Users/Khanh/Talk - Davis Wiki

This page is for discussing Khanh's actions on the wiki.

Khanh has threatened to sue Davis Wiki or its editors for attributing edits made with his sockpuppet account, keepingitlegal to him. He has affirmed that the account does indeed belong to him. When he is accusing his competitors of illegal activity under that name, he cannot do so anonymously.

Legal threats have a chilling effect on editors. If he had suffered legitimate injury due to conduct on the wiki, that would be one thing. However, any legal action he would take would be utterly baseless. We cannot tolerate people throwing around legal threats. I propose that both accounts belonging to this person be banned if the person behind them does not retract their legal threat in 72 hours or less. —WilliamLewis

Edit: Khanh is at it again. He's threatening to go to the police this time if we don't resolve his non-existent issue. Shall finally ban him?

Edit 2: I'm not talking about Khanh deleting the comment he objected to on his page. I'm talking about Khanh's repeated legal threats and insinuation of legal threats. We should have zero tolerance for people flippantly throwing these things out in an attempt to get their way.

"Please advise what i need to do to stop the theats. If we can not come to a resoultion I will get the police department involved." That does not sound like a "legal threat' to me. He can file a police report if he thinks the other individual actually directly threatened him. Did he actually threaten to sue DavisWiki this time? I was trying to engage Khanh, rather than start the conversation (as you've done here) with a proposal to ban him. That isn't a very collaborative approach, IMO. —DonShor

Original legal threat that started this page (in an edit comment) :"If you want me to sue you than keep putting my other name user back on."

I see his latest threat a continuation of this behavior.

Comments:

Note: You must be logged in to add comments

16:21:32 Let him go to the police and then they can explain how it is a non-issue. It's usually easier to take something seriously when a cop says it. —hankim

There is nothing to be said about discouraging people making threats? —WilliamLewis

Most threats I have seen are difficult to carry out, like a fifty pound child threatening to beat people up. Going to the police about whatever is on Davis Wiki does not seem like a viable threat (sure, someone could go to the police, but I doubt they would do very much). Of course, people are going nuts with cyber-bullying nowadays, which might change things. Come at me, bro. —hankim

Oh, I know the threat is empty and irrelevant. We've done nothing illegal or tortuous. I'm just tired of jackasses coming on here and dropping threats left and right. I think they should either retract their threats or face the STFU button. —WilliamLewis

I am personally fine with people making a fool of themselves by shouting out empty threats. —hankim

16:25:18 Yeah it is really sad that you dont see the law as most people do. If you read the threats maybe you would see things differently. —Khanh

I have read these "threats" and wrote to you about them already.

16:26:08 The legal threats seem designed to discourage people from going to his competition. Damn it, KHAAAAAAAANNNNNHHHH! —BrentLaabs

16:26:50 So you understand when you talk about legitimate injury, after we try and get people to follow the law we then get vandalized. I wonder if this is legitimate enouth for you. —Khanh

16:28:49 I like how you guys are making this a competition issue. The issues is that people need to have the proper business license and Electronic repair license. When people comment on my wiki site and threaten the business I do think that this is legitimate. —Khanh

http://daviswiki.org/Davis_Computer?action=diff&version2=29&version1=28 - So what do you think they will target your business with? A bomb? And these days you need a business license to arrange flowers. Licenses do not protect consumers from bad business practices, they just keep competition out. —hankim
Where is your wiki site? If you are referring to an entry on the Davis Wiki, it is not yours any more than an article in the Enterprise is yours just because it mention you, and you should be aware of that. Please read Welcome to the Wiki/Business Owner. —Evan 'JabberWokky' Edwards,

16:45:36 A business license help the person who wants to have legal action find the registered owner and have a dialogueor take them to court. —Khanh

17:07:58 Khanh, it is quite obviously not a threat. "Beware! He's got my ire" and "He's now a tarket (sic) of mine" do not amount to a true threat under any jurisdiction on earth. If you're genuinely concerned for your safety, you should absolutely talk to the police and see what they recommend. However, threatening legal action against the DavisWiki (or any other community website) is probably one of the quickest and surest ways to be permanently removed from the website.

