Redditors (and Popehat) Versus a Bus Company 153
Techdirt explains the strange story of a lawsuit-happy bus company in Illinois which managed to tick off a cadre of determined redditors by calling them uncomplimentary names in the reddit forums. This all started when a bus passenger, Jeremy Leval, reported unsavory behavior by a company employee (telling an exchange student "If you don't understand English, you don't belong at the University of Illinois or any 'American' University.") and said so online. Besides the name calling on reddit, the bus company threatened the forum moderator with libel charges, and over insults posted by the bus company employees which the moderator had deleted. Further, company owner "[Dennis] Toeppen threatened to sue Leval, saying, 'The attorneys for Suburban Express are reviewing this incident with a view towards filing the appropriate legal action against this meddlesome MBA student.'" Attorney Ken White of Popehat got involved, though, and asked with good effect whether the company had fully considered the Streisand Effect. The strangest part? Toeppen's former involvement as a domain squatter.
Sure... (Score:5, Insightful)
Letâ(TM)s hope the Redittors are more accurate with this "issue" than they were with the Boston Bombers. People seem so willing to take whatever is posted on some web site by people that (right or wrong) have some vested thing in some opinion or view. Sometimes a critical mass builds in the Forums when the actual facts end up being completely different from reality. I wasn't there, Iâ(TM)m not jumping on the Band Wagon until the whole thing shakes out.
Re: (Score:1)
If I wanted shitty soap operas I'd watch daytime TV.
Re:Sure... (Score:5, Funny)
So, did anything that matters happen today?
Kentucky Derby. GOD am I wasted...
Re: (Score:1)
We always have more fun when ur asleep.
Re: Sure... (Score:1)
I used to think slashdot was the place to go for new stories.
I read this a few days ago.
In Internet years, it feels like a few months ago.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Sure... (Score:5, Insightful)
Surely you're not suggesting that it matters what colour skin they have?
It does when redditors are tracking down bomb suspects.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What did they get wrong with the Boston Bombers? I don't follow blogs as a source of news.
Just about everything, they labeled at least one innocent bystander as a terrorist.
If the Redditors actually left their basements it would have been a full on lynch mob.
Re: (Score:2)
UMADBRO?
Re: (Score:1)
Because clearly those that speculated on a website should be held responsible for the news and police taking their speculation as fact. Why did the rest of the internet bite so hard on the media's bait and switch with this story? It's like witnessing brainwashing firsthand...
Re: (Score:3)
Squabbles in forums should stay in forums. Anybody willing to spend money to feed shysters over some name calling and trash talk, gives a bad name to forums. /. with our mod system we can say anything we don't mind being modded down for. We can blow off steam and say all kinds of abusive shit and people know it's just shit and steam.
Best off to just escalate the trash talk till the morons go away.
Damn, we're almost civilized here on
I know I've been pissing you guys off with my "outta left field opinions", o
Re: (Score:2)
You are dumber, but thats a reflection on you and not the summary.
It's so easy to Toll on the Intertubes, I'm surprised you chose to Troll logged in rather than as an Anonymous Coward... I'll give you "points" for that, but not your comment.
Re: (Score:1)
It's a toll bridge, not a troll bridge.
Re: (Score:3)
Troll
Noun
1. Any comment that isn't complimentary.
For example:
cousinloving44: This is dumb. You're dumb. Everything is dumb!
hpoirot: Oh Cointreau mon sherry. Perhaps it is you who are the dumbo, no?
cousinloving44: OMG TROLL!
Dictionary of Modern Internet English, edited by Frosty Piss.
What Sort Of Outfit Are They Running There? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It depends on the players you are looking for. Are you looking for those skilled at degrading ad hominem attacks or reasonable intellectual debate? If the first, I am available. If the second, please look elsewhere.
Re: (Score:2)
Calling reddit an "intellectual forum" suggests you've never had the misfortune of dealing with it. Whenever Slashdot feels like a decayed and festering cesspool, just go have a look at the idiotic drivel over there and you'll realize just how good we still have it here -- even despite the influx of idiotic political bullshit normally found in Disqus comments at the bottom of CBS news articles linked to from Drudge and the addition of all the slashvertisements of the last few years.
