| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
The next chapter in the Merkey sagaThe next chapter in the Merkey sagaPosted Jun 22, 2005 4:31 UTC (Wed) by jhardin (guest, #3297)Parent article: The next chapter in the Merkey saga
"... a file of people to be killed" ?
As in, *PLONK*?
Either Mr. Murkey is intentionally misrepresenting in a court filing what a killfile is, or he is just not up-to-speed on common Internet jargon. Can't help with the former, but for the latter here are some references:
http://catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/K/kill-file.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killfile
http://www.hyphenologist.co.uk/killfile/killfilefaq.htm
Also, a running this legal document through a spell checker before making it public would have improved its chances of being taken seriously (granted, at the cost of some of its - surely unintentional - humor value).
Jeff, you're your own worst enemy.
(Log in to post comments)
The next chapter in the Merkey saga Posted Jun 22, 2005 4:35 UTC (Wed) by jmaclean (guest, #30606) [Link] Here is Bruce's actual comment.
The next chapter in the Merkey saga Posted Jun 22, 2005 4:42 UTC (Wed) by jachim (subscriber, #2963) [Link] The guy doesn't even know what RCU is, and he claims to be this great and awesome computer scientist? Give me a break!
The next chapter in the Merkey saga Posted Jun 22, 2005 10:26 UTC (Wed) by vorlon42 (subscriber, #28435) [Link] Ah, but of course he's making intentional misrepresentations in a court filing. Lots of them. Why? Because he's representing himself, so he has no attorney fees for this nonsense, just court costs — which means there is a very substantial inequality indeed when it comes to challenging this bullshit in Mr. Merkey's home court. When you have no ethics, no attorney's fees, and very little risk of a finding against you, it's amazing what kind of crap you'll sign your name to in official court documents.
The next chapter in the Merkey saga Posted Jun 22, 2005 17:19 UTC (Wed) by iabervon (subscriber, #722) [Link] There is still the issue of a five year prison sentence for perjury. If he actually filed this and can be demonstrated to understand the term "email kill file", he could easily get in serious legal trouble.
another day, another killfile Posted Jun 22, 2005 21:50 UTC (Wed) by qu1j0t3 (guest, #25786) [Link] Kurt Wall added Merkey to his killfile, and informed him about it, back on 19 Oct last year.
another day, another killfile Posted Jun 22, 2005 22:19 UTC (Wed) by qu1j0t3 (guest, #25786) [Link] Ditto by Lee Revell. You think Jeff would be familiar with this killfile business by now, wouldn't you, since he clearly combed every post in that thread.
another day, another killfile Posted Jun 23, 2005 15:18 UTC (Thu) by tjw.org (guest, #20716) [Link] > Anyway, thanks for your posts - now I know how to use the kill file in Evolution 2.0.
You must consider the fact that Mr. Merky could believe that "Evolution 2.0" is an application designed for maintaining one's list of people to assassinate.
The next chapter in the Merkey saga Posted Jul 2, 2005 2:01 UTC (Sat) by vnj (guest, #30787) [Link] Let's remember who we are dealing with. Read Judge Anthony W. Schofield's "Findings of Fact" in a case regarding Jeff Merkey:In the 4th Judicial District Court, Utah County, State of Utah Case Number: 970400339 DATED: January 30, 1998 Anthony W. Schofield, Judge FINDINGS OF FACT I find that the following facts have been proven by a preponderance of the evidence: 124. In fact, however, Merkey is not just prone to exaggeration, he also is and can be deceptive, not only to his adversaries, but also to his own partners, his business associates and to the court. He deliberately describes his own, separate reality. 131. While it is human nature for each of us to put our own spin on events which we observe...Merkey nonetheless regularly exaggerates or lies in his comments to others about events happening around him. It is as though he is creating his own separate reality. 135. Given his penchant for creating a separate reality and for deliberate misrepresentation, I find Merkey's claim ... unreliable. Rather, he wanted to have the benefit of both worlds -- his world actually working on a clustering model based upon the Novell architecture -- but also a world in which he could claim that he was not using or misappropriating Novell confidential technical information. 146. Merkey asserts that he did not fit in at Novell because he had a different ethnic or religious background than most of the Novell workers. This claim was not supported by any meaningful evidence. [note: emphasis mine] Sound familiar? There is plenty more. And remember: this is a judge making these statements. I have no idea if Mr. Jeff Merkey's claims are true, but would you trust this guy? You can find the original document here (for a fee) or read a copy at Gorklaw.
|
|
||||||||||||