Because this isn't the first time, I would probably get behind a ban. As WL stated, legal threats are poisonous to participation, discussion, and community. —TomGarberson

17:32:10 Hey, Khanh, I have no problem with your removal of the comment that was on your page. There is no need for threats of any kind. Just keep an eye on your page and reply as needed, and start a Talk page if you see something that bothers you. —DonShor

17:51:54 I agree that Khanh should be able to delete the comment. Businesses bad mouthing each other (it looks like just bad mouthing, not a threat) on the wiki should not be allowed. Having said that, Khanh should not be posting negative comments on his competitor's wiki pages either. —DagonJones

What does this have to do with Khanh's legal threats? —wl

Sorry it was just my two cents about the comment. I don't understand law that well so I am not sure what he is really threatening to do? sue users on the wiki for not getting his way? It just seems kinda stupid, like a kid stamping his feet. So I don't think it is cool at all, Tom brings up a very good point. I would stop contributing altogether if I felt I would face any kind of legal action against me for my opinions or input. If Kanh truly feels threatened then it is not any editor's business at all, that is only a police matter. -DJ

17:56:38 For me, it has nothing to do with the comment. It's completely and totally the issue of making legal threats against the DavisWiki. It's hard to think of anything that will do more to deter people from participating here. Spam and all that crap is annoying, but it's a minor nuisance that's fixed with a couple of clicks, and generally only bothers the gnomes. Legal threats are a very, very different beast. —TomGarberson

18:07:24 Reading the post, I couldn't definitively parse it as to whether he wanted to take police action against the competitor or Davis wiki. I'd not worry about it until he makes it clear. —JimStewart

Yup. After reading through everything briefly, I'm of the same position as of right now. I'd be happy if he would make it explicit one way or the other. —Evan 'JabberWokky' Edwards

As a preamble to the following, it's not really about this particular issue, as if there was a legal threat, that might invoke non-community issues of liability. This is, as it is labeled, a general check of the people involved to see if everybody is working toward similar aims here.

General Community Philosophy Check: I assume that most people here agree that the goal when things like this happen is to keep as many people as reasonably possible involved in the wiki and have as inclusive a community as possible. That, rather than trying to "catch people" and ban them, a bit of forgiveness (after the issue is either resolved or dropped) and moving on — even with some grumbling — is the preferred end result rather than a vigorous exclusion of members of the Davis community that either make a mistake, say something regrettable or trip up on common traditions here on the wiki. That's not to say that there aren't direct acts or patterns that can result in a legitimate ban, but rather that the ideal resolution is inclusive rather than exclusive. -jw

I'm sure everyone would agree with that. The disagreement is going to be over where on the spectrum of obnoxious direct acts or patterns legitimate bans begin. —TomGarberson
He has not backed away from his earlier baseless threats and has made a new one today, this time invoking the police. Someone who resorts to legal threats to get their way is not and should not be a member of our community. If he wants to retract both threats and promise to not drop them again, fine. Thus far, he is unrepentant. We should not allow this to happen. —WilliamLewis

The above is not about this particular event, just a general check that we all have the same general philosophy of goals. -jw
William, William, William... We don't know that he threatened Davis wiki, we don't know that he threatened in order to "get his way" or as a means to get justice. Furthermore, he most definitely does *not* want to be "a member of our community". Having spoken to him at length, he seems to just want to be left alone to run his business. That right should be respected. If you feel his comment violates the Davis wiki terms of use, post a reply to it explaining why it is objectionable and that if he does not modify it withing 72 hours, you will delete it. Then if he doesn't change it, delete it. This is how I handled vlam's abusive posts and nobody objected.

