SlimVirgin tries out IRC!, Cloak not always working right Options

[Daniel Brandt]

SlimVirgin tries out IRC! Her cloak on #wikipedia isn't always working reliably.

[Mar 2 2007 13:08:14] *** Joins: SlimVirgin (n=SlimVirg@S0106001124dba11e.ss.shawcable.net)
[Mar 7 2007 11:43:43] *** Joins: SlimVirgin (n=SlimVirg@S0106001124dba11e.ss.shawcable.net)
[Mar 27 2007 16:37:00] *** Joins: SlimVirgin (n=SlimVirg@S0106001124dba11e.ss.shawcable.net)
[Apr 2 2007 17:08:16] *** Joins: SlimVirgin (n=SlimVirg@S0106001124dba11e.ss.shawcable.net)

That resolves to 70.64.11.240 -- looks like she's in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Her previously known IP was 70.64.45.10 -- which also appears to be in Saskatoon.

[Mar 6 2007 23:45:49] *** Joins: SlimVirgin (n=SlimVirg@wikipedia/slimvirgin)
[Mar 6 2007 23:47:09] <ANGRY_MACROPHAGE> Hello SlimVirgin
[Mar 6 2007 23:47:13] <ANGRY_MACROPHAGE> I don't remember seeing you here before
[Mar 6 2007 23:47:14] <SlimVirgin> hey
[Mar 6 2007 23:47:23] <SlimVirgin> I don't come in much
[Mar 6 2007 23:47:31] <SlimVirgin> it seems very quiet
[Mar 6 2007 23:47:35] <Messedrocker> hey slimvirgin
[Mar 6 2007 23:47:38] <ANGRY_MACROPHAGE> It's unusually quiet tonight
[Mar 6 2007 23:47:40] <SlimVirgin> hi

[Daniel Brandt]

Here's a file of 18,622 hostmasks from the last ten months of #wikipedia and #wikimedia, all resolved to IP addresses. If you don't know what hostmasks are, then you probably don't need it. If you do, then you probably know how to use "find" or "grep" from the command line. I'm thinking that while I won't be putting up the IRC logs again, I'm nevertheless inclined to put up the portion of the search engine I wrote that searched earlier (and smaller) editions of this hostmask file. That won't happen for a few weeks. If my bio is down by then, it may never happen.

Meanwhile, here it is in a 433K zip file. It unzips to a 1.2 meg hostmask.txt file. Line terminations are CR/LF.

In order to disassociate itself from the defamation that occurs on the Wikipedia IRC channels recommended by the Foundation, and patrolled by the Foundation's agents, I believe that Freenode should disallow all cloaks on the various Wikipedia channels hosted by Freenode.

[Alkivar]

In order to disassociate itself from the defamation that occurs on the Wikipedia IRC channels recommended by the Foundation, and patrolled by the Foundation's agents, I believe that Freenode should disallow all cloaks on the various Wikipedia channels hosted by Freenode.

I dont think that would change anything really... a court order can still get an ip even if the client is masked/cloaked.

[Daniel Brandt]

I dont think that would change anything really... a court order can still get an ip even if the client is masked/cloaked.

It depends on how long Freenode keeps hostmask logs. The Foundation rotates their logs every several weeks, which means that a subpoena is futile in most cases. Freenode probably doesn't keep logs even this long. If that's true, then Freenode's hands would be cleaner with respect to defamation-infested channels such as #wikipedia if they'd just stop issuing cloaks when requested by the Foundation's designated IRC group contacts. Maybe I should compile a list of defamatory comments about me from #wikipedia, and note the ones that are cloaked, and send a formal letter to Freenode requesting the hostmasks for these cloaked users.

Do you think they'd bend over backward protecting the Foundation? Interesting question.

[BobbyBombastic]

i would think that freenode would probably keep IP logs a long while.

i don't think they would bend over backwards for the foundation. at some point, the wikipedia-freenode relationship may become more trouble than it's worth.

i don't know much about freenode though.

