johncons

tirsdag 6. november 2007

From: eribsskog@gmail.com Erik Ribsskog
To: Legal.LSC@legalservices.gov.uk
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 02:25:35 +0000
Subject: Fwd: Your e-mail

Hi,

I can't see that I have recieved an answer to this e-mail yet, thats why I'm
trying to send it again.

Yours sincerely,

Erik Ribsskog

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Erik Ribsskog
Date: Oct 19, 2007 4:36 PM
Subject: Re: Your e-mail
To: Legal LSC

Hi,

thank you very much for your answer.

I will now try to summarise the corespondce I've been having with you and
Simon Williams from the Legal Complaints Service.

Simon Williams (The Legal Complaints Service) says that I should contact the
LSC to complain about
a duty solicitor.

And you (The LSC) are saying that I should contact The Legal Complaints
Service to complain about
a duty solicitor.

So I'm not sure how to conclude this summary.

Could you please confirm again who I should contact if I want to formally
complain about poor service
and uprofessional conduct from a law-firm in connection with the duty
solicitors scheme.

Because Simon Williams from The Legal Complaints Service is writing this in
a letter from 26/9:

'Here, a meeting under the duty solicitors programme is unlikely to be
something done under a retainer
(that is, a relationship between solicitor and client), as duty solicitors
are those who provide assistance
to those who are without representation

[...]

As you are not a client of EAD, this office is unable to consider your
complaint. I will, therefore, take
steps to close this file'.

So it's obvious that the Legal Complaints Service aren't looking at
complaints against law-firms in
connection to the duty solicitors scheme.

Williams, write in an e-mail from 2/10:

' *Q2: If not, then who is it one are supposed to complain to, about poor
service/unprofessional* *conduct, by law-firms, in connection with the Dury
Solicitors scheme?*

I have looked into this matter and would suggest that you refer to this
website:

http://www.legalservices.gov.uk/aboutus/regions/liverpool_information.asp

It contains information and contact details of the Merseyside Duty
Solicitors scheme and I hope that you will find it useful.

I should also note that the Legal Services Commission is an organisation
wholly separate from the Law Society and, if you have any specific questions
in relation to the procedures, you should direct them to the LSC, rather
than our Office.'.

So he's saying that the LCS should deal with the complaint.

Is this correct?

Who could I ask for advice/help regarding this, since I'm being in a way
'thrown around' here, from one organisation to the
other.

Also, you are writing that:

'In regards to our customer-helpline, it is more than likely that there
was a miscommunication or misunderstanding between you and my colleague
as a list of law firms can be accessed easily through a search on the
CLS Legal Adviser Directory.'.

So you are writing that since you have an online directory, then it can't be
something wrong
in regards to your customer-helpline's advice.

I can't see that it's an excuse for giving wrong advice (giving me the
phone-numbers to law-firms
in Wales), I can't see that this can be excused by you also having an online
directory.

What is the point of having a customer-helpline, if one can't trust the
advice?

Since like you are writing, you also have an online directory, so this fact
means that any mistakes
the helpline makes, must be misunderstandings.

I don't see the logic in this.

I think you must be mistaking.

Even if you have an online directory, I don't see how this explains mistakes
from your helpline.

It's not a valid excuse I mean.

If I go to Tesco and say I got the wrong change back.

Then Tesco can't say that, of it must be a misunderstanding because you have
paid by debit-card.

Thats the same reasoning to me.

So it would be very fine, if you could please confirm that I've understood
your excuse right.

Because in that case, I don't think it's a valid excuse, and I would please
like to complain about it.

I hope that this is alright!

Thank you very much for your answer again!

Yours sincerely,

Erik Ribsskog

On 10/19/07, Legal LSC wrote:
>
> Our ref: KPL/MISC/07/07/70 (5)
> Date: 19 October 2007
>
>
> Dear Mr Ribbskog,
>
> Thank you for your e-mail on 16 October 2007.
>
> You are always welcome to put forward an informal complaint regarding a
> duty solicitor's poor service and/or misconduct, in connection with
> the Local Duty Solicitors Scheme, to the Account Manager of our relevant
> regional office. They will be happy to investigate your complaint and
> will communicate with the duty solicitor involved to clarify the areas
> of your complaint and endeavor to resolve the issue.
>
> However, it is not within our capacity or powers to enforce any actions
> upon the relevant duty solicitor in regards to their poor service and/or
> misconduct.
>
> For complaints on the poor service and/or misconduct of any solicitor
> to be dealt with formally and with enforceable actions, you must direct
> your complaints to the Law Society's Legal Complaints Service (LCS),
> who are an independent complaints handling body that deals with all
> formal complaints against solicitors. Even though they are part of the
> Law Society, they operate independently.
>
> Further details on the LCS are available at the following website:
>
> http://www.legalcomplaints.org.uk/home.page
>
> Both the above options are available to you and it is your decision on
> where you want to direct your complaint and how it is resolved.
>
> In regards to our customer-helpline, it is more than likely that there
> was a miscommunication or misunderstanding between you and my colleague
> as a list of law firms can be accessed easily through a search on the
> CLS Legal Adviser Directory.
>
> I hope the above is of assistance to you.
>
> Yours sincerely
>
>
> Ka Poh Ling
> Central Customer Services Unit
>
>
>
> ***********************************************************************************
> Disclaimer
>
> This email (and any attachment(s)) is private and intended solely for the
> use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. Its
> unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying is not permitted. If you
> are not the intended recipient please destroy all copies and inform the
> sender by return e-mail.
>
> Internet e-mail is not a secure medium, as messages can be intercepted and
> read by someone else. Please bear this in mind when deciding whether to
> send information by e-mail. Postal addresses for the Legal Services
> Commission are available from
> http://www.legalservices.gov.uk/aboutus/regions/regions.asp
>
> The Legal Services Commission reserves the right to monitor, record and
> retain any incoming and outgoing emails for security reasons and for
> monitoring internal compliance with the Legal Services Commission policy on
> staff use. Email monitoring and/or blocking software may be used and email
> content may be read. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not
> broken when writing or forwarding emails and their contents. No contracts
> can be entered into on our behalf by email.
>
> Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not
> necessarily represent those of the Legal Services Commission.
>
> The Legal Services Commission checks all mails and attachments for known
> viruses; however, you are advised that you open any attachments at your own
> risk.
>
> ***********************************************************************************
>

From: eribsskog@gmail.com Erik Ribsskog
To: enquiries@fphlaw.co.uk
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 02:21:17 +0000
Subject: Fwd: Harassment at work

Hi,

I can't see that I have recieved an answer to this e-mail yet, thats why I'm
trying to send the e-mail again.

