# HobbyTalk to be Sued



## hankster (Jan 1, 1998)

Just posted for informational purposes. 

I have been informed by Joseph Melvin that he will be suing HobbyTalk, from what I can gather, because he has an issue with one of HobbyTalk’s members. Part of this announcement is to let you know where some of your HobbyTalk Supporter donations go. 

His last words are, to quote: “I will do everything I can to shut you down,”

Added note: This is NOT a plea for more donations, I do keep a fund in hand for emergency situations. This was just posted because some in the past have wondered where their donations go. 

Also, PLEASE do not turn this into a "bashing" thread. This was posted for informational purpses.

Have a happy holiday!


----------



## Y3a (Jan 18, 2001)

Anything we can do, other than up our contributions? Never heard of him.


----------



## jwrjr (Oct 31, 2003)

Tells you something about Joe Melvin, doesn't it? In any case, I believe that the lawsuit will fail. There is, I believe, legal precident that, in effect, a blog cannot be held liable for the comments posted on it.


----------



## Steve244 (Jul 22, 2001)

Talk is cheap. What makes you think it's any more than that?

Sorry your day is ruffled.

Any model building shysters out there? Willing to work pro bono?


----------



## hankster (Jan 1, 1998)

I have updated my first post to address the donation issue.

Also, PLEASE do not turn this into a "bashing" thread. This was posted for informational purpses.


----------



## REL (Sep 30, 2005)

Hank,

He's threatened to sue about 5 or 6 people over various things. I get threatening letters from him at least once a week, in fact, his letters are usually CC'd to more than one person, so he just sends them out to everyone on his "list".

I honestly wouldn't worry about it, Hank. The guy has a screw loose are really needs to seek help, and I'm not saying that as an insult, he really should be on some kind of medication.


----------



## Sonett (Jul 21, 2003)

Hate to sound so dumb....but...who is Joe Melvin??


----------



## REL (Sep 30, 2005)

Sonett said:


> Hate to sound so dumb....but...who is Joe Melvin??


He goes by KirkTrekModeler. He's been saying he's going to sue people for the last 6 month's, but I've never received a summons or lawsuit; just a weekly notice that he's going to sue me. So I would take this latest threat with a grain of salt.


----------



## REL (Sep 30, 2005)

Hank,

There's been case law established that anyone that says or does something on an internet site, can't be used against the site owner. I'll look it up for you and post it because I ran into something similar with him over there.


----------



## hankster (Jan 1, 1998)

Yes, I know the law (I have been doing forums in one form or another for 15 years so I am not a stranger to this type of thing)... in easy reading laymans terms - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230


----------



## REL (Sep 30, 2005)

Joe actually threatened someone with physical violence on that site, which is a crime. Let me know if you need an archive of those threads.


----------



## Eric K (Jul 15, 2001)

The sad thing is that if he does sue, it still costs money to fight frivolous lawsuits. Sorry about this. Hang in there


----------



## Xenon (Nov 2, 2007)

Well, if it does end up in the courts (and I hope it doesn't), there's still the option to counter-sue on the grounds of things like harassment, recovery of legal fees and so on.

In any case, I'm sorry you're going through this, I hope it gets sorted soon.


----------



## F91 (Mar 3, 2002)

Damn, I always thought John P , Brent Gair or Frankenstyrene would sue me, but this is quite a surprise.


----------



## Griffworks (Jun 24, 2002)

Melvin posted here under two different usernames: *CmpstCreations* and *Capt. James B.* He's posted at various other forums as *KirkTrekModeler* and still does so at those at which he's not yet been BANNED - and he's been BANNED from a large number of online forums. He claims that there's a conspiracy to keep him from producing kits and has made a number of accusations over the last year against a number of people. This lawsuit thing is relatively new, having been started about two months ago now. I think it shows a great deal about his character that he'd start some more stuff like this up on Christmas Eve.

Regardless, if you want more information on that particular person, it's easy enough to do a Google or Yahoo search to find his posts elsewhere, if you're interested enough.


----------



## CaptFrank (Jan 29, 2005)

What?
Just because I corrected his grammar once?


----------



## Vaderman (Nov 2, 2002)

His accusations are baseless. He has made more threats and accused others of doing things that just did not happen. KTM lives in his own little world and that world has only one way of thinking, Joe's.

Hank, if you need anything from me, don't hesitate to let me know.

Scott


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

F91 said:


> Damn, I always thought John P , Brent Gair or Frankenstyrene would sue me, but this is quite a surprise.


 For what? Uisng "their" when you should'a used "They're"?


I'm not one who belives in frivolous suits.

Except that liesure suit I had in the 70s.


----------



## Eric K (Jul 15, 2001)

John P said:


> For what? Uisng "their" when you should'a used "They're"?.



Nah, it was for using "Uisng" :jest:


----------



## scotpens (Sep 6, 2003)

Or for spelling "leisure" incorrectly?


----------



## F91 (Mar 3, 2002)

I rest my case!



scotpens said:


> Or for spelling "leisure" incorrectly?


----------



## Griffworks (Jun 24, 2002)

scotpens said:


> Or for spelling "leisure" incorrectly?