That's why I specified inclusion of the Davis community above. Having the opportunity to speak doesn't imply a demand to. People are free to ignore Picnic Day, WEF and the wiki. Keeping the doors open doesn't imply a need to enter. He's free to ignore the wiki... And if so, William, then what's the problem? Jim's solution seems pretty reasonable. Jw

I agree with regards to the most recent comment. The disturbing part to me is the recidivism here. Plus, it's hard to say he doesn't want to be a part of the Wiki community when he uses the Wiki to go after rival businesses. I also tend to agree that legal threats toward the wiki or the members of its community should be damn near zero-tolerance. If he really wants nothing to do with the community, that's fine. He should, IMO, be informed of just how seriously we take stuff like this, asked to clarify his intent with regard to the wiki and its editors, issued a final request not to engage in such behavior here. If he can't accommodate those fairly simple requirements he should, in my opinion, be shown the door. —TomGarberson

The legal threats are iffy in this second case. I think we might be guessing here, which is why I like Jim's proposal. Either he'll walk away and things will be fine, or a hostile posture will be made clear. One way or the other, things will be way easier at that point than arguing over what he may or may not have meant in the comment to Philip. -jw

I guess given the most recent comment, I agree. If he'll clarify, that's that. But the old edit note which first gave rise to this page... if you ask me, that'd be a "72 hours to fix it and apologize or you're gone" kind of thing. I was reacting to a combination of the two, and not really giving fair consideration to the ambiguity of today's comment. Still, looking at the comment: ("You guys dont promote illegall business on the wiki right? Please advise what i need to do to stop the theats. If we can not come to a resoultion I will get the police department involved.") there's a bit of a logical disconnect between removing a perceived threatening comment from the wiki and removing a perceived threat to your well-being. Maybe it just wasn't a particularly rational comment (certainly possible), but I tend to assume a reasonable interpretation. Because I'm not associated with the administration of WikiSpot, I thought better of replying with something to the effect of, "Bring it on, asshole." But still... —TomGarberson

2010-06-03 23:31:42 Just so you know the comment was toward computer depot for the response on my page. Not the Davis Wiki. —Khanh

2010-06-03 23:35:55 Just for clarification. I logged on to the Davis Computer Wiki page and found that someone affiliated with the Computer Depot had made a comment that I took to be a threat against either my personal safety and/or the safety of my business. My response for leagal action was against the Computer Depot not the Davis Wiki. I removed his response and it was not put back. I thought that this was a proper thing to do. Someone may have taken it as legal action against the Davis Wiki but that was not the intention. —Khanh

2010-06-04 00:06:37 After reading all the comments in this thread it is very difficult for me to want to be part of the community. Let me explain why. When I log on to the Davis Wikki I tend to look different aspects of how the Wiki works. I deal with many customer who own business in Davis that are not happy with the way that they are depicted on the Wiki. I find myself explaing to them how the Wiki works and in part defending it. On this particular occasion I had logged on to the Wiki and found that either the owner or sombody who was affiliated with the Computer Depot had written something that had made me feel like my business might be threatened or even my personal safety. So when I was writing my response on the Wiki it was toward the Computer Depot. Then Suddenly hankim and williamlewis chime in as me threatening the Davis Wiki. I have been confused in the past and when I have concerns I have learned to go directly to Jabberwokkey. So if I had threatened to take legal action against the Davis Wiki I would have had a discussion with Jabberwokkey before I would have made a post. My question ""You guys dont promote illegall business on the wiki right? Please advise what i need to do to stop the theats." Was a clarificaton to make sure that the community does not promote illegal practices. The legal part about the police was to show them what the Computer Depot had written. In no way and at any time was I going to involve the Davis Wiki in legal action because the Davis Wiki did not do anything wrong. The person who wrote the comment in my opinion was the one who was doing wrong. So I do not feel the need to retract anything but I do feel the need to clarify. So when williamlewis make the comment that I should be banned from the Davis Wiki for trying to remove the Computer Depots comments that were threatening me made me angry. Of course I do understand that he is looking out for the community but it seems like I am always the target instead of opening a dialogue. I am happy to open a dialogue at any time with anybody. To all those people that think that I am trying to get rid of my competition that is just not true. I would just like them to get registered with the correct local and state agencies. If any of my competitors would like to have the information on how to open a computer repair shop they are welcome to come in any time and I will help guide them through the process. Computer stores are not easy to run and don't make any money. I have owned the business for 15 years and make less than 30k per year after everybody is paid. Please don't think that I wrote this for people to feel sorry for me. I wrote this to give a general understanding that I keep the business open employ local people and have my own personal freedom when owning a business. The list of people who I gave to the Bureau of Electronic Repair Have all been legally registered. If you have a problem with them (the computer repair people) now they can be found. That is why I did it. Beleive it or not! —Khanh