Yours sincerely,

Erik Ribsskog

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Erik Ribsskog
Date: Oct 25, 2007 5:31 PM
Subject: Harassment at work
To: enquiries@fphlaw.co.uk

Hi,

I've been in contact with the LSC, and have been given your name, regarding
how to go forward with an Harassment at work-case, against my former
employer.

(This case is also linked with a crime-case, by the way, which seems to be
regarding organised crime in the same company.)

And the LSC told me, that your company accepted founding from the 'legal aid
programmen', so thats why I'm contacting you now.

I have quite a lot of documents regarding the case, which I could send you,
if you want.

I was wondering how I should go forward with bringing up the case.

So I hope you have the oppertunity to help me with this, and please just
tell me if
there is some more information I need to provide.

Yours sincerely,

Erik Ribsskog

From: eribsskog@gmail.com Erik Ribsskog
To: England.moderators@bbc.co.uk
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 01:06:13 +0000
Subject: Fwd: Your BBC Posting has been removed

Hi,

I can't see that I have recieved an answer to this e-mail yet, thats why I'm
trying to send it again.

Hope that this is alright!

Yours sincerely,

Erik Ribsskog

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Erik Ribsskog
Date: Oct 13, 2007 8:34 PM
Subject: Re: Your BBC Posting has been removed
To: England

Hi,

I was wondering if you think it would be possible for me to get a more
spesific reason on why the post
was removed?

