The final fate of alexlucard

[sigma7]

In case you missed it, the artist formerly known as alexlucard has been stalked by a "vampire hunter" whose name I can't mention lest LJAbuse can my account. No, seriously. I'd go off more, but really, the last thing I want to do is put my fate in the hands of LJAbuse right now.

Anyhow, this is primarily a note to let any friends of Lucard who haven't found out yet that (1) he was right and (2) it doesn't matter, he's now off LJ forever:

Anyway, due to a NDA that was part of the settlement I can’t talk about much. Yet. I have to kind of scour the document to see what bits of comedy gold I can give you guys. However in true sore loser fashion, I got perma-banned after rubbing their faces in this whole thing, this time ont he grounds of simply “Refusal of service” which is totally legal. So alas, I won, I got a lot of lolz out of this, it didn’t have to go to court because they realized they had about as much a chance to win as the Unabomber did, but I remain forever a pariah from a blogging community that feels they can ignore both US and international law simply because they want to. Oh well, c’est la vie, no?

Lucard has a new site, though, and there's an RSS feed for those who want to add it to their friends page: alucard_rss, and you can add it here.

The whole mess is more than a little frustrating and depressing.

Comments

[paradisacorbasi.livejournal.com]

[to the tune of badgers]
BoggleBoggleBoggleBoggleBoggleBoggleBoggleBoggleBoggleBoggleBoggle...

[(Anonymous)]

Dude! F-Only this!
I don't even remotely want to risk you getting nailed by LJabuse.
-HBK

[sigma7.livejournal.com]

Meh. If I get in trouble for being frustrated that an LJer (a) gets stalked, (b) gets tired of it and (c) gets permabanned for being right, I'll gladly depart. My paid time's almost up anyway.

[alasdair.livejournal.com]

You don't happen to know if there's an address we can complain to, do you?

[sigma7.livejournal.com]

I've got an overwhelming sense of futility about this, but if I did feel like taking on The Man, I'd probably go here.

Thing of it is, despite that no matter how wrong they were during the initial Lucard/vampire-hunter stalking/harassment, I'm sure they've got a Terms o'Service that allows them to permaban anyone for whatever reason they decide -- and if they don't, they'll just add it to the TOS.

Me, I'm just baffled by the fact that LJAbuse sided with the would-be-slayer in the first place.

[aardy.livejournal.com]

I suspect they sided with who they did because he was the one who complained to Abuse first.

If the guy was truly being as stalker-ish/abusive as described, then Lucard could have registered an official complaint at that point and LJAbuse would have in their own documentation that said guy is a known menace and not to be believed.

[alexlucard.myopenid.com (from livejournal.com)]

Actually I did file it. They IGNORED it, saying even though he's legally been listed as a public figure and it's illegal for LJabuse to ignore international law on the subject, they decided he wasn't a public figure because "they never heard of him." Even though they were sent several court cases showing he does this all the time to people. And the BBB and ofcom sided with me.

LJabuse basically decided they can ignore federal law because they feel like it.

[aardy.livejournal.com]

Please excuse me, but after reading now at least three descriptions of what happened when (and getting more and more disgusted with LJAbuse's behavior in this case) I'm still a bit hazy about what I see as a possible key step in the process: If you simply reported to LJAbuse that you were being stalked, and did so BEFORE he complained that you had posted his name, how can their response to the accusation of stalking be "He's not a public figure?"

As a reponse to "I can jolly well post his name if I want to", that would make sense; but it is such a total non sequitur to "Can you please do something about the constant abuse I'm suffering at the hands of this troll?" that I'm left wondering what the order of events actually was. (Even "I'm sorry, but he's since reported you for a TOS violation, and we think his report has more merit than yours" or "We have no record of you reporting him for abuse, we only have his report of you violating his privacy" would make more sense than "He can't possibly be stalking you because he's not a public figure".)

However, "We're talking about his reporting you for abuse, and now you're trying to counter his complaint by reporting him for stalking? Sorry, first in gets dibs on the abuse process and last one in is a rotten egg troll", while a horrendous way to run a complaints desk, in the absense of any further details to the contrary could also explain why they'd ignore your complaint about him and also why they'd reply with "He's not a public figure."

So do you now see why I'm confuzzled about the actual order of events? (And why "But LJAbuse ignored a federal law and lots of lawyers agree with me!", doesn't make this particular point any clearer?)