johncons

Forfatter: Erik Ribsskog

  • Enclosure 3, Letter sent BBC, 6/2.

    From: eribsskog@gmail.com Erik Ribsskog
    To: England.moderators@bbc.co.uk
    Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 01:53:33 +0000
    Subject: Fwd: Problems with message-board

    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 <eribsskog@gmail.com>
    Date: Oct 31, 2007 11:11 AM
    Subject: Problems with message-board
    To: England.moderators@bbc.co.uk

    Hi,

    I’ve been having some problems with the BBC message-board lately.

    I’ve been trying to post a post about some problems at the local CAB.

    But the message-board programme just shows an error message,

    like this: ‘Please choose the region in which you want your message to
    appear.’.

    But the web-application wont let me choose a region.

    The region field is empty.

    I’ll try to take scree-shot of the screen:

    (I’m also going to attach a copy of the screen-shot, in case it easier for
    you to view the

    screenshot-copy as an enclosure.)

    I’ve tried to use both Internet Explorer and Firefox, to post the message,
    but I’m getting the

    same problem with both programs.

    I’ve been trying to post this message for about three days now, but I
    haven’t managed to

    get it posted on the message board yet, due to the mentioned problem.

    Here is the post, by the way, in case it has occured some problems with the
    post moderated

    moderation system on the message board, (like I have experienced with your
    message board

    earlier):

    ‘Lies and ‘set ups’ at the Liverpool Central CAB.

    I’ve just sent an appeal to the Liverpool Central CAB, regarding the
    investigation of a complaint, that I sent the CAB Complaints and Policy
    Officer in May.

    When I received the answer to my complaint, a few weeks ago, i discovered,
    that the CAB General Unit Coordinator, had been lying in the answer to the
    complaint.

    And it also seems that the Liverpool Central CAB, is envolved in ‘set ups’
    in which they put very young girls in the stair-case area outside of their
    offices, in the State House, (which is an office-building).

    And then they keep the lights off in the pulic areas of their offices, while
    the members of the public are kept waiting in the dark, for about 5-10
    minutes, before most of the meeting is also being kept in the dark. (In
    about twilight-strength light, it was to dark to read a regular
    information-folder there).

    And also the Liverpool Central CAB, has got the wrong e-mail address on
    their webpages.

    It’s says on their website(http://www.liverpoolcab.org) that one can contact
    them on this e-mail address:

    bureau@liverpoolcab.f9.co.uk

    But this is wrong, I had to send the General Unit Coordinator a new e-mail
    to get right e-mail address for the CAB, (which was bureau@liverpoolcab.org
    ).

    So I was wondering what other people were thinking about these problems, and
    if someone have some advice on how I should go forward in dealing with these
    issues.

    That is, besides the complaint I’ve already sent to The Chair, Liverpool
    Central CAB:

    http://johncons.blog.co.uk/2007/10/27/title~3201650

    Because I think this kind behaviour, from the CAB, is totally out of line,
    and also disgraceful for an organisation, if it wants to be respected.

    So I was just wondering what other people were thinking about this.’.

    So, I was wondering if you please have got some advice, on how I should go
    forward to sort this problem with

    selecting the region.

    Also, while I’m writing so to speak, I was wondering if you have had a
    chance to have a look at the e-mail

    I sent you again on 26/10 yet?

    Here is a copy of that e-mail:

    ‘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 <eribsskog@gmail.com>

    Date: Oct 13, 2007 8:34 PM

    Subject: Re: Your BBC Posting has been removed

    To: England <England.moderators@bbc.co.uk>

    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 <England.moderators@bbc.co.uk>

    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: https://johncons-blogg.net/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.

    >

    >’.

    I hope you have a chance to have a look at this, and thanks in advance for
    the help!

    Yours sincerely,

    Erik Ribsskog

  • Enclosure 2, Letter sent BBC, 6/2.

    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 <eribsskog@gmail.com>
    Date: Oct 13, 2007 8:34 PM
    Subject: Re: Your BBC Posting has been removed
    To: England <England.moderators@bbc.co.uk>

    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 <England.moderators@bbc.co.uk>
    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: https://johncons-blogg.net/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.
    >
    >

  • Enclosure 1, Letter sent BBC, 6/2.

    From: eribsskog@gmail.com Erik Ribsskog
    To: England.moderators@bbc.co.uk
    Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 13:51:12 +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, so that’s why
    I’m
    trying to forward it again.

    Hope that this is alright!

    Yours sincerely,

    Erik Ribsskog

    ———- Forwarded message ———-
    From: Erik Ribsskog <eribsskog@gmail.com>
    Date: Aug 15, 2007 2:06 PM
    Subject: Re: Your BBC Posting has been removed
    To: England <England.moderators@bbc.co.uk>

    Hi,

    thank you very much for your e-mail!

    Just out interest, since I’m not so into these issues, do you think it would
    be possible,
    to get a reason, for what the problem is in particular, with the link that
    wasn’t accepted?

