4 ms·

I kept thinking if her emails were as batshit crazy as the author states, why not just post all of them online. Buy a domain and make a big public display of wh

I kept thinking if her emails were as batshit crazy as the author states, why not just post all of them online. Buy a domain and make a big public display of what a whackjob this person is. Allow her to publicly hang herself. I suspect, as suggested in the comments, some or all of this is possibly fabricated for book sales? Otherwise, many of his responses don't make much sense. I think most would very quickly, and correctly, attempt to sue for defamation.

jpxxx 14y ago
Name and shame seems like a good tactic, but you must understand that the animal is incapable of feeling shame or remorse - they have no reputation to uphold. There is only predator and prey. Their world literally does not extend beyond you, their food source. You are their obsession, and your existence (and suffering!) gives them their daily meaning.
- dickbasedregex 14y ago
  Well, the article mentioned her attempts at being a published author? I would argue that reputation and financial ruin might put a crimp in those plans. Obviously, I don't suggest this as a first response... maybe the dream of being an author was the one thing still anchoring her to reality? I would seek legal council on the best method of just making her go the hell away (harassment charges/restraining order). If she persisted to be a thorn in my side, or I had no legal recourse to the harassment, then yes, attempt to ruin her. What other choice do you have? Just allow her to chip away at you for all of eternity?
  - illuminate 14y ago
    "I would argue that reputation and financial ruin might put a crimp in those plans." Delusions have never stopped a sociopath before.
DanBC 14y ago
It's not that easy. (http://www.wired.com/underwire/2012/04/ff_koreanrapper/all/1 http://www.wired.com/underwire/2012/04/ff_koreanrapper/all/1)
- RexRollman 14y ago
  That reminds me of the birther movement in some ways.
jacques_chester 14y ago
> I think most would very quickly, and correctly, attempt to sue for defamation. I agree. In particular I'd also go after republishers, such as Amazon, to have the various public ones removed.
michaelochurch 14y ago
I don't think this is a good idea. When you have a stalker, ruining his or her reputation doesn't help. It can easily be spun around to make you look like the bad guy. Some stalkers are obviously crazy and you should notify the police. Others are adept at making it look like you're doing bad things. They won't be able to prove anything, obviously, but they can muddy the waters and make your life hell. Female-on-male stalking tends to come from the extremes of the popularity spectrum, not the middle of the curve, and those two extremes tend to produce different patterns of stalking. If she's obviously crazy and weird, then she's also unpopular. Her reputation is already damaged, but she doesn't care. Her situation is asymmetric warfare. I wouldn't even call it "warfare" at that point. It's just angry destruction. The bad news is that she's liable to become violent. The good news is that she has no credibility so, while it might be annoying to hear a crazy person using your name, nothing she says will stick. The less common form tends to come from women who are high on the social spectrum. They tend not to be physically dangerous (they have decades of experience at hiding their craziness, and they know that physical intrusion will blow their credibility) but it's much more socially dangerous, because when they set out to ruin a man's reputation, they often succeed. What the OP experienced appears to be a mix of those two, enabled by the largeness and credibility sparsity of a large society (e.g. the Internet).

jpxxx 14y ago

Name and shame seems like a good tactic, but you must understand that the animal is incapable of feeling shame or remorse - they have no reputation to uphold. There is only predator and prey. Their world literally does not extend beyond you, their food source. You are their obsession, and your existence (and suffering!) gives them their daily meaning.

dickbasedregex 14y ago
Well, the article mentioned her attempts at being a published author? I would argue that reputation and financial ruin might put a crimp in those plans. Obviously, I don't suggest this as a first response... maybe the dream of being an author was the one thing still anchoring her to reality? I would seek legal council on the best method of just making her go the hell away (harassment charges/restraining order). If she persisted to be a thorn in my side, or I had no legal recourse to the harassment, then yes, attempt to ruin her. What other choice do you have? Just allow her to chip away at you for all of eternity?
- illuminate 14y ago
  "I would argue that reputation and financial ruin might put a crimp in those plans." Delusions have never stopped a sociopath before.

DanBC 14y ago

It's not that easy. (http://www.wired.com/underwire/2012/04/ff_koreanrapper/all/1 http://www.wired.com/underwire/2012/04/ff_koreanrapper/all/1)

RexRollman 14y ago
That reminds me of the birther movement in some ways.

jacques_chester 14y ago

> I think most would very quickly, and correctly, attempt to sue for defamation. I agree. In particular I'd also go after republishers, such as Amazon, to have the various public ones removed.

michaelochurch 14y ago

I don't think this is a good idea. When you have a stalker, ruining his or her reputation doesn't help. It can easily be spun around to make you look like the bad guy. Some stalkers are obviously crazy and you should notify the police. Others are adept at making it look like you're doing bad things. They won't be able to prove anything, obviously, but they can muddy the waters and make your life hell. Female-on-male stalking tends to come from the extremes of the popularity spectrum, not the middle of the curve, and those two extremes tend to produce different patterns of stalking. If she's obviously crazy and weird, then she's also unpopular. Her reputation is already damaged, but she doesn't care. Her situation is asymmetric warfare. I wouldn't even call it "warfare" at that point. It's just angry destruction. The bad news is that she's liable to become violent. The good news is that she has no credibility so, while it might be annoying to hear a crazy person using your name, nothing she says will stick. The less common form tends to come from women who are high on the social spectrum. They tend not to be physically dangerous (they have decades of experience at hiding their craziness, and they know that physical intrusion will blow their credibility) but it's much more socially dangerous, because when they set out to ruin a man's reputation, they often succeed. What the OP experienced appears to be a mix of those two, enabled by the largeness and credibility sparsity of a large society (e.g. the Internet).