Court Forces Disclosure of Hidden Online Identity

The Emptiness Markchine · Jun 24, 2012

Has said: ↑

Just because Cormier says there was threats to his personal safety, doesn't mean there was. Read the actual twitter comments. There really aren't that many of them and the only threat was that he was going to publicize Cormier's unethical behavior to his Rotary group. Which never happened. Cormier reported ProfessorTanked to a company just because he sent him an email disagreeing with Cormier's post. The email had nothing to do with his job- but Cormier wanted to attack ProfessorTanked for daring to disagree with him. Some people would consider that to be unethical behaviour- definitely not the openminded, allowing freedom of speech behaviour that you would expect from a newspaper journalist.

Cormier threatened lots of stuff too. For one, Cormier threatened to 'expose' ProfessorTanked to everyone if ProfessorTanked didnt pay his legal costs. "Following the receipt of his identity, my lawyer and I prepared a letter dated April 4, 2012, demanding compensation, an apology, the removal of his account and a number of other requests from Mr. DeBow." Note that the court already deemed Cormier's claim did not deserve to be awarded fees. Cormier even stated "Justice McNally ordered both of us to pay our own court fees."

What do you call it when someone threatens to expose your personal information unless you pay money? Hmmm.. I think the word is blackmail? Maybe extortion is a better word? Regardless of what you call it, that's what Cormier did. Its beyond bullying. When other people do that, they go to jail. He is lucky DeBow didn't take that email to the police. Debow refuses the threat, and Cormier says he isn't taking the situation <threat> seriously so Cormier is just to publicly humiliate and ruin Debow's reputation? Cormier- you are lucky he didnt take that seriously. Meanwhile, Cormier deliberately writes a post to publicize DeBows name ALL over the internet, lying and misleading, painting DeBow as the bully and twisting everything DeBow did do, because DeBow refused to pay Cormier money to shut Cormier up.

What we have here is a bully pretending he is the bully, in order to further bully. Read the actual twitter comments yourself with an open mind.
Click to expand...

I already tried to visit the ProfessorTanked twitter feed but the account has been deleted. Feel free to point me to these tweets. There were also emails which the public are not privy to, as far as I know.

I find it curious you've signed up to talk about this. Mr. DeBow, I'm presuming? Or a friend of his?

Clearly Justice McNally feels this is serious enough of an incident to necessitate the revealing of DeBow's (your?) identity. And Cormier clearly feels it was serious enough to pursue legal avenues. So I can't help but feel that you're not sharing the whole truth.

Enlighten me.

Has · Jul 2, 2012

Mark said: ↑

The last quote mentioned in the article was from October, but it doesn't say it was the last correspondance between the two parties. In fact, DeBow began libelling Cormier in October.

I guess the overarching point here is that at a certain point trolling becomes harassment. When you threaten the physical well-being of a person and make it known you have plans to confront them in public, knowing intimate details of this person's life, you lose your right to anonymity. It's just like trying to track down someone who has been calling you and harassing you. I fully believe Cormier has the right to protect his professional reputation as well as his physical well-being in this case, and the judge clearly agrees with this. If someone is willing to spend the money to find out who their harasser is, then that's up to them.
Click to expand...

The overarching point is that you are missing the point.

Its not harassment. Harassment is a criminal offense and the police already declined pursuing it as harassment because they found no merit to that charge.

The reputation that was ruined is DeBow. The person affected was DeBow. DeBow was threatened. DeBow was brutally libeled. You are just biased like most Atlantic Canadians who don't appear to think for themselves. There is no proof or evidence to what you say- but you say it anyway. Why is it Atlantic Canadians think if you disagree with someone then you must be harassing? That's not harassment, that's freedom of speech.

BTW "DeBow began libelling Cormier in October." if you bothered to get any sort of facts, you would have seen that statement was totally not true and in itself libel.

Finally the judge only felt Cormier has the right to have the name so he could initiate legal action if he chooses. The judge didnt even think Cormier's case warranted the judgement of fees. The judge did not and in no way, judge the accusation, the situation or DeBow's or Cormier's actions. The judge in no way 'agreed' with Cormier on the accusations- he just upheld the rule that all Canadians have the right to legal action (that does not mean you will win, but everyone has the right to sue.) I wish ignorant people would stop pretending they know more than they know.

lime treacle · Jul 2, 2012

I'm not reading all of this.

Log in or Sign up

Court Forces Disclosure of Hidden Online Identity

The Emptiness Markchine Canadian Beauty LPA Administrator

Has New Member

lime treacle Über Member Über Member

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

Court Forces Disclosure of Hidden Online Identity

The Emptiness Markchine Canadian Beauty LPA Administrator

Has New Member

lime treacle Über Member Über Member

Share This Page

Useful Searches