    This since it would make it easier for me to know how to adapt to the rules,
    since it’s
    not clear to me at the moment, what it is, in particular, that was wrong
    with the link.

    Hope that this is alright, and thank you very much for your help in advance!

    Yours sincerely,

    Erik Ribsskog

    On 15 Aug 2007 11:21:45 +0000, England <England.moderators@bbc.co.uk>
    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 may be removed if they:
    >
    > * Contain links to other websites which break our Editorial Guidelines
    >
    > The URL(s) which failed were:
    > http://johncons.angelfire.com/blog/
    >
    > Please read the messageboard external links Editorial Guidelines page, for
    > more information:
    >
    > http://www.bbc.co.uk/messageboards/newguide/popup_editorial_guidelines.html
    > 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=4474744&post=52134546
    >
    > Subject:
    > Problems with the Daily Post Message-board (Sensorship)
    >
    > Posting:
    > Here is the link for the deleted thread: http://johncons.angelfire.com/blog/
    >
    >
    > 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.
    >
    >

  • Letter sent BBC, 6/2.

    Erik Ribsskog

    Flat 3

    5 Leather Lane

    Liverpool 6. February 2008

    L2 2AE

    British Broadcasting Corporation

    Broadcasting House

    Portland Place

    London

    W1 1AA

    COMPLAINT

    I’ve been having some problems with postings on the BBC message-board, being removed

    for no obvious, to me at least, reason.

    Then, I’ve been trying to write to the Moderators, to try to get them to explain to me, what

    it is in particular, that is wrong with the message-board postings.

    But I haven’t managed to recieve any answer to this e-mails.

    So I think I have to try to complain about this.

    The e-mails in question, are three e-mails I sent to england.moderators@bbc.co.uk, last

    automn.

    When I didn’t recieve any answer to the mentioned e-mails, then I also tryed to send

    reminders about this, on 28/8, 26/10 and 6/11, of last, for the respective e-mails.

    But I still didn’t recieve any answer to eighter the original e-mails, or the reminders.

    So I tried to send a complaint about this, to info@bbc.co.uk, on 6/11, and then a

    reminder, on 23/11, but I didn’t recieve any answer to any of these e-mails.

    Then I tried to call the BBC customer support, on 0870 010 0222, on 3/1, and then

    I got adviced, to send a web-mail, from the BBC website, since the BBC customer

    service representative, thought that it was more likely to get an answer, if one

    used the webmail-function, to send a complaint on the moderators, than if one

    used the e-mail address, that I had been using, thats info@bbc.co.uk.

    So I sent a web-mail, from the URL: http://bbc.co.uk/feedback, on 3/1, but I

    haven’t recieved any answer to this web-mail yet, so I thought I should maybe

    try to send a letter.

    I’m enclosing copies of the mentioned e-mails, and I’m also going to enclose screen-shots,

    taken of the web-mail message, which I sent from the http://bbc.co.uk/feedpack URL, on 3/1.

    So I hope you have the chance to have a look at this, and thank you very much in advance

    for your help!


    Yours sincerely,

    Erik Ribsskog

  • Enclosure 1, letter sent Google, 5/2.

    Fwd: [#209091530] Fwd: Blogger DMCA Complaint received
    05 February 2008
    23:26
    Subject
    Fwd: [#209091530] Fwd: Blogger DMCA Complaint received
    From
    Erik Ribsskog
    To
    support@blogger.com
    Sent
    06 November 2007 02:01

    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 <eribsskog@gmail.com>
    Date: Oct 26, 2007 9:12 PM
    Subject: Re: [#209091530] Fwd: Blogger DMCA Complaint received
    To: Blogger Help <support@blogger.com>

    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 <support@blogger.com > 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 <eribsskog@gmail.com>
    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 < support@blogger.com> 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 <support@blogger.com> 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” <eribsskog@gmail.com>
    > > 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:
    > > > https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-8.html
    > > > https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-9.html
    > > > https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-15.html
    > > > https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-16.html
    > > > https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-17.html
    > > > https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-18.html
    > > > https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-19.html
    > > > https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-20.html
    > > > https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-21.html
    > > > https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-22.html
    > > > https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-23.html
    > > > https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-24.html
    > > > https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-25.html
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > Original Message Follows:
    > > > ————————
    > > > From: “Erik Ribsskog” < eribsskog@gmail.com >
    > > > 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:
    > > > >
    > > > > https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-8.html
    > > > > https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-9.html
    > > > > https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-15.html
    > > > > https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-16.html
    > > > > https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-17.html
    > > > > https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-18.html
    > > > > https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-19.html
    > > > > https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-20.html
    > > > > https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-21.html
    > > > > https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-22.html
    > > > > https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-23.html
    > > > > https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-24.html
    > > > > https://johncons-blogg.net/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
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > >
    > >
    >
    >

  • Letter sent Google, 5/2.