Yours sincerely,

Erik Ribsskog

On 12 Oct 2007 15:57:47 +0000, England
wrote:
>
> Dear BBC Community member,
>
> Thank you for contributing to a BBC community site. Unfortunately we've
> had to remove your content below because it contravened one of the House
> Rules.
>
> Postings to BBC messageboards will be removed if they:
>
> *Break the law, or condone or encourage unlawful activity. This includes
> defamation and contempt of court.
>
> You can find out more about Defamation at
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/hub/HouseRules-Defamation
> You can read the BBC messageboards House Rules in full here:
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/messageboards/newguide/popup_house_rules.html
>
> Please be careful when you copy the text of someone else's message into
> your post. If their posting is subsequently removed, your posting may also
> have been removed, as it contained a copy of their failed text.
>
> If you can rewrite your contribution to remove the problem, we'd be happy
> for you to post it again.
>
> Please note that anyone who seriously or repeatedly breaks the House Rules
> may have action taken against their account.
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/messageboards/newguide/popup_breaking_rules.html
>
> Regards,
>
> The BBC Communities Team
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/messageboards/newguide/
>
> URL of content (now removed):
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/england/F2770282?Thread=4653901&post=54093182
>
> Subject:
> The use of Negative Reinforcement as a Management-method at the Arvato
> Microsoft Scandinavian Product Activation in Liverpool.
>
> Posting:
> When I was working at the Arvato Microsoft Scandinavian Product Activation
> in Liverpool, I had a meeting with one of the team-leaders on the campaign.
>
> I was wondering why we, (I was working as a regular Contact Centre
> Representative there), and I was wondering why we got lines like 'NN, you're
> on wrap-up', shouted at us across the tables, from the team-leaders.
>
> Then I got to hear that this was something that the team-leaders had been
> thought during team-leader training.
>
> The team-leader I was in the meeting with, told me, that they had been
> trained using '[negative] reinforcement', during the team-leader training.
>
> She explained to me, that she wouldn't stop with the
> shouting/complaining/'giving stick', the way she did, because this was the
> way they had been trained to lead the campaign.
>
> Here is a quote from the summary from this meeting:
>
> 'I also brought up the situation with the wrap-up meeting we had some
> weeks earlier, where
> we agreed on that I would work on gradually bettering the wrap-up time,
> but that she then
> forgot this agreement, and the next day acted like this meeting hadnt been
> taking place
> at all, and continued to shout 'You're on wrap-up' if the wrap-up time
> exceeded 5 seconds.
>
> Vivian explained that this was call reinforcement, and that the
> team-leaders were trained
> to use reinforcement as a way of solving problems, like the problem with
> agents being
> to long time on wrap-up between the calls. So she wouldnt stop doing this,
> because she
> had been trained to do her job this way.
>
>
> NEGATIVE REINFORCEMENT
>
> I hadnt heard about reinforcement on the management/organisation modules I
> had studied on
> upper secondary and university-level, and neighter had I heard about it on
> the management-
> courses I had participated on while I was working as a manager in Norway.
>
> So when I got home on the day we had the meeting, I searched for
> 'reinforcement' on the
> internet. I found from how Vivian described it in the meeting, that this
> way of sorting
> problems was called 'negative reinforcement'.
>
> I couldnt find very much on how this was being used in management, but
> from what I found
> it seemed like it was more used as a way of training dogs, and that it was
> known to make
> the dogs nervous.
>
> Line says that they were told to do it this way, because if they did it
> this way, then the agents
> would do the job the way the team-leaders wanted.'.
>
> Link: http://johncons-mirror.blogspot.com/2007/10/enclosure-7.html
>
>
> My issue, regarding this, was that when I was searching on the term
> 'negative reinforcement', on the internet, then it mostly appeared links
> that had to do with the training of animals, like dogs and horses. (And not
> so much with management-theory):
>
> Link: http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=negative+reinforcement&meta=cr%3DcountryUK%7CcountryGB
>
>
>
> And, the fact that the team-leaders are screaming things like 'You're on
> wrap-up', to the CCR representatives.
>
> I think this is a bit impolite, because the places were people are seated,
> are up to the region of 5-10 meters from were the team-leader is sitting
> shouting.
>
> So I remember I myself thought this practice was a bit inpolite towards
> the representatives.
>
> And also, I thought it was interfering in the work.
>
> That is, if one are sitting, and writing some notes, or if one are loging
> the latest call.
>
> The latest call from when someone has called in to activate Windows or
> Office etc.
>
> Then one had five seconds to log the call and to prepare for the next
> call.
>
> So sometimes one ran out of time, and sometimes, one also wanted to have a
> zip of water inbetween the calls, so sometimes five seconds could be maybe a
> bit to little time.
>
> But the point is, that when the call wasn't a regular call. That is, if
> the call lasted for longer than about five minutes, then one had to log the
> call on a form as well as on the screen.
>
> And if it was a company-call, a Microsoft customer, then it could be that
> one had to write some notes down, since these calls sometimes were a bit
> more complex than the regular calls.
>
> And also since there was a lot of types of agreements, like
> Select-agreement, Open-agreement, etc.
>
> There were meny combinations of different agreements and products, so
> sometimes, one happened to write down some notes, and also send e-mails to
> the line-managers about the activation.
>
> So if one were busy doing things like this, then I think the shouting was
> sometimes interfering a bit with the other work.
>
> Because, often, it wouldn't be possible to do work-tasks like this, while
> one were answering the next call simultaniously.
>
> Because one needed to consentrate on the loging and the writing og notes
> and e-mails.
>
> So then it interfered a bit when someone shouted at me: 'Erik, you're on
> wrap-up'. At least I remember that I thought this personally.
>
> Because then I lost my concentration, and my awarenes of what I was doing.
> And I sometimes got a bit stressed, and I maybe started thinking about
> things regarding the organisation of the campaign instead.
>
> And I also think that this practice is a bit condescend.
>
> That is, from the team-leader to the representative. It seems to me, that
> one are shouting like this, then it means that one thinks that the
> representative isn't using his time in a meaningful way. That is, it means
> that the representative is doing something wrong.
>
> I tried telling them, that we knew from before, that the wrap-up time was
> five seconds, and that they didn't really need to shout that out, because we
> already knew this from before.
>
> And when one used more time than five seconds, it was because it was
> needed to finish the work-tasks.
>
> But when they were shouting, then I think it means that they didn't belive
> the representative would be able to manage the time for the work-tasks
> themselves, in a reasonble way.
>
> So then I guess it means that the representatives was looked at as to be
> thoughtless and without the ability to act reasonable.
>
> I thought this meant that the representatives, were looked down upon, in
> regards to the issue of being able to manage their own work-time in a
> meaningful way.
>
> So I myself, remember, that I was thinking that this practice was a bit
> condescend.
>
> I used to work as a store-manager in Norway, and in conection with that, I
> had a few courses in practical management etc.
>
> And I also had some modules in management and organisation, from upper
> secondary school level, and also from university level.
>
> But I can't remember, that we were taught were much about 'negative
> reinforcement' in those modules and couses.
>
> So I was wondering if someone maybe had some knowledge, regarding where
> negative reinforcement fits in, in relation to the management-theory field.
>
> I think that management is an interesting field, so I think it would be
> very fine if someone have the time to contribute a bit to the thread on
> this.
>
> I myself, think that this management-method, can maybe sometimes seem a
> bit harassing, but I think it would be very interesting to also hear what
> other people think about this.
>
>
>
>
>
> This e-mail, and any attachment, is confidential. If you have received
> it in error, please delete it from your system, do not use or disclose
> the information in any way, and notify us immediately. The contents of
> this message may contain personal views which are not the views of the
> BBC, unless specifically stated.
>
>

From: eribsskog@gmail.com Erik Ribsskog
To: sct@amnesty.org.uk
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 02:04:35 +0000
Subject: Fwd: Regarding help from Amnesty

Hi,

I can't see that I have received an answer to this e-mail yet, thats why I'm
trying to send it again.

Yours sincerely,

Erik Ribsskog

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Erik Ribsskog
Date: Oct 26, 2007 1:47 AM
Subject: Regarding help from Amnesty
To: sct@amnesty.org.uk

Hi,

I'm a Norwegian living in Britain, and I've been in contact with the
Norwegian department of Amnesty,
regarding lack of respect from the Government in connection with human
rights issues.

What I've contacted them about, was that the Norwegian Government,
(Politidirektoratet/justisdepartementet),
isn't answering my e-mails.

And also the 'Spesialenheten' (the Norwegian equivalent of ipcc), have been
using more than six months,
and have still not decided if they are going to investigate my complaint
against representatives from
the Norwegian special police 'Kripos', or not.

So it's obvious that they are delaying this.

This might not seem so important, but the point is, that this is in regards
to me being followed by organised
criminals or mafia, in both Norway and Britain.

And the point is, that this can lead to people being
killed/executed/tortured.

And also, if the police is aware of this, like the Norwegian police are,
since I've told them, and still don't help,
maybe they have problems getting evidence against the criminals/mafia, and
then hope that they will kill,
so that they will get evidence in that way. (I would call it people
sacrifice).

This is how it seems to me that it must have been, or still is, for all that
I know.

And I contacted the Norwegian department of Amnesty, earlier this week, but
they only said that Amnesty
wasn't dealing with investigating crime.

But that's not at all what I contacted them about, I contaced them about the
problem that the Government
are ignoring peoples rights, with the consequense that people can end up
murdered/tortured etc.

