she uses.

Fuat Abdi Kircaali is a 61-year-old Jehovah's Witness who lives in a shabby genteel $2.2 million mansion in desperate need of an interior decorator on a heavily trafficked commercial road at 3001 NE 36th Street in Lighthouse Point, Florida. Lighthouse Point is in Broward County and Broward County is spam-scam country.

See, even though Kircaali treats Linux "magazines" like they were Kleenex and publishes hit-pieces regularly, one number it left with a journalist led to this home address and - wouldn't you know it but - he cosigned for the $1.76 million adjustable rate mortgage with his apparent live-in girlfriend and Senior Vice President of advertising, Carmen Gonzalez.

Fuat and Carmen have lived in this little piece of property since February, 2003.

Now, this isn't your usual anonymous Florida McMansion. It's practically a self-contained village where spammers launch billions of V1-a'6rA emails upon the world from their garage, porn directors fuck the mouths off of white trash girls and people know each other's business.

But Washington Mutual didn't know much about Fuat when they gave him a mortgage except that he had a computer, worked at home (maybe sometimes) for a lawyer, and liked yachts. Oh yes, and fucking his Senior Vice President of Advertising.

He was also missing and had been for weeks.

Nobody there knew where he was.

He had up and disappeared one day, and the yacht skipper was worried about him. He said his son, Fuat Abdi Gonzalez Jr. had dropped by and he didn't know where she was, and that some Linux zealots that "nobody knew," as the webmaster described them, had tried to DoS his website 5 times while he was gone - the SCO license he had had installed on his site - something nobody else in the internet seemed to feel a need for - was more expensive than the server.

FUCKING HIS SR. VICE PRESIDENT OF ADVERTISING.

TO BE CONTINUED.

Not a DoS, Fuat (0, Redundant)

Dr.Zap (141528) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526348)

Tsk, tsk. It was not a DoS, Fuat, and it was not an attack. It was a DDoS, and the result of your publishing an article that many people tried to read simultaniously, an occurance commonly refered to as a "slashdotting". You're a publisher. Isn't this the kind of attention you wanted?

DDoS,DoS, but not an attack. (1)

Dr.Zap (141528) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526361)

Oops, what am I thinking? it was a DoS too, just not an attack.

OK I changed my mind back again........ (3, Insightful)

i_want_you_to_throw_ (559379) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526351)

Here I was ready to give Sys-Con the benefit of the doubt since they fire MOG but fuck it! This interview only proves that they aren't sorry, they do NOT see the err of MOGs ways.

If MOGs story WERE legitimate and they fired MOG not because of her story but because of it's unpopularity then that too would be mucho unethical.

Throw Sys-Con and it's publications into your meat/cyber space equivalent of a kill file.

Reminds me of tabloid journalism (1)

dacarr (562277) | more than 9 years ago | (#12526391)

This guy running Syscon seems a bit like a tabloid journalist. I get a feeling that the interviewer just came out of the interview feeling like he had a bucket of snot poured on him.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?