    Erik Ribsskog

    Flat 3

    5 Leather Lane

    Liverpool 5. February 2008

    GB-L2 2 AE

    Great Britain

    Google Inc.

    1600 Amphitheatre Parkway

    Mountain View

    CA 94043

    USA

    COMPLAINT BLOGGER

    I just wanted to please complain about a couple of issues surrounding Blogger.

    1. Blogger let the company Arvato Ltd. remove my resume/C.V., and other

    of my personal documents from work, from my blog, from these URL’s:

    https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-8.html
    https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-9.html
    https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-15.html
    https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-16.html
    https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-17.html
    https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-18.html
    https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-19.html
    https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-20.html
    https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-21.html
    https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-22.html
    https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-23.html
    https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-24.html
    https://johncons-blogg.net/2007/10/enclosure-25.html

    This was done, with the following reason: ‘In accordance with the DMCA, we have completed

    processing your infrigment complaint regarding the following URLs:’

    I don’t think it’s right that my CV should be deleted from my blog, since it’s says on my CV,

    that I was working for 15 months for Arvato Ltd., on the Microsoft Scandinavian Product

    Activation, in Liverpool.


    I don’t think, that even if the name ‘Arvato’, is protected by copyright, still I don’t it’s against

    the law, to write the word ‘Arvato’, in a document, like this e-mail or in a CV.

    And I also think one have the right to publish work-related documents, given to oneself

    in person, at ones workplace, especially since this was part of a ‘whistleblowing’ process.

    So I think this removal of documents from my blog, was a bit peculiar, so I would think it

    would be very fine, if you could have had a look at this, and checked that everything was

    done, in accordence with standard procedures in cases like this.

    2 In the e-mail from support@blogger.com, from 10/23/07, it says that:

    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′.

    I’ve been checking this, the mentioned link above, several times, since 23. October, but I can’t

    really say, that it has been possible, to see the notice Blogger recieved from Arvato Ltd. on the

    mentioned URL at all.

    So I was wondering if it please would be possible to update mentioned link, since the e-mail,

    from Blogger, where it says that the notice from Arvato Ltd. would be possible to be found

    on the chillingeffects-link, is more than three months old.

    So I think it should have been possible to see the notice by now.

    So I think it would be very fine, if Blogger could eighter update the link, or maybe send me a

    copy of the notice, in an e-mail, since I’m a bit currious about what the notice says, since

    I think, like I mentioned above, that the removal of my CV and the other files, was a maybe

    a bit peculiar.

    And, like I mentioned above, I’m also involved in a ‘whistleblowing’-process, and harassment

    at work legal-case, against the same Arvato Ltd. company, so I suspect that this, the

    DMCA complaint, could be linked with the employement-case/whistleblowing process.


    So I think it would be very fine, if it would be possible to please have a look at the mentioned

    notice.

    3. The reason, that I’m writing this letter, and not just sending another e-mail to

    support@blogger.com, is that, I’m not receiving any more answer to the e-mails I sent

    to Blogger support.

    So I think it would be very fine, if it would be possible to please get a reason for why this is,

    that I’m not recieving any answers to my latest e-mail.

    (I’ll enclose copies of these e-mails).

    4. I was wondering, like I was writing in one of the last e-mails I sent support@blogger.com,

    about how long time one have, if one wanted to file a DMCA counter-complaint, if one

    wanter to complain about the removal of the files from the blogg.

    Since, I thought that the removal of the files from my blog, could maybe seem a bit strange,

    since I couldn’t really see how my CV etc., could be connected with any type of copyright

    infridgment.

    So I’m trying to get some more advice on how to go forward with a DMCA counter-complaint,

    and then I think it would be very useful, to know, if possilbe, how long time one have got,

    if one wanted to file a counter-complaint like this.

    So I think it would be very fine if you would have the oppertunity to help me with answering

    these questions.

    I’ll also enclose copies of the correspondance between support@blogger.com, and myself.


    So I hope this is alright, and thank you very much for your help in advance!

    Yours sincerely,

    Erik Ribsskog

  • The Police.

    Ok, the police have used me as a spy, is that right?

    And now they wont level with me, even if it’s more than a year since they used me
    as a spy and/or ‘target guy’, against some mafia or something like that?

    And they are sending people to spy on me, clockwork orange style, is that it?

    And they have done so much wrong, that they wont tell what they’ve done.

    And they just pretend, when they’re speaking with me, that there’s nothing going on?

    Is that it?

  • Letter sent Nordea, 5/2. (In Norwegian).

    Erik Ribsskog

    Flat 3

    5 Leather Lane

    Liverpool 5. februar 2008

    GB-L2 2AE

    Storbritannia

    Nordea

    Postboks 1166 Sentrum

    N-0107 Oslo

    Norway

    KLAGE

    I august i fjor, så ringte jeg Nordeas kundeservice og pratet med en representant hos dere,

    som het Frode.