Re: (Score:2)
Hell, I'm one of them. I loved USENET. Unabashedly, unashamedly but not in an alt.love fashion (i.e.perversion).
Re: (Score:2)
That an intellectual forum of internet posters could degrade to ad hominem attacks instead of reasoned debate.... Is this the /. farm system where we draft our new players from?
I know the post is facitious, but the summary was poor. It wasn't reddit posters that resorted to ad homs, it was the owner of the bus company who made several troll accounts (including ones trying to impersonate his "foes") and posted various hilarious troll attempts.
Essentially the owner of the bus company has a very short fuse, a persecution complex, and no self control. So while he was filing lawsuits he was also trolling the lawsuit targets with troll reddit accounts.
It's Ocean Strategery [sic] and Pen
Re: (Score:2)
It seems I can't spell "facetious", I thought I caught that typo. Oh well.
Stuff that matters? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
It's impossible to flamebait libertarians, they flame constantly with no provocation whatsoever.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Is that like a self-basting troll? Mmmm tasty!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Stuff that matters? (Score:5, Interesting)
I've never argued against any technology being used when you have an imminent threat, an active crime going on," Paul said. "If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and fifty dollars in cash. I don't care if a drone kills him or a policeman kills him."
Re: (Score:2)
He's not arguing that people coming of liquor stores should be killed; he's saying that there's bugger all difference between being killed by a policeman and being killed by a drone. What, it's supposed to make the dead guy happier that the bullet was fire as a result of a trigger being pulled instead of a button being pressed?
Re: (Score:1)
After the policeman accidentally kills me, my family has some legal grounds to stand on and go after the officer and/or the department. With a drone, there's no way to know with 100% certainty who was controlling it. Cops already delete dash cam video and other video evidence. You know they'll mess with drone recordings too. The department won't release the name of the person controlling it, they'll say it was a glitch, or the wind moved the bullet/drone right when it fired, the camera was miscalculated
Re: (Score:2)
That is dumb and makes no sense. If the cops could pull the shit you say they would, they WOULD BE pulling the shit you say they would, right now -- and the situation we'd be in now would be no different than the one you're hypothesizing about. That things don't work that way now would indicate that the cops aren't capable of that level of bullshittery.
Re: (Score:2)
> ... they WOULD BE pulling the shit you say they would, right now -- ....
I think [barrycam.com] that you [wordpress.com] may not have been paying attention. [theagitator.com]
The public can video the drone taking some action, but cannot link from that to the operator. If multiple drones are in operation at any one time, with multiple operators, reasonable doubt could be easily established simply by "losing" the drone captured imagery.
The police don't have to prove whatever drone problems they claim, they just have to create reasonable doubt.
Re: (Score:2)
...What, it's supposed to make the dead guy happier that the bullet was fire as a result of a trigger being pulled instead of a button being pressed?
Apparently that is our dividing line in Syria. If folks get killed by poison gas, then we'll interfere and send over troops without having any rational end game in mind. But as long as the folks are only getting killed by assault rifles, tanks, guided missiles and bombs, well everything is hunky-dory.
Re: (Score:2)
at least in America they have the right, at least until rand Paul shoots them with a drone because they walk out of a liquor store suspiciously
Honestly though, that would be kinda cool. Can we do that now, because, they'll only get the chance once, and I want to be alive to see the shitstorm.
Re:Stuff that matters? (Score:4, Insightful)
You hold the public in too high esteem. The majority of Americans would say "he musta been guilty or they wouldn'ta droned 'em".
People don't want due process anymore. They don't believe in innocence until guilt is proven. They have absolutely no sense of the civil liberty they are rightfully owed other than when it comes to wanting weed to be legalized because "textiles, dude".
Re: (Score:2)
It matters because it shows that alleged free market companies cannot really survive in a free market.
How does it show this? Are you saying a company that gives bad service should thrive in a free market?
Re:Stuff that matters? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
The suppression of information is the antithesis of a free market.
That's _exactly_ how Monsanto is evil. Genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) aren't necessarily more evil than generationally modified organisms (normally bred). They're probably going to grow more food for cheaper with the same problems as growing other foods.