2010-06-04 00:25:40 The last comment of the night is that I dont know what it means to be part of the community. I feel that the way I have been treated, which is negative,when I do try and make a difference really is offputting. I wish that people would be more helpful and objective, espically those who are really active in the commnity. The only person I feel that has every been objective is Jabberwokkey. He even took the time out to call me and have long discussion with me and give me hints on how to use the Davis Wiki in a positive way. That is why I had found myself defending the Wiki. After this experince I feel like an outsider again. According to the thread, I feel that the people involved think I should just shut down by business. We have served over 27,000 people and in this time there have been less than 20-30 negative comments over 15 years. Of course I take it into perspective, and I will not be doing that. Also, to Brentlaabs, sorry you felt that way too but I am not trying to kill my competion. It is good that we have lots of people to help with IT. I definately could not handle serving 70K people in Davis. We would not be able to serve all these people and keep them happy! In all my time informing people of business that did not have proper licensing did I ever bad mouth any of my competetors. THE ANSWER IS NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! —Khanh

2010-06-04 08:03:21 I think that was pretty well said. The legal threats seem to be a misunderstanding. Can we all have a big wiki group hug now? —DagonJones

Does it matter that Khanh was threatening legal action against a member of the community rather than the wiki itself? The effect is the same — people may be afraid to post because they are afraid to have legal action taken against them. If Khanh feels threatened, then he should go to the police. Why come on the wiki and state that you are going to the police? —cp

For reference and context, William started this talk page because of previous edit conflicts. Khanh created an account, 'keepingitlegal' that he used to post a warning on every computer page that wasn't properly/officially registered. That seems fine, though maybe a little distasteful to some. However, he became very upset when people wanted to note that 'keepingitlegal' was 'Khanh' from Heron Tech. The specific edit William originally refers to was this one ((removing the Khanh userlink) (specifically, see the Comment for Version 41) and had the log comment of "If you want me to sue you than keep putting my other name user back on" This is the legal threat thing that is referenced above in the newer conversation

And he has made other threats. Making threats is not a legitimate way to be a member of this community and we should have little tolerance for those who engage in such things. Yeah, this particular situation is over, but what he did was still unacceptable. He made threats, if not against the wiki, which were completely illegitimate. The only threats we have seen here haven't been against khanh, but from khanh. —wl

2010-06-04 09:18:53 I suggest this page be deleted now. —DonShor

2010-06-04 09:49:20 I'm going to let Dagon do the honors with the drama include since it was his idea, but I think it's time to move on. Khanh clearly did feel genuinely threatened by the comment and consulted with the police about how to deal with it. It seems that he's aware of how seriously we take legal threats, and if it happens again I'm sure quite a few people will push for a ban. He explained this incident in what I take to be a very sincere way.

I think most people would agree that it'd be inappropriate to ban him for a comment made 5 months ago, and this latest one appears to be resolved (correct me if I'm wrong), so I'm not sure what good can come from the discussion. —TomGarberson

I don't want to keep pushing this. But Khanh did threaten to go to the police this time around. His explanation is that he didn't threaten the wiki, but rather the person who he thought had made a physical threat to him. My point is that wiki users should not be threatening other wiki users with force (though I am not sure that this happened) AND they should not be threatening other wiki users with going to the police. Rather, they should just GO to the police. I'd feel more comfortable moving on if Khanh committed to stop threatening other wiki users with legal action. —cp

That's fair. I'm not particularly concerned given the way it all played out (the nature of the "threat," the fact that Khanh's mention of the police was on Philip's page, the amount of time that has passed). But I agree with your concern in the abstract. -tg