    Jeg skulle overføre to betalinger til Norge, og da koster det £20, for hver overføring fra Barclays,

    så jeg tenkte at jeg kunne overføre totalbeløpet for begge regningene til kontoen min i Nordea,

    og så bruke nettbank for å betale regningene til de norske firmaene, for da ville det koste £20

    å betale begge regningene, istedet for £40.

    Jeg hadde hatt noe problemer i 2006, med overtrekk på kontoen hos Nordea, og jeg hadde

    fått i stand en betalingsordning med Aktiv Kapital, at jeg skulle betale et visst beløp hver

    måned, når jeg hadde blitt litt mer vant til den nye jobben som selvstendig næringsdrivende

    innen ‘company research’, sånn at jeg tjente nok til å betale alle regningene.

    Så i august, i fjor, så skulle jeg betale den første regningen til Aktiv Kapital, og også en

    regning til et annet firma.

    Så jeg ringte kundeservice og pratet med Frode, for å forsikre meg om at overføringen ville gå

    greit, siden det hadde vært problemer med overtrekk på kontoen, året før.

    Frode sa at det ikke var noe problem, og at det var bare å sende overføringen fra Barclays

    -kontoen, til Nordea-kontoen, så skulle ikke det være noe problem i det hele tatt.


    Det som skjedde, var at når jeg, som avtalt med kundeservice-medarbeideren deres, sendte

    beløpet et visst antall dager senere, var at pengene ikke kom inn på Nordea-kontoen, men

    ble sendt i retur til Barclays.

    Så begge de norske regningene ble forsinket.

    Barclays skulle ha enda et gebyr, i størrelseorden £30-35, og Barclays informerte meg, om

    at beløpet hadde blitt sendt i retur, fordi kontoen hos Nordea var slettet/innbetalingen ble

    nektet mottatt.

    Nå har jeg hatt mye å gjøre i jobb og med noen arbeidsrettsaks-prosseser osv., i de siste

    månedene, men nå 3. januar, så ringte jeg Nordeas kundeservice, og da fikk jeg vite at

    kontoen var slettet, og jeg fikk spørsmål om hvem jeg hadde snakket med i august i fjor.


    Så vi ble enige om at jeg skulle forsøke å finne det notatet, blant alle bank-papirene, for

    å prøve å finne ut hvem jeg hadde pratet med.


    Men jeg fant et notat, fra en samtale jeg hadde hatt med en representant som het Frode,

    og da ringte jeg tilbake i forrige uke var det vel, og da trodde de det var en representant

    som hadde det navnet som jobbet på avdelingen i Ålesund.

    Så pratet jeg med han 31. januar, og han mente at kontoen kunne jo ha blitt slettet, i

    mellomtiden, mellom samtalen min med Nordea, og til overføringen nådde fra Barclays

    til Nordea.

    Men jeg sa jo det, at jeg husket at jeg spurte om det gikk greit å sende betalingen den og

    den tidsperioden.

    Jeg spurte jo ikke om det var greit å sende betalingen samme dagen, jeg spurte om det

    var greit å sende, senere samme måned, når jeg hadde fått lønning.

    Og det fikk jeg beskjed om at ikke skulle være noe problem.

    Så jeg mener det ikke er riktig at betalingen skal nektes overføres til kontoen da, når jeg

    hadde ringt tidligere samme måned, og avtalt med kundeservice at jeg skulle sende

    pengene den og den datoen.

    Så dette synes jeg var litt rart, at pengene skulle bli sendt i retur da, siden jeg jo hadde

    ringt og fått i stand en avtale rundt dette med overføringen.


    Så jeg lurer på hva som kan ha skjedd.


    Det virker som om jeg har hatt noe problemer med, av en for meg uforståelig årsak, med

    at politiet har brukt meg som spion/’target guy’ mot noen kriminelle nettverk osv., og jeg

    har også overhørt, i Norge, i 2003, at jeg er forfulgt av noe kriminellt mafia-nettverk, som

    de kalte ‘mafian’.

    Og det virker som om jeg har hatt noe problemer med overvåking, trakassering mm., på

    debattforum osv. i Norge, og også med trenering/trakassering fra myndighetene, i forbindelse

    med at jeg har prøvd å få råd om hvordan man burde takle slike problemer med kriminelle

    nettverk osv.

    Så jeg lurer på om det tullet med kontoen, må man vel nesten kunne kalle det, kan på noen

    måte være forbundet enten med trakassering fra kriminelle ‘mafia’-nettverk, eller, av en eller

    annen grunn, fra myndighetens/politiets side.

    Jeg mistenker i allefall at det muligens kan henge sammen på den måten, så jeg lurte litt

    på om det hadde vært mulig for dere å undersøke dette, på noen måte, og at jeg gjerne

    fikk et skriftelig svar, om hva som har foregått, fordi jeg har tenkt å prøve å få mye av

    sakene i forbindelse med overvåking/trakassering/ignorering av menneskerettigheter fra

    myndighetene osv., gjennom rettsystemet.


