Comments on: JL Kirk & Associates SLAPPs Katherline Coble

By: TDL

TDL — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Quite the debate going on. I would like to point out one thing, however. The fact that this "recruitment" firm was asking for an up front fee should be a strong signal that they are scamming their clients. Recruiters do not work in this manner (multiple sources advise against using these types of firms, whether government agencies, recruiters themselves, or career centers at universities and colleges.) The use of a lawsuit to silence a critic of the firm is simply another tell of what the firm seems to be, a scam. I see no reason to criticize Mrs. Coble for writing about her experience. After all, if you are believer in the free market (which I am,) reputation is an absolutely critical component of a business. Good business can defend their reputation by simply showing their results; bad business rely on lawsuits (a generalization, but true the vast majority of the time.)

Regards,
TDL

By: Dan tdaxp

Dan tdaxp — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

If you felt you were in the right, you would not complain on D5GW or PC? You would not attempt to shame your accuser to get justice, even though your accuser is attempting to coerce you through the law-courts?

By: Curtis Gale Weeks

Curtis Gale Weeks — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

However, the profit issue also makes the two cases quite different.

By: Curtis Gale Weeks

Curtis Gale Weeks — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Dan, if it were me and JLK, I would not have gone to the first interview, certainly not the second. If, out of extreme desperation or the wish to find a benevolent angel delivering up the Divine Career, I did go to both interviews, I'd feel like a fool afterward and hush up, learning from my mistakes without having to advertise them to the world — i.e., advertising by transferring the mistake onto a proxy. So, no, there'd be no blog post on PC or D5GW about the experience.

By: Dan tdaxp

Dan tdaxp — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Curtis, to rephrase: if for your perhaps-true-but-negative-impression-generating comments, Coble chose to sue you… “you would not complain on D5GW or PC? You would not attempt to shame your accuser to get justice, even though your accuser is attempting to coerce you through the law-courts?”

By: Curtis Gale Weeks

Curtis Gale Weeks — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

No, I wouldn't try to shame Coble. Perhaps I'd try to co-opt Coble's attempt for my own purposes. And let this 10x become a 20x story with much greater consequences than a simple blogstorm trying to protect the integrity of an infantile Blogosphere.

But, hell, Dan, I'd have YOU to write about it; so why would I need to?

By: Curtis Gale Weeks

Curtis Gale Weeks — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Precisely! A threat is not the actual use [1], and when the threat is operative, it's more like 4GW. A threat is not kinetic, only the actual action is kinetic. But in this case, the action -- the trial -- would almost certainly resolve in a non-kinetic effect, or the loser's giving in to the changed reality of the situation.

[1] http://www.fifthgeneration.phaticcommunion.com/archives/2007/01/toward_a_better_understanding.php

By: Dan tdaxp

Dan tdaxp — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Dolphin,

I wonder if CGW would believe that it is fair & reasonable for Coble to see her as, though what he says may be literally true, it may leave an unfavorable impression of her? :-p

Curtis,

"when the threat is operative, it's more like 4GW"

Why? Because 4GW is a default state for non-operative threats? And likewise, do you consider 4GW War to be synonymous with 4G operations regardless of domains?

By: dolphin

dolphin — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

bloggers are happy to dish out judgment but cry "Foul!" when actual legal judgments, before an impartial judge or jury, are threatened.

Curt, I'm wondering if you bothered to actually read the entire exchange. Kat wrote a blog entry about her personal feelings about a bad experience she had with this company. She voiced an opinion, which is clear upon reading her original post.

The company in question responded, calling her names directly, insulting her, spreading demonstrably false information about her and most certainly violating any company-client confidentiality that may have existed. I think if Kat couldn't "take it," she would have most certainly deleted this comment and filed her own legal action against JLK for what is alot closer to libel than anything she had written.

If you look at the specific complaints they have about the "false and defamatory" statements she made, 3 of 4 are clearly opinion only (I'm not a lawyer, but I don't think you can sue somebody for saying "I personally don't like you"), and the remaining one is noted by the Better Business Bureau as well (I presume the BBB is not currently facing a lawsuit from JLK).

In fact, even in the cease-and-desist letter (complete with all it's spelling mistakes), they acknowledge that her statements may be "literally true." This cease-and-desist letter is just another example of the "strong-arm tactics" Kat felt she was being exposed to. Basically, Kat posted an opinion the company would rather not see and so they are trying to bully her into taking it down.

By: Curtis Gale Weeks

Curtis Gale Weeks — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Dan,

"Why? Because 4GW is a default state for non-operative threats? And likewise, do you consider 4GW War to be synonymous with 4G operations regardless of domains?"

Could you explain this? I do think that the movement toward a higher G is often a flight away from a higher K (kinetic)...but I'm not sure what you mean.