So I think, since they are working with human-rights issues, on a daily
basis, then I can't really understand,
how it could be possible for them to not understand what I was contacting
them about.

So I'm a bit worried that something might be wrong in the Norwegian Amnesty
department.

And this case is also linked to Britain, so I was wondering if it's right
that Amensty aren't dealing with
serious breaches of human rights from Governments.

And also how I should go forward if I wanted to complain about the Norwegian
of Amnesty, since it seems to
me that something must be wrong there.

And I think that this would be serious, since I've always thought that
Amnesty is an important organisation,
and that you are doing valuable work around the world.

I'm also going to forward you copies of the correspondence I've been having
with the Norwegian deparment
of Amnesty regarding this.

I know that they are in Norwegian, but I'm sending them anyway, just for
formalitys sake.

I hope that this is alright, and I hope that you have the chance to have a
look at this!

Thank you very much for your help in advance!

Yours sincerely,

Erik Ribsskog

From: eribsskog@gmail.com Erik Ribsskog
To: support@blogger.com
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 02:01:33 +0000
Subject: Fwd: [#209091530] Fwd: Blogger DMCA Complaint received

Hi,

I can't see that I have recieved an answer to this e-mail yet, that's why
I'm trying to send it again.

Yours sincerely,

Erik Ribsskog

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Erik Ribsskog
Date: Oct 26, 2007 9:12 PM
Subject: Re: [#209091530] Fwd: Blogger DMCA Complaint received
To: Blogger Help

Hi,

thank you very much for your answer!

I relly understood that you couldn't give me legal advice, I just thought
that maybe
you knew about some organisation etc. who could maybe give advice on this.

I should probably have made it more clear in the e-mail, that it was this I
meant.

Since there isn't always that easy, for different reasons, to get help from
an attorney.

But that's my problem I guess.

But what I was hoping that you could maybe answer me about, was if there was
a
time-limit for filing the DMCA counter-complaint.

So this was the main reason for my enquiery, but I should maybe have
clearified this.

So that's why I'm trying to e-mail you again, in case that point got a bit
lost in my last
e-mail.

(Also if you know what the next procedure usually is in an DMCA
complaint-process,
that would be fine, but I'm also going to search more on the internet
regarding this,
so this is only if you have the time and oppertunity to answer).

So I hope that you have the chance to answer me about this, and thanks in
advance for
the reply!