    Så da tenkte jeg at det kunne jo vært greit å hatt noe dokumentasjon på hva som har

    foregått, i forbindelse med disse problemene i forbindelse med overføringen til kontoen

    min i Nordea, i tilfelle dette kan være forbundet på noen måte med de andre tidligere,

    nevnte problemene.


    For jeg synes jo det var litt rart, at man først avtaler at det skal gå greit å overføre et

    visst beløp, på et bestemt tidspunkt, og så, siden, så skal man få beskjed fra den

    engelske banken, at beløpet ble nektet å bli mottatt på kontoen, og at pengene

    ble sendt i retur til England, og at man må betale over £30, var det vel, i gebyr,

    av de £85, som man først sendte.


    Og da gikk jo £20, først i gebyr, for overføringen til Norge, og så, må man betale,

    jeg tror det var £30-35, i gebyr for at pengene ble sendt tilbake i retur fra Nordea.


    Så jeg gikk til banken med £85, og en ukes tid senere, var det vel, så fikk jeg igjen

    litt over £30, tror jeg det var.


    Så det var vel ikke så veldig artig, så det synes jeg var litt snodig da, hvordan dette

    kunne skje, siden jeg jo hadde ringt Nordea på forhånd, og sjekket at alt var i

    orden.


    Da fikk jeg jo problemer med de norske krediorene og, for det hjalp jo ikke de

    norske fimaene så mye, hvis jeg stod med ca. £30 pund i England, når jeg skulle

    betale 700-800 kr. i Norge.

    Hvis jeg hadde sendt pengene en gang til, så hadde det jo blitt igjen litt over £10,

    etter at overføringsgebyret, for overføring til utlandet, hadde blitt betalt.

    Så da ville vel ca. 150 kr. da, blitt overført til Norge, og det hjelper jo ikke så mye,

    når man skal betale 700 eller 800.

    Så da fikk jeg litt problemer med de firmaene jeg skyldte penger i Norge og, så

    det var ikke så artig.

    Så jeg håper dere har muligheten til å undersøke dette på en ordentlig og

    ansvarlig måte!

    Jeg sender med en kopi av overføringsskjemaet, fra august i fjor, fra Barclays,

    der står det dato for overføring, og beløpet osv.


    Håper dette er i orden, og på forhånd takk for hjelp!

    Mvh.

    Erik Ribsskog

  • Enclosure 2, Letter sent TV2 5/2. (In Norwegian).

    SV: Veggavisen – Tema flyttet!
    05 February 2008
    14:23
    Subject
    SV: Veggavisen – Tema flyttet!
    From
    Gunnar Stavrum
    To
    Erik Ribsskog
    Sent
    08 November 2007 07:24

    Hei, og takk for mailer.

    Temaet er ganske omfattende, så jeg trenger litt tid før jeg kan gi deg et svar.

    mvh

    Gunnar Stavrum
    TV 2 Nettavisen
    —–Opprinnelig melding—–
    Fra: Erik Ribsskog [mailto:eribsskog@gmail.com]
    Sendt: 8. november 2007 05:04
    Til: Gunnar Stavrum
    Emne: Fwd: Veggavisen – Tema flyttet!

    ———- Forwarded message ———-
    From: Erik Ribsskog <eribsskog@gmail.com>
    Date: Nov 3, 2007 1:11 PM
    Subject: Re: Veggavisen – Tema flyttet!
    To: Veggavisen Admin <veggavisen@tv2.no>

    Hei,

    takk for svar!

    Jeg fortstår hva du skriver, om innleggene, at bare noen veldig få av innleggene jeg har
    sendt deg, er fra folk som jeg har på ignore.

    Hovedparten av innleggene, er i kategorien, innlegg som er trakasserende i seg selv,
    og ikke fordi de er sendt av brukere jeg har på ignore.

    Så jeg vet ikke helt om hvordan vi skal gjøre det med de innleggene jeg nevnte nå,
    altså de som er trakasserende i seg selv.

    Det var jo også en del spørsmål i den forrige e-posten jeg sendte, nå for en times tid
    siden, som jeg ikke kan se å ha fått svar på, det var altså om hvordan dere pleide
    å gjøre det, hvis det var uenighet mellom Admin og bruker, om en tråd stod på riktig
    forum eller ikke.

    Og også, om hvordan dere pleier å gjøre det, hvis det var uenighet, mellom Admin og
    bruker, om et innlegg var trakasserende eller ikke.
    Så jeg prøver å ta med dette en gang til, bare for alle tilfellers skyld.
    Så får jeg håpe dere har tid til å se på dette etterhvert.

    Så på forhånd takk for hjelp!

    Mvh.

    Erik Ribsskog

    On 11/3/07, Veggavisen Admin <veggavisen@tv2.no > wrote:
    Hei igjen.

    Skal forsøke å forklare dette en gang til.