Monsanto's evil lies in trying to lie about it. Monsanto wants to prevent people from knowing they are eating GMO foods or buying milk with growth hormones added. Monsanto says it's because people won't buy the new stuff.
Bullshit.
If Monsanto passes
Re: (Score:1)
the company is borderline criminal, almost certainly Republican-linked
If it's a bus company and criminal, that sounds more like Democrat-linked.
Re:Having solved all of the world's other problems (Score:5, Insightful)
Why doesn't Reddit ever use their hivemind to affect change for any of the real, substantial problems we have in this world?
I can't help noticing that you don't seem to be helping the world right this second. Why are you posting on Slashdot when you could be affecting change for some of the real, substantial problems we have in this world?
Re: (Score:2)
Irony: he had it right.
Re: (Score:1)
BWAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAA
Re: Having solved all of the world's other problem (Score:1)
No. To "effect change" means to "bring about change." It's a standard English idiom. To "affect change" is a meaningless expression.
Re: (Score:2)
Good luck effecting that...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"I can't help noticing that you don't seem to be helping the world right this second."
Speak for yourself.
"Why are you posting on Slashdot when you could be affecting change for some of the real, substantial problems we have in this world?"
Because all of the problems I deal with are handled by computer. Gotta love being able to ensure a country's food production half-naked in my living room, while designing prototypes at the same time. What the fuck are YOU doing to solve some of the more pressing problems?
O
Re: (Score:1)
A minority of people that use reddit aren't taking too kindly to a xenophobic bus driver and his employer. Hyperbole from you and you alone, and ironically, your post puts you into the category of people you are moaning about.
Re: (Score:2)
Why doesn't Reddit ever use their hivemind to affect change for any of the real, substantial problems we have in this world?
You mean like the live-blog of the Boston Bombing police scanner reports, being fact checked in real time hours before the network news?
I'm not sure what you're getting at? So, what? You want them to just run the country?
Re: Having solved all of the world's other problem (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Reddit gets their panties in a bunch over a bus driver in BumfuckEgypt, IL who unsurprisingly is a lukewarm bigot.
Well, UIUC is the birthplace of Mosaic and Netscape, that ought to count for something on slashdot.
What sort of university is this? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
I think you meant to say "hear" instead of "here".
Are you sure you're in an American university? (I only have a GED and I know that's wrong.)
Re: (Score:1)
I don't see how it could be self-evident when you clearly lack the ability to use words and punctuation correctly.
I've met too many commissioned officers (in the military) that are like you; they depended on us dumb enlisted people to fix their errors so they wouldn't end up looking like fools in front of their higher ups. And God forbid that we should miss a mistake that our intellectual superiors made...
Re: (Score:2)
Universities have a way of normalizing that without needing to actively discriminate though: if you don't understand the language in which classes are taught, you are not likely to succeed and ultimately graduate.
Contract of Adhesion with sneaky terms (Score:5, Informative)
.
There's a very interesting write-up at the Daily Illini about this company and their practices by someone who initially did not believe how bad and wierd (and imho probably illegal) the actions of this bus company were and are:
Re:Contract of Adhesion with sneaky terms (Score:5, Interesting)
If it's the same company that was in a Chicago Tribune article recently, their terms of service make some cell phone services look outright peachy in comparison. Almost like loan sharks on wheels. The company could have two busses going to the same place at the same time, but if you hop on the wrong one the company will go after you for theft. Also no refund for that ticket that's only good for a specific time on that specific bus. So if they screw up you're screwed anyways. I'd also guess the upkeep and maintenance on the vehicles is nothing to talk about either, old rattletrap vehicles with questionable maintenance and comparable to a roach motel on wheels.
Pretty much it's a shady and exploitative company. You'd be better off asking for rides on a campus bulletin board, Craigslist, or hiking with a backpack near a major highway and thumbing it.
Re: (Score:2)
Except it's not the sneaky terms, it's the blatant fraud. I am not super convinced by the student newspaper report...