Yours sincerely,

Erik Ribsskog

On 10/26/07, Blogger Help wrote:
>
> Hello Erik,
>
> We are in receipt of your latest email. Blogger is not in a position to
> provide legal guidance or counsel to the legal issue at hand. We recommend
>
> that you seek an attorney to properly answer your questions and provide
> you with legal advice.
>
> Sincerely,
> The Blogger Team
>
>
> Original Message Follows:
> ------------------------
> From: "Erik Ribsskog" < eribsskog@gmail.com>
> Subject: Fwd: [#209091530] Blogger DMCA Complaint received
> Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 03:39:27 +0100
>
> Hi,
>
> I can't see that I've recieved an answer to this e-mail yet.
>
> I'm not so used with dealing with cases like this, and also not used to
> deal
> with
> to copyright laws.
>
> But I'm trying to send a new e-mail anyway, since I'm not sure where to
> ask
> for
> advice regarding this.
>
> The reason I have put the files in the deleted entry on the blog, is
> because
> I'm
> trying to 'whistleblow' regarding whats going on in the Arvato Ltd. firm,
> and the
> Microsoft Scandinavian Product Activation there.
>
> This is about an (organised) harassment at work case.
>
> And it's conected with a crime-case in the company, (which I have got
> confirmed
> about from the Norwegian embassy in London), and this most certianly, as
> far
> as
> I can understadn, must be an orginised crime/mafia/mob-case.
>
> And that's why I think it's important that I try to deal with this in an
> as
> proper way
> as possible.
>
> So, even if I'm a Norwegian living in Britain, I still would want to
> pursue
> this matter
> with a DMCA counter-complaint.
>
> I'm in the process of contacting law-firms in Britain, to get help with
> the
> (organised)
> harassment at work issues.
>
> And I think this DMCA issue propably should be included with that case.
>
> Also, I was wondering if not the purpose of 'whistleblowing', should be
> looked at as
> more relevant than copyright issues, (even if it also seems a bit strange
> to
> me
> that this should be a copyright issue, the files removed, where files like
>
> summarys
> from employee meetings at Arvato Ltd, and shift-plans, and also the entry
> containing
> only my CV, was deleted from the blog).
>
> So that's why I'm trying to write to you again.
>
> I was wondering if you knew about how the rules are surrounding the
> 'whistleblower'
> issues, in regards to the DMCA law?
>
> Because it could be that the British law-firms need a bit of time to deal
> with this,
> (from earlier experience with companies like these), so I was also
> wondering
>
> how long time I have got to file a DMCA counter-complaint.
>
> So I'm sorry that I'm sending you so many e-mails about this!
>
> I should have prepared more on the last e-mails I sent maybe, so I
> appologise for
> this.
>
> But I hope that you have the chance to have a look at this anyway!
>
> Thanks in advance for the help!
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
> Erik Ribsskog
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Erik Ribsskog
> Date: Oct 24, 2007 1:22 AM
> Subject: Re: [#209091530] Blogger DMCA Complaint received
> To: Blogger Help < support@blogger.com>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> thank you very much for your reply again!
>
> By the way, I've checked on the internet, and it said that DMCA, was a US
> copyright law.
>
> So is the fax-number American then?
>
> And is it Arvato in the US or in the UK, who has sent the complaint?
>
> I'm sorry I haven't lived that long in the UK, so I got a bit cunfused
> here.
>
> Thanks in advance for the help!
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
> Erik Ribsskog
>
>
> On 10/24/07, Blogger Help wrote:
> >
> > Hello Erik,
> >
> > You can file a DMCA counter-complaint as soon as you'd like, and we will
>
> > forward it on to Arvato Services to give them notice of the
> > counter-complaint. Please fax your counter-complaint with all of the
> > necessary information to (650) 618-2680.
> >
> > Thank you for your understanding and cooperation in this regard.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > The Blogger Team
> >
> >
> >
> > Original Message Follows:
> > ------------------------
> > From: "Erik Ribsskog" < eribsskog@gmail.com>
> > Subject: Re: [#209091530] Blogger DMCA Complaint received
> > Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 00:40:11 +0100
> >
> > Ok,
> >
> > thank you very much for your reply!
> >
> > I've tryed to search a bit on 'DMCA complaints', and I was wondering, if
> I
> > want
> > to file a DMCA Counter Notice, should I then wait until the link in your
> > e-mail,
> > with the compaint, is active.
> >
> > Or should file one right away you think?
> >
> > Thanks very much for the help, and sorry if the correspondence is busy!
> >
> > Yours sincerely,
> >
> > Erik Ribsskog
> >
> >
> > On 10/23/07, Blogger Help wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello Erik,
> > >
> > > We received a DMCA complaint from Arvato Services Limited regarding
> the
> > > content that we have removed based on their allegations of copyright
> > > infringement. The DMCA complaint that we received will be posted on
> the
> > > link we sent you ( http://www.chillingeffects.org/notice.cgi?sID=4463)
> > > within the next couple of weeks.
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > > The Blogger Team
> > >
> > >
> > > Original Message Follows:
> > > ------------------------
> > > From: "Erik Ribsskog"
> > > Subject: Re: [#209091530] Blogger DMCA Complaint received
> > > Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 20:21:27 +0100
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > these are my personal files from work.
> > >
> > > I don't see how there could be any copyright issues with others, since
>
> > > these
> > > are my
> > > personal work-files.
> > >
> > > Who is it that has got you to delete the entries then, and shouldn't
> you
> > > have checked
> > > it with me first, in case it was public files to do with my work,
> (like
> > it
> > > is)?
> > >
> > > Thanks for the fast reply by the way.
> > >
> > > Yours sincerely,
> > >
> > > Erik Ribsskog
> > >
> > >
> > > On 10/23/07, Blogger Help < support@blogger.com > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hello Erik,
> > > >
> > > > We apologize for the mix up. Blogger has been notified, according to
>
> > the
> > > > terms of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), that some of
> > your
> > > > images allegedly infringe upon the copyrights of others. The URLs of
> > the
> > > > allegedly infringing images may be found at the end of this message.
>
> > > >
> > > > The notice that we received, with any personally identifying
> > information
> > > > removed, may be found at the following link:
> > > > http://www.chillingeffects.org/notice.cgi?sID=4463
> > > >
> > > > Please note that it may take several weeks for the notice to be
> posted
> >
> > > on
> > > > the above page.
> > > >
> > > > The DMCA is a United States copyright law that provides guidelines
> for
> > > > online service provider liability in case of copyright infringement.
> > We
> > > > are in the process of removing from our servers the images that
> > > allegedly
> > > > infringe upon the copyrights of others. If we did not do so, we
> would
> > be
> > > > subject to a claim of copyright infringement, regardless of its
> > merits.
> > > > See http://www.educause.edu/Browse/645?PARENT_ID=254 for more
> > > information
> > > > about the DMCA, and see http://www.google.com/dmca.html for the
> > process
> > > > that Blogger requires in order to make a DMCA complaint.
> > > >
> > > > Blogger can reinstate these images upon receipt of a counter
> > > notification
> > > > pursuant to sections 512(g)(2) and 3) of the DMCA. For more
> > information
> > > > about the requirements of a counter notification and a link to a
> > sample
> > > > counter notification, see http://www.google.com/dmca.html#counter.
> > > >
> > > > Please note that repeated violations to our Terms of Service may
> > result
> > > in
> > > > further remedial action taken against your Blogger account. If you
> > have
> > > > legal questions about this notification, you should retain your own
> > > legal
> > > > counsel. If you have any other questions about this notification,
> > please
> > > > let us know.
> > > >
> > > > Sincerely,
> > > > The Blogger Team
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Affected URLs:
> > > > http://johncons-mirror.blogspot.com/2007/10/enclosure-8.html
> > > > http://johncons-mirror.blogspot.com/2007/10/enclosure-9.html
> > > > http://johncons-mirror.blogspot.com/2007/10/enclosure-15.html
> > > > http://johncons-mirror.blogspot.com/2007/10/enclosure-16.html
> > > > http://johncons-mirror.blogspot.com/2007/10/enclosure-17.html
> > > > http://johncons-mirror.blogspot.com/2007/10/enclosure-18.html
> > > > http://johncons-mirror.blogspot.com/2007/10/enclosure-19.html
> > > > http://johncons-mirror.blogspot.com/2007/10/enclosure-20.html
> > > > http://johncons-mirror.blogspot.com/2007/10/enclosure-21.html
> > > > http://johncons-mirror.blogspot.com/2007/10/enclosure-22.html
> > > > http://johncons-mirror.blogspot.com/2007/10/enclosure-23.html
> > > > http://johncons-mirror.blogspot.com/2007/10/enclosure-24.html
> > > > http://johncons-mirror.blogspot.com/2007/10/enclosure-25.html
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Original Message Follows:
> > > > ------------------------
> > > > From: "Erik Ribsskog"
> > > > Subject: Re: [#209091530] Blogger DMCA Complaint received
> > > > Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 01:41:26 +0100
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > thank you for your e-mail.
> > > >
> > > > I was wondering if there has been a misunderstanding somewhere,
> > because
> > > I
> > > > have not
> > > > sent any 'infringement complaint' regarding any of the mentioned
> > URL's.
> > > >
> > > > I was just wondering if there had a mix-up or a misunderstanding
> > > > somewhere.
> > > >
> > > > So I hope very much that you have the time to have a look at this.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks in advance!
> > > >
> > > > Yours sincerely,
> > > >
> > > > Erik Ribsskog
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 10/22/07, Blogger Help < support@blogger.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > In accordance with the DMCA, we have completed processing your
> > > > > infringement complaint regarding the following URLs:
> > > > >
> > > > > http://johncons-mirror.blogspot.com/2007/10/enclosure-8.html
> > > > > http://johncons-mirror.blogspot.com/2007/10/enclosure-9.html
> > > > > http://johncons-mirror.blogspot.com/2007/10/enclosure-15.html
> > > > > http://johncons-mirror.blogspot.com/2007/10/enclosure-16.html
> > > > > http://johncons-mirror.blogspot.com/2007/10/enclosure-17.html
> > > > > http://johncons-mirror.blogspot.com/2007/10/enclosure-18.html
> > > > > http://johncons-mirror.blogspot.com/2007/10/enclosure-19.html
> > > > > http://johncons-mirror.blogspot.com/2007/10/enclosure-20.html
> > > > > http://johncons-mirror.blogspot.com/2007/10/enclosure-21.html
> > > > > http://johncons-mirror.blogspot.com/2007/10/enclosure-22.html
> > > > > http://johncons-mirror.blogspot.com/2007/10/enclosure-23.html
> > > > > http://johncons-mirror.blogspot.com/2007/10/enclosure-24.html
> > > > > http://johncons-mirror.blogspot.com/2007/10/enclosure-25.html
> > > > > We appreciate your patience as we work to remove all of the images
> > > from
> > > > > our servers. Please note that all cached versions should expire
> > within
> > > a
> > > > > week.
> > > > >
> > > > > Please let us know if we can assist you further.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sincerely,
> > > > > The Blogger Team
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