    De meldingene du sender til meg, er IKKE fra de brukere du har satt på ignore.
    Meldingene du får, og som du har sendt videre til meg, er beskjeder fra forumsystemet om at det …. finnes ett innlegg skrevet av X….

    Dette hender uansett om du har satt brukeren på ignore eller ikke.

    mvh
    Admin
    —– Original Message —–
    From: Erik Ribsskog
    To: Veggavisen Admin
    Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2007 1:08 PM
    Subject: Re: Veggavisen – Tema flyttet!

    Hei,

    takk for svar!

    Da er vi nok litt uenige om det har foregått trakassering eller ikke.

    I følge de definisjonene jeg har lest, om hva trakassering er, dvs. nedlatende og uønskede utsagn/kommentarer,
    så vil nok jeg si at mer eller mindre alle, av de vel over 40 postene jeg har rapportert til dere, de siste månedene,
    må være snakk om trakassering.

    Du skriver at det ikke er person-angrep i postene, men jeg mener at de postene jeg har sendt er personangrep,
    eller trakassering da.

    Av forskjellige grunner, noen synes jeg var trakasserende fordi brukerne fortsatte å sende meg meldinger,
    enda jeg hadde satt de på ‘ignore’, og ikke svarte de på de forrige meldingene.

    Men det er kanskje uenighet mellom oss, om hva trakassering er.

    Jeg har forstått det sånn, at det er utsagn, som er nedlatende og uønskede.

    Jeg tar det for gitt at jeg selv bestemmer hva som er ønsket eller ikke.

    Og da blir det vel bare igjen å avgjøre om utsagnet er nedlatende eller ikke da.

    Men det er mulig at vi er uenige om hva nedlatende betyr.

    Sånn som jeg har skjønt det, er et utsagn nedlatende, hvis det setter en person, på et nivå under de
    andre.

    Så hvis noen sier du skrive jammen meg masse sprøe innlegg må jeg si.

    Da mener jeg dette er nedlatende, fordi da er man jo sprø, hvis man skriver ‘sprø’ innlegg.

    Og å være sprø, er jo ikke like bra som å være ‘normal’.
    Så da er det nedlatende, mot den som blir kalt sprø, fordi da er pesonen på et lavere nivå
    enn de som er normale.

    Så sånn er det jeg forstår dette med trakassering og hva begrepet nedlatende betyr.

    Og det er vanskelig for meg å tilbakevise det du skriver, om at postene ikke er pesonangrep.

    Det er enklere hvis vi tar en og en post, men jeg rapportert poster til dere fortløpende, ca. de
    siste en og en halv, eller to månendene, og så drøyer det lenge med å få svar, så det er jo
    ikke så lett å ta for seg et innlegg av gangen da.

    Men hvis du har noen konkrete eksempler på hvorfor alle disse over 40 rapporterte postene,
    ikke er trakassering, så hadde det også vært fint.
    For da er det enkelere for meg å skjønne hvordan dere tolker reglene, enn hvis dere bare
    skriver at det ikke er trakassering, uten å forklare hvordan dette defineres, og f.eks. bruke
    eksempler da.

    For da hadde jeg skjønt mere hvordan dere avgjør om noe er trakassering eller ikke.

    For hva dere mener er trakassering, det er litt uklart for meg nå.
    Så hvis dere har tid, så kan dere jo se om dere har eventuelt tid til å forklare om dette, det
    hadde vært veldig bra i såfall.

    Du svarte forresten ikke på det jeg spurte om i den e-posten jeg ‘forwarded’ sammen med den forrige e-posten,
    altså hvordan dere pleide å gå frem, hvis det var uenighet, mellom Admin og bruker, om på hvilket forum en
    tråd hører hjemme.

    I tillegg lurer jeg også på om hvordan dere pleier å gå frem, dersom det er uenighet mellom Admin og bruker,
    om innlegg som er rapportert, er trakasserende eller ikke.

    Jeg er i en prosess med å ta kontakt med advokat i Norge, angående andre spørsmål, så jeg kan jo høre
    med de om dette, hvis jeg får noen svar av det, om hva som regnes som trakassering innefor lovverket i
    Norge.
    For jeg regner vel med, at man i tillegg til forum-reglene, også er beskyttet av Norges Lover, når det gjelder
    ting som mobbing og trakassering, så hvis jeg får ordnet med advokat osv. som planlagt, så skal jeg også
    prøve å finne ut litt mer om dette.

    Men samme det.

    Dere får se om dere har tid til å forklare litt bedre, hvordan dere mener trakassering osv.

    Hvis ikke så kan jeg også prøve å ta det med advokat osv., og høre hvordan de definerer det, for det er vel
    ikke umulig at dette også går under Norges Lover.

