User talk:Plato/archive May 2004

Legal Threat Against Wikipedia Here

Dear Plato,

Because of your determination in opposing anarchy and vigilantism among Wikipedia leadership, you have been selected as a possible complainant against the Wikimedia Foundation for violations of Florida Statutes Title XXXIII, (Regulation of Trade, Commerce, Investments and Solicitations), Chapter 496 (Solicitation of Funds). [1]

The act requires any charitable organization in the state of Florida, such as the Wikimedia Foundation, to register [2] with that state's Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, and to disclose [3] their activities in annual statements, available to donors and to the public. Wikipedia Foundation has so far attempted to evade the letter and spirit of Florida law by claiming its published solicitations for editorial contributions and cash donations "is not and should not be considered a solicitation to make a donation." The claim is as false as would be the claim of a panhandler on a sidewalk rattling coins a tin cup that such activity is not panhandling. Wikimedia Foundation, on links provided from every page, solicits readers to contribute editorial content ("edit this page") and presents links to a soliciation to "donate if you can afford it." [4] That is a solicitation, regardless the pages attempt to say black is white. You can form your own opinions if claiming that a request to "donate if you can afford it" is not a solicitation is accurate and neutral information, as Wikipedia claims to provide.

Florida law states "'Solicitation' means a request, directly or indirectly, for money, property, financial assistance, or any other thing of value on the plea or representation that such money, property, financial assistance, or other thing of value or a portion of it will be used for a charitable or sponsor purpose or will benefit a charitable organization or sponsor. [5]

Florida law states "'Solicitation' includes, but is not limited to, the following methods of requesting or securing the promise, pledge, or grant of money, property, financial assistance, or any other thing of value: (a) Any oral or written request; (b) Making any announcement to the press, on radio or television, by telephone or telegraph, or by any other communication device concerning an appeal or campaign by or for any charitable organization or sponsor or for any charitable or sponsor purpose; (c) Distributing, circulating, posting, or publishing any handbill, written advertisement, or other publication that directly or by implication seeks to obtain any contribution; [6]

Wikimedia Foundation solicits cash donations, in-kind donations of editorial services and in-kind donations of technical services. You may pursue prosecution of Wikipedia Foundation by contacting the Florida Division of Consumer Services of the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. [7], and may verify Wikimedia Foundation's lack of compliance at the Division's on-line charitable organizations reporting page [8]. You may make an on-line complaint to the Division at http://www.800helpfla.com/~cs/ccform.html. Thank you for your interest in protecting the integrity of human knowledge, and for whatever interest you might develop in upholding the rule of law regarding charitable contributions, and compliance with the law among rouge on-line charitable organizations.

Your comrade in the struggle for equitable justice under the law,

Enforcer 02:33, 1 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

As long as I'm going out of my way to be nice to you :) have a bit of advice: Ignore this message above and pretend it never happened. If you get involved with this legal threat, then it is likely that you will get into trouble with people who have much more power than I do, and it will not help your cause. Just so you are aware... (I'm not bothering to warn the others who recieved this message.)- Fennec 05:01, May 1, 2004 (UTC)

Plato,

I am working on an article on Witness tampering. I have not posted it yet, because so far all I have is a draft. Under federal law, witness tampering is punishable by up to 10 years in prison. Title 18, Part I, Chapter 73, Sec. 1512. is titled "Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant". Maybe you can suggest a paraphrase, or how to balance this with an overview of the various state laws, such as those of your state. The federal law states, in part:

Whoever knowingly uses intimidation or physical force, threatens, or corruptly persuades another person, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to - (1)(b) influence, delay, or prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding; or... (3)hinder, delay, or prevent the communication to a law enforcement officer or judge of the United States information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense or a violation of conditions of probation, parole, or release pending judicial proceedings; shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

(c)Whoever intentionally harasses another person and thereby hinders, delays, prevents, or dissuades any person from - (1)attending or testifying in an official proceeding; (2)reporting to a law enforcement officer or judge of the United States the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense or a violation of conditions of probation, parole, or release pending judicial proceedings; causing a criminal prosecution, or a parole or probation revocation proceeding, to be sought or instituted, or assisting in such prosecution or proceeding; or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. Not all laws are the same, though, with regards to threats against people who might report a crime. Starting close to home, I looked at North Carolina's statute, 14-226, intimidating a witness. That law doesn't apply to matters in which the victim of a crime is intimidated as does the federal law, so in North Carolina prosecutors often charge extortion in those matters. I think this is similar to the extortion indictments against Michael Jackson, in which he is charged with making threats in an effort to obtain something of value - immunity, or the victim's silence. The North Carolina felony extortion statute reads:

§ 14-118.4. Extortion Any person who threatens or communicates a threat or threats to another with the intention thereby wrongfully to obtain anything of value or any acquittance, advantage, or immunity is guilty of extortion and such person shall be punished as a Class F felon. ...so probably the extortion article needs to be expanded to explain a broader view than that which probably applied only to the state of residence of the person who wrote it.