From: eribsskog@gmail.com Erik Ribsskog
To: torry.pedersen@vg.no
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 01:58:10 +0000
Subject: Klage VGD/Fwd: Problemer med å logge på forum mm.

Hei,

jeg har prøvd å sende e-posten til VGD et par ganger nå, de siste ukene.

Men jeg kan ikke se at jeg har mottatt noe svar.

Så jeg kikka på websidene til VG, og der fant jeg den e-post adressen som
jeg sender til nå.

Så jeg tenkte det kanskje kunne være verdt et forsøk.

Håper dette er i orden!

Mvh.

Erik Ribsskog

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Erik Ribsskog
Date: Oct 27, 2007 9:20 PM
Subject: Fwd: Problemer med å logge på forum mm.
To: Magne.Antonsen@vg.no

Hei,

jeg kan ikke se at jeg har mottatt noe svar på denne e-posten ennå,
så derfor prøver jeg å sende den igjen.

Håper dette er i orden!

Mvh.

Erik Ribsskog

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Erik Ribsskog
Date: Oct 18, 2007 3:01 PM
Subject: Fwd: Problemer med å logge på forum mm.
To: Magne.Antonsen@vg.no

Hei,

jeg sender deg denne e-posten, i forbindelse med den klagen jeg har sendt
tidligere, angående
mulig trakassering fra Mod på VGD.

Det er disse spørsmålene (som også var med i e-posten fra 22/9):

*Tema: *Trakaseri fra Mod?
*Hvis du leser innlegg på VGD du mener er i strid med våre regler (les
reglene her) kan du trykke på dette symbolet over det aktuelle innlegget. VG
Nett vil vurdere om innlegget skal fjernes. *
Moderator Ny
bruker? Registrer deg her
Nytt Tema
Legg Tema Til Favoritter
Regler Trådet
Side:
1
*cons * [2607]
22.09.0702:42
Er innlegget upassende? Tips oss Svar
På
Endre Ja, nå ser jeg jo
at Mod har svart i 'klage sendt' tråden, etter at jeg fortalte at jeg skulle
skrive den her tråden.

Men jeg tenkte at jeg fikk vel skrive den her tråden alikevel, siden jeg
allerede hadde sagt at jeg skulle gjøre det.

Poenget da, nå var jo Mod grei, og fornya/validerte brukernavnet mitt over
telefon fra England.

Så det er ikke for å være uhøflig at jeg skriver det her, det var jo greit
gjort.

Men, nå syns jeg det begynner å hope seg opp litt med 'snodige',
'merkverdige', 'trakasseri'-aktige ting fra Mod her.

Jeg hadde ikke tenkt å skrive noen avhandling, så jeg tar det fra
hukommelsen. så jeg får håpe ingen dreper meg hvis det er noen slurvefeil:

1. Tråden 'kjeller' da, den ble sletta midt på natta. I 2-3 på natta, 15/9.

Er ikke det litt snodig da.

Ikke for å være uhølig, men for å vise et poeng:

Altså tråder i Norge, skulle ikke de bli sletta mellom kl. 9 og 14.30 mandag
til torsdag, eller mellom klokka 9. og 13.30 på fredag?

Er det ikke litt snodig at plutselig midt i 2-3 tida på natta, så kommer Mod
å sletter hele tråden?

Uten forvarsel.

Jeg har vært på VGD i 4 år, og aldri fått så mye som pekefinger i advarsel,
og alikevel så bare sletter dem hele tråden helt på natta.

2. Også da. Noen dager etterpå, fordi jeg skriver tråd på VGD-forum,
angående feilaktig sletta tråd.

Så innrømmer dem at slettinga var feil.

Men tror dere at dem henta tilbake tråden og gjennopprettet den på backstage
da?

Neida, dem sier jeg kan starte en ny tråd på backstage.

Men jeg kan jo skrive andres innlegg på nytt.