    Det er sikkert verdt å sjekke ut mer om i allefall.
    For jeg mener at jeg har blitt trakassert i alle disse tilfellene, og det mener jeg er uakseptabelt, så det synes
    jeg ikke er riktig at man bare skal finne seg i, og få høre at det ikke er trakassering, for da skjønner i hvertfall
    ikke jeg hva trakassering er.
    Så det er fint hvis dere har mulighet til å klargjøre litt mer om dette.
    Så på forhånd takk for hjelp i forbindelse med det, og igjen takk for det forrige svaret!

    Mvh.

    Erik Ribsskog

    On 11/3/07, Veggavisen Admin <veggavisen@tv2.no > wrote:
    Heisann

    Nå har jeg vært igjennom de e-postene du har sendt. Det generelle inntrykket er at det ikke har foregått noe trakassering av deg. Noen snedige kommentarer finnes riktig nok, men bruker man ett debattforum, er man nødt til å kunne akseptere at det kommer meninger om en selv. Mange av de e-postene du sendte inneholdt overhodet ingen angrep eller i det hele tatt forsøk på angrep på din person.

    mvh
    Admin
    —– Original Message —–
    From: Erik Ribsskog
    To: veggavisen@tv2.no
    Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 12:01 AM
    Subject: Fwd: Veggavisen – Tema flyttet!

    Hei,

    nå er jeg tilbake med en oppsummering her.

    Det ble til sammen 37 e-poster jeg sendte, angående e-poster som jeg mener
    faller inn under kategoriene personangrep/trakassering.

    (Et par av e-postene inneholdt også innlegg som ble sendt meg, etter at jeg hadde
    satt personen på ‘ignore’, og at personen burde ha vist at jeg ignorerte personen,
    siden jeg ikke svarte på de forrige postene.)

    Og jeg husker også at det var en del personangrep/trakassering i tråden ‘Norge er
    ikke som du tror’.

    Men dette var før jeg fikk satt på varslingsfunksjonen, så fra de postene har jeg
    dessverre ikke noen e-poster.

    Og hvis det er noen poster du/dere er i tvil om hvorfor jeg sendte, så bare kontakt
    meg tilbake angående de, og jeg vil forklare dette nærmere.

    Så jeg gjentar spørsmålet fra tidligere e-post, altså hva dere har gjort/har tenkt å
    gjøre, i forbindelse med de postene jeg har rapportert om tidligere, og om de
    e-postene jeg har sendt i dag.

    Så jeg ser frem til å motta nærmere svar fra dere angående dette!

    Håper dette er i orden!

    Mvh.

    Erik Ribsskog

    ———- Forwarded message ———-
    From: Erik Ribsskog <eribsskog@gmail.com>
    Date: Oct 28, 2007 9:54 PM
    Subject: Fwd: Veggavisen – Tema flyttet!
    To: veggavisen@tv2.no

    Hei,

    nå skriver jeg tilbake angående tråder og poster med personangrep/trakassering osv.

    Jeg gjør det på den måten, at jeg går gjennom e-poster jeg har fått gjennom varsling for nye
    poster metoden på forumet.

    Også sender jeg de, som jeg synes faller inn under definisjonen personangrep/trakassering.

    (De fleste av disse er nok rapportert før, men det skulle bli enklere å kikke på det samlet nå,
    ettersom jeg sender e-postene etter hverandre, så da burde det være enklere å få en samlet
    oversikt).

    Jeg sender e-postene fra to e-post adresser da, siden jeg byttet fra eribsskog@gmail.com,
    til erik.ribsskog@btinternet.com, siden jeg ikke bruker den siste e-post adressen så mye,
    så da slapp jeg å få så mange trakasserende innlegg fra folk jeg hadde på ignore på den
    ‘vanlige’ e-post adressen.

    Grunnen til at jeg ikke fjernet varsling fra de aktuelle trådene på forumet, var at jeg synes
    det er oversiktelig å se på ‘mitt forum’ siden, når varsling er på, for da ser man tid og dato
    for når de siste postene er skrevet i hver tråd.

    Og jeg bruker mest bare BT e-post adressen, som en slags reserve e-post adresse, fordi
    jeg har startet å bruke gmail, og BT klarte å stave navnet mitt feil i BT epost-adressen,
    når jeg begynte å abonnere på fasttelefon og internett fra de, så jeg begynte aldri å
    bruke den BT adressen så mye.
    Så da har det bare blitt til at jeg bruker gmail e-postadressen.

    I tilfelle det var noen som lurte på det der.

    Men samme det.

    Jeg sender kopier av de aktuelle e-postene nå, også når jeg gått gjennom alle e-postene,
    så sender en vanlig e-post til slutt, for å oppsumere hvor mange e-poster jeg har sendt,
    og om hvordan vi skal gjøre det fremover i forbindelse med dette osv.

    Håper dette er i orden!

    Mvh.

    Erik Ribsskog

    ———- Forwarded message ———-
    From: Erik Ribsskog < eribsskog@gmail.com>
    Date: Oct 28, 2007 5:12 PM
    Subject: Re: Veggavisen – Tema flyttet!
    To: Veggavisen Admin <veggavisen@tv2.no>

    Hei,

    takk for svar!

