Terrorist Ex-Councillor Samuel Collingwood Smith / Vordrak / Sam Smith / BenvolaStar / Matthew Hopkins News - Convicted defamer, vexatious litigant, actual terrorist, GamerGator, stalker, extortionist (Prosperous Software Consulting Limited)

[Null]

"Opponents: Kiwi Farms"
I just audibly groaned. What a loser.

 

[CatParty]

"Opponents: Kiwi Farms"
I just audibly groaned. What a loser.

my favorite part is "i didn't lose too badly"

 

[Null]

I also would like to point out that his site name is the Kiwi Farms Wiki. So he's basically advertising our site on a page where he wants to downplay our site. He's a fucking genius.

 

[repentance]

I also would like to point out that his site name is the Kiwi Farms Wiki. So he's basically advertising our site on a page where he wants to downplay our site. He's a fucking genius.

It's kind of like Fire linking our threads in posts complaining about us.

We should point Fire in Sammy's direction.

 

[Ponderous Pillock]

I also would like to point out that his site name is the Kiwi Farms Wiki. So he's basically advertising our site on a page where he wants to downplay our site. He's a fucking genius.

I suspect he doesn't remotely understand the concept of the Streisand Effect.

Y'know. Standard Lolcow Behavior.

 

[HG 400]

He replied.

Yes

Cool. Being serious tho, I have some real questions.

1 - If you were good at your job on on the Milbank attack squad how come you just got shuffled off to some pissweak out-of-the-way councilman's seat instead of a MPs seat in Labour heartland, like your effective and talented colleagues got? I realise you're trying to make me scared or whatever but this is about as scary as bragging about being in ISIS and then having it turn out you're just the kid who polishes their guns or the goat they all take turns fucking.

2 - How much did it cost to correct that filing where you wrote 'KiwiNull' instead of 'KiwiDynastia'. Have you filed anything else since then? I'd like to keep a running tally on how much of your welfare money you're wasting on this. Call it personal curiosity, I guess.

3 - When Prosperous Software Company LTD files it's first return in January, are your declared profits gonna be anything close to consistent with the £72k salary you're claiming on your self-published vanity wiki? That 40% tax bracket looks savage af for a guy on welfare who just wants to make himself look successful so people on the internet will stop laughing at him, lol.

I'll keep you all posted on his answers.

 

[Smutley]

From Dynastia's email exchange this jumped out:

"The lawsuit will end as discussed but be unenforced, so you avoid a disclosure order and I avoid paying the filing fee for said order."

translation: Please don't call my bluff and make me pay the 500 that I haven't to file this obviously fake suit!

 

[Ponderous Pillock]

From Dynastia's email exchange this jumped out:

"The lawsuit will end as discussed but be unenforced, so you avoid a disclosure order and I avoid paying the filing fee for said order."

translation: Please don't call my bluff and make me pay the 500 that I haven't to file this obviously fake suit!

He'd actually have to file for a default on costs. So even if it went to an unanswered default, he has to pay.

 

[Smutley]

He'd actually have to file for a default on costs. So even if it went to an unanswered default, he has to pay.

"Weekend Law Student"

 

[HG 400]

From Dynastia's email exchange this jumped out:

"The lawsuit will end as discussed but be unenforced, so you avoid a disclosure order and I avoid paying the filing fee for said order."

translation: Please don't call my bluff and make me pay the 500 that I haven't to file this obviously fake suit!

He has to pay the 500 on the defamation suit no matter what, he's now talking about filing disclosure orders on all my social media on the grounds that he thinks I'm KiwiDynastia from ED. They'll all be laughed the fuck out of court unless he's already gone through the motions of filing disclosure on ED itself and the information returned turns out inconclusive, and even then it'll be iffy whether a judge will order twitter to disclose my info based on a newly-created ED sock with the same name defaming some faggot on the internet.

 

[Ponderous Pillock]

"Weekend Law Student"

Emphasis on the weak.

I'm not even a law student and I found this crap out.

 

[repentance]

I think I've worked out his strategy and I don't think ED or Dynastia are his ultimate targets. As he acknowledges, enforcement would be an issue.

That said, if he did obtain a default judgement he would then claim to have "won a defamation case' and try to use that as leverage against people in the UK, by claiming republication and/or secondary publication.

An interesting side question is whether he could be viewed as consenting to the continued publication of the material in question if he obtained orders but took no measures to enforce them.

 

[CervixHammer]

How ashamed of your manlet status do you have to be to start listing your height in half inch increments?

I'm sure Samuel Collingwood Smith is used to measuring things in half inch increments.

 

[DrJonesHat]

I seem to recall that US courts are kinda twitchy about enforcing anything having to do with UK defamation law since it's so draconian. Since Twitter and the like are US companies, wouldn't he have to get a US court to order them to turn over Dynastia's info?

 

[AnOminous]

He'd actually have to file for a default on costs. So even if it went to an unanswered default, he has to pay.

Even to achieve a default, he'd have to achieve service of process. Under no regime imaginable does posting whiny shit on the Internet constitute valid international service of process.

I seem to recall that US courts are kinda twitchy about enforcing anything having to do with UK defamation law since it's so draconian. Since Twitter and the like are US companies, wouldn't he have to get a US court to order them to turn over Dynastia's info?

Yes. There's the SPEECH Act, passed to protect Americans from the ludicrous defamation jurisprudence of foreign countries. It is pointedly aimed at British libel law, which is internationally notorious for its vexatious plaintiffs like the deranged individual who is the subject of this thread.

Not really relevant if both defendants are Australian, of course.