I'll get back to this in a little bit ... I need to do some more research and of course, I have other obligations beyond my charitable work at Wikipedia. Enforcer 08:06, 1 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yes, please do file a lawsuit against Wikipedia. It would be all the incentive needed to get you banned permanently. Rick K 20:26, 1 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your question on Jimbo's talk page: see this mailing list post. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 10:15, 6 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am not quitting Wikipedia. See the post above, that's a good answer. Jimbo Wales 14:03, 6 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

A little, but not all that well. - Hephaestos|§ 13:40, 7 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

hey dude, I am having my name drug through the mudd and considering I need all the friends I can get I would really appreciate your support of me in Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/GrazingshipIV thanks a simple signature rather than a statement will due-thanks GrazingshipIV 05:26, May 12, 2004 (UTC)

You have to sign under my response for it to count unfortunetly. GrazingshipIV 17:04, May 12, 2004 (UTC)

Go here and post that comment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/GrazingshipIV#Response

ok? There should be 6 people who have signed-sign under the last one. GrazingshipIV 20:57, May 12, 2004 (UTC)

Hello--Jimbo The troll Slayer 05:22, 13 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

bourgeois pig! how dare you mock the GREAT hero of the revolution Lenin, I will get you for that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!--Ê¹€ì •ì¼ 20:56, 13 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I have aim... GrazingshipIV 00:53, May 14, 2004 (UTC)

Just a note to say thanks! (taking advantage of the current inter-ban) :O) - Yours, - irismeister 18:04, 2004 May 14 (UTC)

There is strength in @)----^--

Well, I humbly accept and boldly continue my fight all along, with my rose as a symbol of strength and truth as my weapon. This is the most treasured Wiki award so far, so I feel indebted to you, comrade. Please count on me from now on - so that I might deserve the honor. Sincerely, irismeister 09:25, 2004 May 15 (UTC)

Nexus pagina tua

Salve Plato! I edited your user page in the German Wikipedia. The link to the Latin Wikipedia needed to be correct. The user page on the Latin one should be designated as "usor:user name". KIZU 19:43, 16 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Emergency

Comrade, the WikiRepublic is in danger! Wikipolice make their coup d'êtat! Please add your voice and come help John here . Thank you ! - Yours, - irismeister 17:25, 2004 May 19 (UTC)

Request for Comments on Theresa Knott

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Theresa Knott has been created as structured way to gather support in the Wikipedian community for action to be taken against Theresa Knott for her consistent use of aggressive editing tactics that are counter productive to the development of high quality encyclopedic articles. Now, is your chance to voice your grievances against Theresa Knott. Please take a few minutes of your time to air your comments. Feel free to expand the list of problem areas by adding problems or grievances of your own. -- John Gohde 04:06, 20 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Pinochet

See discussion at Talk. Your proposed version is definitely not a solution. It has all the problems I have complained about repeatedly. V V 01:51, 22 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if that sounded too harsh. I appreciate your effort to end the dispute, but the use of U.S.-backed in the intro is intolerable to me, as is the "way out" via a confusing and out-of-place footnote. V V 08:56, 22 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I really dislike the idea of using the footnote at all. It seriously breaks reading of the article, and there's nothing it says that couldn't just be said flat out in the intro. Furthermore, it's being used as cover to keep controversial wording. We should either just drop the mention of the US from the intro, leaving the large section of the article to cover the issue, or only state facts which are undisputed and worthy of emphasis. V V 11:12, 22 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Response to your question

I don't think Snowspinner is terribly offended by the statement you quoted, and on the off chance that it was directed at me, neither am I. But the simple fact that you wonder if it might be considered a personal attack should answer the real question about whether statements of this nature are appropriate to make. --Michael Snow 20:25, 22 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Your signature

Your signature renders weirdly -- the link to User_talk:Plato is really screwed up. See, for example, your vote on WP:RFA (near the bottom). cryptfiend64 03:26, May 31, 2004 (UTC)