This post has been edited by BobbyBombastic: Wed 16th May 2007, 7:22pm

[Jonny Cache]

IANAB, but it seems to me that IRC chat falls under the category of "things overhead in a bar". I mean, it probably wouldn't matter much to the average J&J how loudly you proclaim somebody an ass in the heave-ho of a barfite, nobody's gonna consider that a serious libel. Of course, if a liquor store gets held up later that afternoon, some bits of bravado overhead between those who were about to be desperados might indeed count as barometers of intent.

But all this talk of bars is making me thirsty ...

Jonny

[Rootology]

IANAB, but it seems to me that IRC chat falls under the category of "things overhead in a bar". I mean, it probably wouldn't matter much to the average J&J how loudly you proclaim somebody an ass in the heave-ho of a barfite, nobody's gonna consider that a serious libel.

Has a United States court ever found "against" anyone for what amounts to talking shit in a chat room or IRC?

Posting stuff in a semi-permanent or permanent form is one thing, in cases (websites, print media, etc.). But IRC/AIM chats, etc., are transitory by nature and there is no established republishing method. I don't think (but IANAL) that you can get in serious legal trouble for being even ultra-nasty about someone, especially if you can't be tied by any records to your in-real-life identity. Given that Freenode IP information is supposedly gone in less than a month, and Wikipedia also only keeps such records for 4-6 weeks at most, and compiled with the fact that even if you did catch someone saying something...

It's not happening.

Add in the theoretical fact that if someone wanted to go after someone from another country--lets say, for argument's sake, Brandt and SlimVirgin--there's other problems.

Subpoena Freenode. Subpoena Wikipedia. You need to get judges in two jurisdictions to authorize this (I forget where Freenode is based out of it, but I don't think it was Florida). OK, you have t-minus 4-6 weeks from the 'defamation' to get those records (assuming they exist). Next, you have to proove that SlimVirgin on IRC is SlimVirgin on Wikipedia, to tie their identities together. Assuming you pull this off before the records expire off the system, you have an IP saying Slim was in both places. For argument's sake, let's say it's a Shaw IP, the big Canadian IP. Then what? You need to get Shaw to give up whose IP that is. If they don't/won't, get thee to the Canadian court. And that's assuming that THEY (Shaw) keep the records indefinitely. You're probably into the scale of months or longer by now, for time tables. Oh, and hopefully, "Slim" wasn't connecting through like a Japanes open proxy or something. Or public wireless. Or work (another thing to track down). Then what?

Let's assume that you manage to proove that Slim on IRC is Slim on Wikipedia, and tie them all together. You've "got" Slim. You've got the Foundation. You can connect the dots after much legality, of who is who, and who enabled who, and who supplied the means for someone to utter the defaming whatever. Then what? YOU still have to demonstrate it's defamation, libel, whatever. And, you'll need to do it possibly in two jurisdictions. United States for Wikipedia and Freenode, and then Canada for Slim (or England, or Turkey, or wherever the editor in question is). And then what? You could end up out thousands of dollars in legal fees, for no rewards.

Even worse, it might just lead Freenode or WP to decide to not even keep IP records "as long" going forward. If they drop them both to a week in response to avoid future liability (a valid and quite smart legal tactic), then what?

No offense, Daniel, but I think the pursuit of the people for trivial legal stuff that isn't bulletproof, while a fine noble pursuit, isn't overly worth it. Then again, you could be independently wealthy, I don't know you--spending thousands or more in American money on something like this might be a drop in the bucket, the level of my spending $4 on a coffee here in the city. I just don't think anyone's clearly enumerated the absurdly difficult and frankly impractical uphill scale this is on. I respect your work outside of the Wikipedia stuff--it's great stuff. Your fantastic researching skills may make this stuff trivial for you to do--for all I know, you've got all the stuff you need already lined up, but are waiting on perhaps getting the article taken down. But the sheer absurd scale of what is needed to make anything come out of pursuing people talking crap about you (or me, or whomever) on the Internets is almost a borderline Quixotic ideal. Lord knows I love tilting at windmills myself, but ones that are feasible to actually hit.