Altså, hvis VGD, feilaktig sletter en tråd, så burde dem vel gjennopprette
tråden da. Jeg kan ikke skjønne at noe annet skulle være riktig jeg men.

3. Så får jeg advarsel for å skrive 'Klage sendt'.

Altså, jeg har vært på VGD i 4 år som jeg skreiv over, men jeg aldri hatt
noe grunn til å klage før. Aldri sett noe grunn til det i hvertfall.

Men nå i det siste, så har det vært et par episoder med personangrep, må man
vel kalle det. Med at debattanta har tatt mann og ikke ballen, for å bruke
fotball språk.

Så dette har jeg ikke vært så mye borti fra tidligere.

Så her i går, så blei det skrevet en post fra en annen debatant som var så
tøyeste, med vilje tøysete/trakasernede tolket jeg det som. At han ville med
vilje trakassere, og ødelegge tråden.

Så skriver jeg klage da, det står jo en link over posten.

Og så skriver jeg to ord i en post under: 'Klage sendt.'.

Fordi det husker jeg fra fotball-forumet tidligere, det skreiv dem alltid.

Så jeg tenkte jeg fikk vel skrive det jeg og, siden det virka som det var
normen.

Så får jeg klage/advarsel på at jeg skreiv 'Klage sendt'.

Også skriver Mod at dem prøver å slå ned på 'Klage sendt' så ofte som mulig.

Men så er det bare å søke på 'klage sendt' så får man opp 20 treff de siste
4 dagene.

Og det viser at folk skriver 'klage sendt' hele tida.

Og detta skriver dem etter innlegga dem har klagd på.

Så det er ikke noe mulighet for Mod å ikke se det.

Men når jeg skrev det i går, da fikk jeg advarsel, pluss sletting av post.

Så skal det ikke være en klar linje her da.

Jeg trukke noe på dem, hvis dem sier at (som dem faktisk sier), at dem
prøver å advare folk om dette så godt dem kan.

For dem skulle jo ha sett postene, (for å forklare: dem har jo øyer i hue),
og hvis dem hadde sett postene, så skulle dem jo vært sletta.

Og da skulle det jo ikke være mulig å søke dem opp med søkefunskjon.

Så her er det noe som ikke henger på greip virker det som.

A: Ingen klar linje.

B: Mod sier at dem slår ned så mye som mulig på 'klage sendt', men søk på
søkefunskjon på ordene 'klage sendt' viser at detta kan ikke stemme.

Her har Mod et forklaringsproblem sånn som jeg ser det.

Så det hadde vært interessant å hørt hva Mod har å si til det.

4: Mod tillatt at tråden min om 'Klage sendt' skeia ut (se tråd dette
forum).

5. Mod svarte ikke mitt innlegg nr. 2605.

Dem svarte først etter at jeg skreiv at jeg skulle starte denne tråden, det
skreiv jeg i innlegg 2606. (Se 'klage sendt' tråd i dette forum).

Ja, nå fikk jeg skrivd det jeg hadde på hjertet i hvertfall, så nå blir det
spennende å se hvordan tilbakemeldinger man kan få den her posten da.

Nå har jeg jo fått tilbake nicket nå da, så det er ikke for å være
utakknemmelig:

Altså nicket mitt ble sperret fordi jeg diskuterte om mat og Sunderland i en
tråd som
en annen hadde startet, og hvor tema var mat og Sunderland på en
vitsete/fleipete måte da.

Så fortsetter jeg å fleipe litt om de samme temaene.

Også sperrer dem nicket mitt.

Også får jeg e-post i dag, og da står det at det var fordi det skal være
sportslig stil over
innleggene på Fotball - Premiere League/Engelsk fotball.

Men dem har jo poster som heter sånn:

'Skal du reise til England?'.

Med tips over togtider og hoteller og flytider osv.

Så jeg er litt usikker på om ting som er angående f.eks. hvordan det er å bo
og reise til Storbritannia er
lov å ta med, på forumet.

Ikke at det er så utrolig viktig akkurat det.

Men det skal vel ikke være forskjellsbehandlig heller så, da tenkte jeg at
jeg kunne ta med dette som
et sjette spørsmål i tillegg til de 5 spørsmålene fra posten, som jeg bare
'pastet' ovenfor i mailen her.

Så håper det er greit at jeg bare kopierte den posten inn i denne e-posten,
for da er det jo også enkelt
å finne sammenhengen som spørsmålene ble stilt i på forumet.

Også er det litt tidsparende i tillegg.

Men jeg håper dere har tid til å se på dette alikevel!

Håper dette er i orden!

Mvh.

Erik Ribsskog

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: diskusjon < diskusjon@vg.no>
Date: Oct 18, 2007 12:09 PM
Subject: Re: Problemer med å logge på forum mm.
To: eribsskog@gmail.com

Hei

1. Nicket er åpnet: cons

Når det er sagt så vil vi gjerne at du diskuterer mat og Sunderland i
Fotball Garderoben. I andre fotball-grupper prøver vi å holde en sportslig
stil.

2. Hvis du har problemer med vår moderering kan du henvende deg til
sjefsmoderator magne.antonsen@vg.no. Hvis tråder er feilaktig slettet
beklager vi gjerne, og gjør vi ikke det mener vi at vår vurdering er
korrekt.

Mvh
VG Modteam

-----

-----Original Message-----
From: Erik Ribsskog [mailto:eribsskog@gmail.com ]
Sent: Mon 10/15/2007 3:01 PM
To: diskusjon
Subject: Re: Problemer med å logge på forum mm.

Hei,

jeg fikk bare opp det skjermbilde her:

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1003/1460430642_9689492a8b.jpg

Hvis det var den tråden om Sunderland og hvordan mat dem hadde der, så var
det faktisk tema
i tråden.

Tråden var i en vittig/fleipete tone, så da regnet jeg med at det ville være

i orden.

Og det var ikke spam, for det var ikke meningsløst.

Det var faktiske innlegg med mening.