    Ja, de kan vel se gjennom det hvis de har tid osv. da.

    Men det er ikke sånn jeg mente det, at dere behøvde å lage noen nye rutiner osv. for min del, så
    det skal jeg egentlig ikke blande meg i.

    Kanskje det er jeg som er kranglete, og at det aldri har vært noe uenighet om hvilket forum
    trådene passer best på før?

    Sånn jeg tenkte meg det, var at dere løste det sånn som dere pleide å løse det med lignende
    problemer.

    Jeg hadde ikke tenk å legge meg opp i hvordan rutinene skal være da, for å si det sånn.

    Men jeg skal prøve å få sett igjennom de trådene på nytt i løpet av dagen.

    Så da sender jeg en ny oppdatering angående de innleggene jeg mente var trakasserende osv.,
    senere i dag.

    Håper dette er i orden, og igjen takk for svar!

    Mvh.

    Erik Ribsskog

    On 10/28/07, Veggavisen Admin <veggavisen@tv2.no > wrote:
    Heisann.

    Det virker som vi er litt uenige der ja.
    Kan sende saken til VApanelet, som hjelper meg med fokustrådene blant annet. Dette er nøytrale personer, som ikke skriver noe særlig på forumet lenger, og om tør å være ærlige. Ikke en offisiell klageinstans, men kanskje de vil se på saken?

    Når det gjelder trakassering. Har sett en del mailer, men har til nå ikke funnet noe spesielt som jeg vil slå ned på. Ettersom jeg får en god del mailer pr dag, så er jeg ikke i stand til å huske konkret hvor denne trakasseringen skulle ha foregått. Jeg vil gjerne at du skriver til meg hvilke tråder det er, så kan jeg ta en ekstra kikk på det.

    mvh
    Admin
    —– Original Message —–
    From: Erik Ribsskog
    To: Veggavisen Admin
    Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2007 9:47 PM
    Subject: Re: Veggavisen – Tema flyttet!

    Hei,

    da er vi nok uenige.

    For da ser dere ikke helheten i posten.

    Og det er om dette er ledd i et mønster, som det står i temasamendraget, for å tulle med Carl og Eli Hagen,
    (og andre Frp-topper).

    Altså om det er en politisk motivert kampanje for å trakassere politikere som tilhører en hvis politisk blokk.

    For å på den måten skade en politisk blokk, og dermed styrke en annen.

    Så da tror jeg at man legger for mye vekt på enkeltdetaljer i innlegget, istedet for å se på helheten.

    Så da er vi nok uenige ja.

    Men jeg klarer ikke helt å fortså hvordan det er mulig å unngå å se helheten i innlegget.

    I allefall hvis man leder et debattforum, så burde man vel være vant til å se helheten for et innlegg, og ikke
    henge seg opp i detaljene.

    Så dette synes jeg var snodig, hvis jeg skal si min mening.

    Men dere har kanskje noen klageinstans?

    Jeg har også vært plaget med trakassering på forumet deres, og jeg har rapportert en del innlegg, og sent
    en del e-poster i forbindelse med dette.

    Så jeg sendte dere en e-post 18/10, hvor jeg spurte om dere hadde gjort noe i forbindelse med dette.

    Men jeg kan ikke se at jeg har fått noe svar på den e-posten ennå, enda det er godt over en uke siden
    jeg sendte den.

    Men jeg skal sende den på nytt nå, sammen med denne eposten, så det blir spennede å se om det
    dukker opp noe svar.

    Så får jeg håpe at dere blir flinkere til å ta hensyn til helheten i innleggene i framtiden.

    Mvh.

    Erik Ribsskog

    On 10/27/07, Veggavisen Admin <veggavisen@tv2.no > wrote:
    Hei

    Med tanke på tematittelen, og mye av postens innhold, da spesielt fokuset på Eli Hagens frisyre, og hennes utforkjøring, kan vi desverre ikke se at dette er av nok politisk relevans for å la det bli stående på politikkforumet.

    mvh
    Veggavisen
    —– Original Message —–
    From: Erik Ribsskog
    To: veggavisen@tv2.no
    Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2007 7:56 AM
    Subject: Re: Veggavisen – Tema flyttet!

    Hei,

    nå tror jeg dere har glemt å tørke søvnen ut av øynene her.
    For det er i høyeste grad politikk.

    Det går på problemstillinger rundt skitne og uærlige triks, for å påvirke styrkeforholdet
    mellom de politiske blokkene.

    Så dette må dere se på en gang til synes jeg.

    På forhånd takk for hjelp!

    Mvh.
    Erik Ribsskog

    On 10/27/07, veggavisen@tv2.no < veggavisen@tv2.no> wrote:
    Temaet kalt Eli Hagens frisør – Spøkefugl eller faglig dyktig?, har blitt flyttet.
    Du kan nå se det på: http://forum.tv2.no/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=130&threadid=38368&forumid=1