Dr. Andrew B. Chung and Mu, harassers



B

Bob

Guest
"What constitutes harassment?

<http://writing.fsu.edu/oow/2001/title_page.htm>

To simply define what is and what is not harassment can be quite a difficult task. The legal
definition of harassment according to Black's Law Dictionary is: "A course of conduct directed at a
specific person that causes substantial emotional distress in such person and serves no legitimate
purpose" or "words, gestures, and actions which tend to annoy, alarm and abuse (verbally) another
person."(Working to Halt Online Abuse) Since this is seemingly a vague definition, some examples
might clear up any confusion.

Beware, some of these cases might surprise you! Cases that DO NOT constitute harassment:
* Someone who simply disagrees with you, however strongly or unpleasantly.
* Someone who sends you a single e-mail that is not blatantly threatening.
* Spam, even though it is very annoying.
* Messages posted to any open arena, such as newsgroups, message boards, or forums or chat rooms,
unless they are forged to appear to have come from you or contain direct threats or libelous
statements.
* Information posted on a website. Cases that DO constitute harassment:
* Repeated communication via e-mail or an instant messaging program after the harasser has been
clearly told to stop.

For a good overall view of what cyberstalking actually is, check out
<http://www.wiredsafety.org/divisions/cyberstalking.html>

Bob
 
J

John

Guest
On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 17:54:05 -0500, Bob <[email protected]> wrote:

>"What constitutes harassment?
>
><http://writing.fsu.edu/oow/2001/title_page.htm>
>
>To simply define what is and what is not harassment can be quite a difficult task. The legal
>definition of harassment according to Black's Law Dictionary is: "A course of conduct directed at a
>specific person that causes substantial emotional distress in such person and serves no legitimate
>purpose" or "words, gestures, and actions which tend to annoy, alarm and abuse (verbally) another
>person."(Working to Halt Online Abuse) Since this is seemingly a vague definition, some examples
>might clear up any confusion.
>
> Beware, some of these cases might surprise you! Cases that DO NOT constitute harassment:
>* Someone who simply disagrees with you, however strongly or unpleasantly.
>* Someone who sends you a single e-mail that is not blatantly threatening.
>* Spam, even though it is very annoying.
>* Messages posted to any open arena, such as newsgroups, message boards, or forums or chat rooms,
> unless they are forged to appear to have come from you or contain direct threats or libelous
> statements.
>* Information posted on a website. Cases that DO constitute harassment:
>* Repeated communication via e-mail or an instant messaging program after the harasser has been
> clearly told to stop.

Oh, I get it - like what you've been doing to Dr. Chung for far, far too long.

John
 
D

Dr. Andrew B. C

Guest
John wrote:
>
> On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 17:54:05 -0500, Bob <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >"What constitutes harassment?
> >
> ><http://writing.fsu.edu/oow/2001/title_page.htm>
> >
> >To simply define what is and what is not harassment can be quite a difficult task. The legal
> >definition of harassment according to Black's Law Dictionary is: "A course of conduct directed at
> >a specific person that causes substantial emotional distress in such person and serves no
> >legitimate purpose" or "words, gestures, and actions which tend to annoy, alarm and abuse
> >(verbally) another person."(Working to Halt Online Abuse) Since this is seemingly a vague
> >definition, some examples might clear up any confusion.
> >
> > Beware, some of these cases might surprise you! Cases that DO NOT constitute harassment:
> >* Someone who simply disagrees with you, however strongly or unpleasantly.
> >* Someone who sends you a single e-mail that is not blatantly threatening.

In SMN's case, there are multiple unwanted (and unanswered) e-mails.

> >* Spam, even though it is very annoying.
> >* Messages posted to any open arena, such as newsgroups, message boards, or forums or chat rooms,
> > unless they are forged to appear to have come from you or contain direct threats or libelous
> > statements.

The latter would apply to *both* RP and SMN's Usenet posts here in SMC.

> >* Information posted on a website. Cases that DO constitute harassment:
> >* Repeated communication via e-mail or an instant messaging program after the harasser has been
> > clearly told to stop.
>
> Oh, I get it - like what you've been doing to Dr. Chung for far, far too long.
>
> John

Yes, John.

That's the beauty of God's Armor. It is quite enduring :)

Servant to the humblest person in the universe,

Andrew

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com/

**
Who is the humblest person in the universe?
http://makeashorterlink.com/?W1F522557

What is all this about?
http://makeashorterlink.com/?J31722867

Is this spam?
http://makeashorterlink.com/?N69721867
 
S

Stephen Nagler

Guest
On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 20:27:39 -0500, "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>In SMN's case, there are multiple unwanted (and unanswered) e-mails.

..............