Re:Contract of Adhesion with sneaky terms (Score:5, Interesting)
They file the lawsuits in a neighbouring county so that the students are ineligible for legal aid support from the university and thus can't afford to defend themselves - the "fines" are cheaper than the cost of defending yourself.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Why, thank you! They should hire me as an editor, dontcha think?
Re: (Score:2)
Looks like you have your dupe post skills down pat; now just work on your spelling and grammar (you'll need a lot more errors for Slashdot front-page copy).
Public relations checklist (Score:5, Funny)
Suburban Express' marketing department should probably update the public relations checklist:
MEMO
TO: All employees, and particularly boss-type in-charge people
SUBJ: Keeping your feet away from your mouths
Before posting on an online forum, sending an email, or communicating with the press, reread your message. Do any of your statements:
If you circled "Y" on any of these items, please turn off your computer and do not send the message.
Thank you!
~R.P. Choadington, V.P., P.R, H.R., VHS, QVC. esquire
American checklist (Score:2, Insightful)
MEMO
TO: All persons who claim to be Americans
SUBJECT: Actually being an American, rather than a useful idiot
Before denouncing somebody as a "racist", "sexist", "homophobe" etc, please review your statement and the circumstances:
1. Did you actually hear the offensive speech or are you just jumping on the bandwagon and taking somebody else's word that the offensive speech was spoken? Remember: some people make claims like this as a way to invalidate somebody they have other disagreements with.
2. Are you sure
Re: (Score:2)
If I had not just commented elsewhere you would have got +1 insightful for that.
Most corporations don't enjoy having employees from the shallow end of the gene pool speaking in public.
Suburban Express is the new Santa Cruz? (Score:2)
we desperately need something new to bash... SCO is dead (or an artificially stimulated fighting zombie at most), microsoft keeps fucking up so much i almost feel sorry for them (almost), google is increasing the linux marketshare too much to call them "really evil" even apple bashing is getting stale since samsung is apparently flooding the market with cheaper-than-i-things (we all knew they would).
we neeeeed something to bash.... a bus company full of lawyers may not be threatening linux, but hey it's sti
Slimy Company (Score:5, Interesting)
So I went to school at Illinois, and still live in C/U. We've all known for years just how bad Suburban Express is, but unfortunately there's enough people that don't know, and enough new people each year, that keep them in business. While it's weird that this made Slashdot, it's nice to see them get the publicity that they deserve.
Re: (Score:1)
Who pays? (Score:3)
I am completely sick of threatened and nuisance lawsuits with no purpose other than to intimidate or force others to make some arbitrary change in their socially acceptable behavior.
Filing a law suit should at an absolute minimum require the plaintiff to pay some costs to the defendant (perhaps the smaller of the legal costs incurred by either side) should the plaintiff lose. This will help to minimize the number of frivolous lawsuits and so minimize the quelling impact of such lawsuits on society.
Threatening a law suit in a public forum instead of contacting the defendant privately or simply filing said suit is nothing more than creating a spectacle trying to achieve the same quelling without even paying the cost to file. As such it should be punishable via a simple civil action with a default judgment (e.g. similar to junk fax) with the fine to be split equally between the wronged party and whomever pursues action to completion.
While we are at it, anyone who threatens or actually does file a suit against an inanimate object should face the same penalty as does one threatening a suit. The penalty should be faced both by the individual and additionally the organization (if any) who sponsors their lawsuit activity and by all their superiors within that organization.
Re: (Score:1)
Filing a law suit should at an absolute minimum require the plaintiff to pay some costs to the defendant (perhaps the smaller of the legal costs incurred by either side) should the plaintiff lose
I was about to say how that would never work for the little guy trying to sue a big company with an army of lawyers. Then I noticed your bit about paying the smaller of the legal costs from either side. That's actually quite a clever way to work around the issue. I approve.
Re: (Score:2)
Filing a law suit should at an absolute minimum require the plaintiff to pay some costs to the defendant (perhaps the smaller of the legal costs incurred by either side) should the plaintiff lose.
So you are saying only rich people should be allowed to file lawsuits? Sometimes even the people who are in the right still manage to lose.
Re: (Score:2)
So you are saying only rich people should be allowed to file lawsuits?
That would be different from the current system... how?