 

[repentance]

I seem to recall that US courts are kinda twitchy about enforcing anything having to do with UK defamation law since it's so draconian. Since Twitter and the like are US companies, wouldn't he have to get a US court to order them to turn over Dynastia's info?

It depends. It's difficult to get US courts to domesticate the orders of foreign courts, but with multinational companies there can be ways around that if the company maintains a presence in the nation where the action originates. Twitter US isn't under the jurisdiction of UK courts but if they operate a UK office, then that office would be.

Even with Dynastia's information, he'd still run up against issues with Australian courts (not to mention the cost).

Even to achieve a default, he'd have to achieve service of process. Under no regime imaginable does posting whiny shit on the Internet constitute valid international service of process.

I've never, ever seen alternative service allowed without the court specifying in the papers the precise method of alternative service they are allowing and why. The rules governing valid service differ between Australian states, so he'd have to know Dynastia's location in order to be familiar with the usual requirements and argue for an exception to be made.

Yes. There's the SPEECH Act, passed to protect Americans from the ludicrous defamation jurisprudence of foreign countries. It is pointedly aimed at British libel law, which is internationally notorious for its vexatious plaintiffs like the deranged individual who is the subject of this thread.

Not really relevant if both defendants are Australian, of course.

The Australian situation is both complex and evolving. The sheer cost of pursuing defamation action here means that it rarely comes before the courts and that when it does there are deep pockets defendants involved. Generally speaking, there are other remedies which can be sought in "teacup" cases without resorting to our defamation laws.

Even when it does and the plaintiff prevails, they usually suffer further damage to their reputation as a result of the proceedings and are generally still out of pocket at the end of the day as awards for costs never cover every expense incurred in mounting the action and there are caps on general damages in defamation actions.

Of course it might be difficult for Sammy to establish that he has an Australian reputation which has been damaged, and the High Court here has already ruled previously on the issue of "jurisdiction shopping".

 

[HipstrsGonnaHip]

I used to be paid to do things like this and I was good at it.

If he was any good at it why does he have to do it for free now?

 

[Ponderous Pillock]

Even to achieve a default, he'd have to achieve service of process. Under no regime imaginable does posting whiny shit on the Internet constitute valid international service of process.

He has, however, emailed the document and order to relevant parties, which counts as serving them notice.

ED shat itself and immediately cucked to his demands.

Dynastia and LikeICare however are just able to sit about. The former because they've stated publically on numerous occassions they're not the KiwiDynastia named, and LikeICare doesn't because he's too busy huffing Jenkem.

Yes. There's the SPEECH Act, passed to protect Americans from the ludicrous defamation jurisprudence of foreign countries. It is pointedly aimed at British libel law, which is internationally notorious for its vexatious plaintiffs like the deranged individual who is the subject of this thread.

Not really relevant if both defendants are Australian, of course.

I'll be honest, the whole section of the law is a ruddy annoyance to lots of folks. Makes the UK law industry a lot of money though, so nobody's in a rush to fix it.

If he was any good at it why does he have to do it for free now?

People found out the Milbank Attack Unit existed, there was a massive uproar that there was basically a dedicated smear team at the heart of a major political party lead by Derek Draper and Damien McBride.

It's whole purpose was the make up libelous statements but release them quietly as hearsay and let the stories build by themselves. (Sound familiar?)

The Unit was shut down in 2008 because McBride was stupid enough to use an official Downing Street email account instead of personal/party email addresses.

 

[HG 400]

Like Facebook, Twitter handles all non-US users privacy claims through Twitter International, which is based out of Ireland. That means they're bound by some of Europe's weakest privacy retention laws. It doesn't matter though, because a disclosure order on my account based of something a similarly named account elsewhere on the internet did will get laughed right the fuck out of court. Norfolk Orders expressly prohibit 'fishing expeditions' and require that any more sensible means of obtaining the information have been exhausted, which in this case means an order against ED.

To dox me through legal methods, Sammy has to do the following.

1. File a successful disclosure order against Encyclopedia Dramatica, in an American Ukrainian court. (or convince them to cuck out and hand the userdata over willingly)
2. If KiwiDynastia can be identified from ED's userdata, his shot at using this lawsuit to dox me has basically already ended and he'll have to just go after whoever KiwiDynastia ED is instead of continuing to target me.
3. However, if KiwiDynastia used TOR or a VPN, he can try to convince an Irish court that there's sufficient grounds to believe I am KiwiDynastia on both ED and Twitter, and file a successful disclosure order on my user data against Twitter International Inc. (This won't happen, btw, but assuming it does let's continue)
4. Find out that I used a US-based cell phone and exit node to register my twitter and actually fall under protection of Twitter Inc., out of San Fransisco
5. Successfully File a disclosure order against Twitter Inc. in an American court
6. Have Twitter Inc. hand over my American burner number and ip's but withhold everything else on the grounds that I'm not American.
7. Successfully file another disclosure order against Twitter International for the rest of my userdata, the only useful thing being some ip ranges he could have got for free 5 months ago with a pixel grabber.
8. Successfully file a disclosure order against my ISP in an Australian court (there is no possible way this will happen, as Australian ISP's don't give a fuck).
9. Find out he just doxed a stillborn baby who died in 1981.
10. Cry.

 

[AnOminous]

He has, however, emailed the document and order to relevant parties, which counts as serving them notice.

Some form of "notice" and actual valid service are vastly different things. To initiate a suit requires service of original process before the court even has jurisdiction to hear the case. Parties can arrange for alternate service once a case is actually in existence. Until then, it's garbage, though.

10. Cry.

My advice to him is he can probably save a lot of time and money by going straight to this part.