... and I give you my permission to post all of them right here in their entirety.

smn
 
B

Bob

Guest
John wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 17:54:05 -0500, Bob <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>"What constitutes harassment?
>>
>><http://writing.fsu.edu/oow/2001/title_page.htm>
>>
>>To simply define what is and what is not harassment can be quite a difficult task. The legal
>>definition of harassment according to Black's Law Dictionary is: "A course of conduct directed at
>>a specific person that causes substantial emotional distress in such person and serves no
>>legitimate purpose" or "words, gestures, and actions which tend to annoy, alarm and abuse
>>(verbally) another person."(Working to Halt Online Abuse) Since this is seemingly a vague
>>definition, some examples might clear up any confusion.
>>
>> Beware, some of these cases might surprise you! Cases that DO NOT constitute harassment:
>>* Someone who simply disagrees with you, however strongly or unpleasantly.
>>* Someone who sends you a single e-mail that is not blatantly threatening.
>>* Spam, even though it is very annoying.
>>* Messages posted to any open arena, such as newsgroups, message boards, or forums or chat rooms,
>> unless they are forged to appear to have come from you or contain direct threats or libelous
>> statements.
>>* Information posted on a website.

>>Cases that DO constitute harassment:
>>* Repeated communication via e-mail or an instant messaging program after the harasser has been
>> clearly told to stop.
>
> Oh, I get it - like what you've been doing to Dr. Chung for far, far too long.

See if you can follow along here, lightweight "John." None of the examples above describe my
behavior. But you already knew that since you're another "Christian" liar like your mentor and are
only trying to draw fire. Poor "John," I guess your "Truth *Invention* Electro-mechanical Whizbang"
didn't work any better than Chung's "Truth Discernment Ray Gun."

Bob
 
B

Bob

Guest
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:
> John wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 17:54:05 -0500, Bob <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"What constitutes harassment?
>>>
>>><http://writing.fsu.edu/oow/2001/title_page.htm>
>>>
>>>To simply define what is and what is not harassment can be quite a difficult task. The legal
>>>definition of harassment according to Black's Law Dictionary is: "A course of conduct directed at
>>>a specific person that causes substantial emotional distress in such person and serves no
>>>legitimate purpose" or "words, gestures, and actions which tend to annoy, alarm and abuse
>>>(verbally) another person."(Working to Halt Online Abuse) Since this is seemingly a vague
>>>definition, some examples might clear up any confusion.
>>>
>>> Beware, some of these cases might surprise you! Cases that DO NOT constitute harassment:
>>>* Someone who simply disagrees with you, however strongly or unpleasantly.
>>>* Someone who sends you a single e-mail that is not blatantly threatening.
>
> In SMN's case, there are multiple unwanted (and unanswered) e-mails.

So far as I've seen posted, there are three. Two inviting Chung to lunch and one more asking him not
to do his religious wacko stuff aimed at Stephen.

Note that Chung didn't mention anything about threatening. So no harassment.

>>>* Spam, even though it is very annoying.
>>>* Messages posted to any open arena, such as newsgroups, message boards, or forums or chat rooms,
>>> unless they are forged to appear to have come from you or contain direct threats or libelous
>>> statements.
>
> The latter would apply to *both* RP and SMN's Usenet posts here in SMC.

<LOL> Right Lawyer Chung speaks again. Sounds just like that whiny guy on Perry Mason who
always lost.

>>>* Information posted on a website. Cases that DO constitute harassment:
>>>* Repeated communication via e-mail or an instant messaging program after the harasser has been
>>> clearly told to stop.
>>
>>Oh, I get it - like what you've been doing to Dr. Chung for far, far too long.
>>
>>John
>
> Yes, John.
>
> That's the beauty of God's Armor. It is quite enduring :)

Or, it could simply be an extreme case of hard headedness. Odds...?

Bob
 
D

Dr. Andrew B. C

Guest
[email protected] (Carol T) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Bob <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
>
> Dear Bob,
>
> Why are you letting Satan take advantage of you in this way?
>
> I pray that you become strong enough to resist his manipulative ways?
>
> Carol T

Folks who turn their backs on Christ (for food in Bob's case) walk right into Satan's arms.

Servant to the humblest person in the universe,

Andrew

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com/

**
Who is the humblest person in the universe?
http://makeashorterlink.com/?W1F522557

What is all this about?
http://makeashorterlink.com/?G1BB12C67

Is this spam?
http://makeashorterlink.com/?N69721867
 
B

Bob

Guest
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:

> Folks who turn their backs on Christ (for food in Bob's case) walk right into Satan's arms.

<LOL> Jeez, tell Chung to get some new writers. These guys are making Chung look as weighty as a helium-
filled balloon.

As long as it weighs a certain amount, content is irrelevant.

Poor guy...

Bob