Re: (Score:2)
I've given some thought to mitigating that issue as you can see by my proposal which while imposing costs on the losing plaintiff, would provide a firm limit to that cost under the control of the plaintiff. If you have a better solution to the problem of nuisance lawsuits, or to improve my idea, I'm probably not the only one who'd like to hear your idea.
Re: (Score:2)
Filing a law suit should at an absolute minimum require the plaintiff to pay some costs to the defendant (perhaps the smaller of the legal costs incurred by either side) should the plaintiff lose. This will help to minimize the number of frivolous lawsuits and so minimize the quelling impact of such lawsuits on society.
Aside from reclaiming legal costs, how about the plaintiff stands to lose the amount of compensatory and punitive damages they seek? That'll bring frivolous lawsuits to a halt with a quickness, and will probably keep amounts sought reasonable in legitimate suits. (Keep the appeals process in place, of course.)
Re: (Score:2)
So I hire a no-win-no-fee lawyer, and if I lose, I don't have to pay anything.
I believe most judges are smart enough to realize that the lack of a bill from lawyer to client does not mean no costs have been incurred.
I know the guy... (Score:5, Interesting)
I've done some consulting work for him in the past.
Honestly... He's sort of a jerk sometimes, and he makes some really poor decisions sometimes. But he's honest, and he's not a total moron. He isn't suing people to create some kind of crazy profit center, he's trying to deal with people using forged or incorrect tickets to get on buses. People like to point to his (admittedly a little wacky) terms and conditions and imply that he's suing over stupid shit. He's not, so far as I know. He's suing over people who do stuff like print three copies of the same ticket and get on three different buses that are running the same schedule. This isn't about "socially acceptable behavior", for the most part. (Some of the later stuff, like the defamation claims, was pretty dumb IMO, though.)
And everyone jumps in with some "oh, hey, I know how you could easily solve this!" solution. It's like the thing where, if you spend ten years working with doctors to try to treat insomnia, anyone who hears about this will suggest you cut down on caffeine after dinner. Because, obviously, neither you nor the doctors have ever thought of that!
Yes, there really are reasons that checking passengers against a manifest is at the very least a substantially higher cost than the (fairly small, compared to the user base) amount of fraud. Yes, there are reasons it probably wouldn't be a good tactic at all. It's not that he's too much of an idiot to think of this, it's that he has more information about what is actually happening than those of us who are reading couple-paragraph summaries over the Internet.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh dear, letting facts and shades-of-grey realities get in the way of a corporations-iz-evills story!
You must be new round here... %-P
Rgds
Damon
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You're completely neglecting the part where he is using his lawyers to intimidate and threaten the authors of reddit posts, Facebook posts, and yelp reviews.
He's also not only suing people who forge tickets. He's suing students who used the To/From tickets on a round trip backwards. Or whose parents issued a chargeback becuase the bus never showed up.
In my opinion, his ticketing practices are crap - but that's not the real issue, at all.
English (Score:3, Insightful)
To be fair, the quoted statement is perfrctly valid in itself, and universities, indeed, require an English test for students whose native language is not English, for this very purpose.
I remember that when I arrived in US in September 1993, for a few weeks I could not talk to locals because I did not understand spoken English. I avoided talking to them because I expected it to be too much of a trouble for them to have a conversation with me. Once I adjusted to the spoken US dialect of English, I reached the point when communication with me was worth the trouble, so I could talk to people without expecting them to run away in frustration. That was common courtesy on my part.
On the other hand, if now some ignorant racist fuck will pretend that he doesn't understand me because he can kinda recohnize some Russian accent in my speech, I would tell him to go fuck himself with the Washington Monument.
Re: (Score:2)
WTF? Terms and Conditions on a bus??? (Score:2)
No they most likely didn't (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure all the idiots here will only be happy when they are a white minority in THEIR OWN COUNTRY and have nowhere left to run to, and the hate-filled third world invaders have taken their jobs, and are now attacking them in the streets with impunity.
But I am a foreigner living in US, I am white, and I still hate you. Maybe the problem is not with someone's skin color but with you being a racist asshole with no redeeming qualities whatsoever.