I e-posten min fra 30/9, så skrev jeg også dette:

'> > Forresten, så har det vært en del problemer, rundt feilaktig sletting
av
> > tråder, og også
> > forskjellsbehandling, og også manglende på en indeksert klage jeg skrev
> > angående
> > trakaseri-aktige forhold fra moderator.
> >
> > Så jeg lurte på i samme slengen, om du kjenner noe til noe måte jeg kan
> gå
> > frem,
> > for å ta opp disse tingene?'.

(kopi fra lenger ned i denne e-posten).

Men jeg kan ikke se at jeg har fått noe tilbakemelding ennå på denne delen
av e-posten fra 30/9.

Så jeg håper dere har tid å svare på spørsmålene i denne e-posten.

Mvh.

Erik Ribsskog

On 10/15/07, diskusjon < diskusjon@vg.no> wrote:
>
> Alle som blir utestengt får beskjed om dette da de prøver å logge seg på
> igjen.
> Du ble utestengt p.g.a. spamming, mer bestemt off topic innlegg på Fotball
> - Premier League.
>
> Mvh
> VG Modteam
>
>
> -----Opprinnelig melding-----
> Fra: Erik Ribsskog [ mailto:eribsskog@gmail.com <
eribsskog@gmail.com>]
> Sendt: sø 14.10.2007 14:40
> Til: diskusjon
> Emne: Re: Problemer med å logge på forum mm.
>
> Hei,
>
> takk for svar!
>
> Som jeg skrev i den første e-posten, så holder jeg til i England, så jeg
> valdierte brukernavnet over telefon.
>
> Så det er mulig det står på det gamle mobilnummeret mitt (90565882), fordi
> de to siste to valdieringene
> har jeg foretatt over telefon, fordi jeg fikk ikke de sms-ene frem til
> mobilen.
>
> Men jeg husker jeg forsøkte å få et brukernavn til 45883384, men sms-ene
> kom
> altså ikke fram til England,
> så det er mulig at de beholdt det gamle mobilnummeret (90565882), når jeg
> ringte for å valdiere brukernavnet.
>
> Dere skriver at nicket cons er stengt, men hva er grunnen til det hadde
> jeg
> nær sagt, skal man ikke få e-post
> osv. hvis nicket blir stengt?
>
> På forhånd takk for svar!
>
> Mvh.
>
> Erik Ribsskog
>
>
> On 10/14/07, diskusjon < diskusjon@vg.no> wrote:
> >
> > Hei,
> >
> > Nicket cons er stengt og mobilnr. 45883384 står registrert med et annet
> > brukernavn.
> >
> > Mvh
> > VG Modteam
> >
> >
> > -----Opprinnelig melding-----
> > Fra: Erik Ribsskog [
mailto:eribsskog@gmail.com <
> eribsskog@gmail.com>]
> > Sendt: sø 14.10.2007 01:56
> > Til: diskusjon
> > Emne: Re: Problemer med å logge på forum mm.
> >
> > Hei,
> >
> > takk for svar!
> >
> > brukernavn: cons
> >
> > mobilnummer: 45883384
> >
> > Håper dere har tid å se på dette.
> >
> > Mvh.
> >
> > Erik Ribsskog
> >
> >
> > On 10/13/07, diskusjon < diskusjon@vg.no> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hei, vi beklager manglende svar. Hva er brukernavn og mobilnr.?
> > >
> > > Mvh
> > >
> > > VG Modteam
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Erik Ribsskog [
mailto:eribsskog@gmail.com < eribsskog@gmail.com><
> eribsskog@gmail.com> <
> > eribsskog@gmail.com>]
> > > Sent: Sat 10/13/2007 9:38 PM
> > > To: diskusjon
> > > Subject: Fwd: Problemer med å logge på forum mm.
> > >
> > > Hei,
> > >
> > > jeg kan ikke se at jeg har mottatt noe svar på denne e-posten ennå, så
> > det
> > > er derfor jeg
> > > prøver å sende den igjen.
> > >
> > > Håper dette er i orden!
> > >
> > > Mvh.
> > >
> > > Erik Ribsskog
> > >
> > > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > > From: Erik Ribsskog < eribsskog@gmail.com>
> > > Date: Sep 30, 2007 11:53 AM
> > > Subject: Problemer med å logge på forum mm.
> > > To: Magne.Antonsen@vg.no
> > >
> > >
> > > Hei,
> > >
> > > viser til telefonsamtale for ca. en måneds tid siden angående
> validering
> > > av
> > > brukernavn.
> > >
> > > Siden i går, så har jeg hatt litt problemer med å logge på VGD.
> > >
> > > Jeg har ikke fått noe e-post eller feilmelding, så jeg lurte på om
> dere
> > > vet
> > > noe mer nøyaktig
> > > om hva som er problemet.
> > >
> > > Skulle det bli sent en e-post hvis noe var galt?
> > >
> > > Forresten, så har det vært en del problemer, rundt feilaktig sletting
> av
> > > tråder, og også
> > > forskjellsbehandling, og også manglende på en indeksert klage jeg
> skrev
> > > angående
> > > trakaseri-aktige forhold fra moderator.
> > >
> > > Så jeg lurte på i samme slengen, om du kjenner noe til noe måte jeg
> kan
> > gå
> > > frem,
> > > for å ta opp disse tingene?
> > >
> > > På fohånd takk for hjelp!
> > >
> > > Mvh.
> > >
> > > Erik Ribsskog

*****************************************************************

Denne fotnoten bekrefter at denne e-postmeldingen ble

skannet av MailSweeper og funnet fri for virus.

*****************************************************************

This footnote confirms that this email message has been

swept by MailSweeper for the presence of computer viruses.

*****************************************************************

tirsdag 6. november 2007

Bloggarkiv

Populære innlegg

Om meg

Totalt antall sidevisninger

Etiketter