Quick, somebody file that so we can pull it out next time John corrects someone else!  :lol:


----------



## CaptFrank (Jan 29, 2005)

So. How does one pronounce "Uisng"?

"Weezing"?


----------



## Y3a (Jan 18, 2001)

I wonder if this guy has had a C&D order against him for copying the Enterprise w/out giving credit? I just looked at his stuff.........yawn.


----------



## Eric K (Jul 15, 2001)

CaptFrank said:


> So. How does one pronounce "Uisng"?
> 
> "Weezing"?


No, it is like saying "You ising spelling leisure wrong."

:jest:


----------



## Hand Solo (Aug 1, 2007)

Y3a said:


> I just looked at his stuff.........yawn.


Shouldn't that read, " I just looked at his stuff......... PUKE! " ?!?


----------



## Hand Solo (Aug 1, 2007)

Oh....

" Bad Joe, Bad. "*


















* Inside joke. Direct quote from one of his rants.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

:lol:


----------



## Nova Designs (Oct 10, 2000)

Wow, _that_ guy again huh?  

Well don't let it upset you Hank, you know we're all behind you. And there is nothing he can do legally to this site... and frankly nothing he can do to any member he happens to be miffed at. I'll bet he won't even be able to find a lawyer to give him the time of day, let alone file any papers.

Still, I'm really sorry to hear you're having to go through garbage like this during the holidays.


PS, I just re-upped! :thumbsup:


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

John P said:


> For what? Uisng "their" when you should'a used "They're"?
> 
> 
> I'm not one who belives in frivolous suits.
> ...


The_ *really* _good suits back then were "laysure" suits! :thumbsup:


----------



## onezero (Jul 9, 2005)

He sent pretty much the same threat to me - though he called himself "Dan Siverson" in those eMails.


----------



## ClubTepes (Jul 31, 2002)

Wow,

Sorry to hear about these little troubles.
There is always someone out there who is a little more 'out there'.

I think that there are enough people out there who can vouch for your charactor and his 'charactor' as well.

The other nice thing is that there is a continous record of all his comments on this (and other) forums to serve as witness as to his state of mind.

John, I hope I spelled everything right. This late at night, I can't tell.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Let's see.... Nope, it's 'charact*e*r' not 'charact*o*r.' And the period after 'out there' should be _inside _the quotation mark. I'm not sure of the rules between using single quotes or double quotes, so I'll let that go.


----------



## SteveR (Aug 7, 2005)

John P said:


> And the period after 'out there' should be _inside _the quotation mark.


... unless the writer is in the UK.


----------



## Eric K (Jul 15, 2001)

No, the quotation mark is to identify the phrase within a statement. The period is the end of the statement. The only time a period (or other punctuation) is to be included in a quotation mark is when the quote is a statement (or other complete thought) within the larger context.


----------



## fokkerpilot (Jul 22, 2002)

Y3a said:


> I wonder if this guy has had a C&D order against him for copying the Enterprise w/out giving credit?


It was his concept and idea all along. Gene was just borrowing it.


----------



## Steve244 (Jul 22, 2001)

I feel we should mount a class action suit against JohnP for grammar malpractice.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Eric K said:


> No, the quotation mark is to identify the phrase within a statement. The period is the end of the statement. The only time a period (or other punctuation) is to be included in a quotation mark is when the quote is a statement (or other complete thought) within the larger context.


 My boss is a proofreader and QA person, and she keeps telling me to always put the punctuation inside the quotes. *shrug*


----------



## Steve CultTVman Iverson (Jan 1, 1970)

Periods and commas are supposed to go inside the quotation marks, no matter how awkward it seems. I learned the hard way.

http://spot.pcc.edu/~mdembrow/wr122quoting.htm 
http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/grammar/g_quote.html

Apparently question marks, exclamation points, colons and semicolons can (but not always) go outside the quotes.

I hate grammer.

Steve


----------



## bigdaddydaveh (Jul 20, 2007)

Don't sweat it John, I think you talk good English. :wave: We all do, me two, I mean, included! As long as we can still paint, that's what counts write?


----------



## scotpens (Sep 6, 2003)

John P said:


> My boss is a proofreader and QA person, and she keeps telling me to always put the punctuation inside the quotes. *shrug*


Your boss is correct. Periods and commas should ALWAYS go inside quotation marks. The difference between American and British punctuation is that, in American usage, double quotation marks indicate quoted material within text and single marks indicate quotes-within-quotes. In the UK, it's the other way around. Also, over there they call them "inverted commas." (Note correct placement of quotation marks — uh, perverted commas — uh, whatever.)


----------



## F91 (Mar 3, 2002)

May we all educate each other on the proper use of "too" vs. "to"? Drives me nuts, but I'm *too* polite *to* correct anyone.


----------



## Steve244 (Jul 22, 2001)

> There are peculiar typographical reasons why the period and comma go inside the quotation mark in the United States. The following explanation comes from the "Frequently Asked Questions" file of alt.english.usage: "In the days when printing used raised bits of metal, "." and "," were the most delicate, and were in danger of damage (the face of the piece of type might break off from the body, or be bent or dented from above) if they had a '"' on one side and a blank space on the other. Hence the convention arose of always using '."' and ',"' rather than '".' and '",', regardless of logic." This seems to be an argument to return to something more logical, but there is little impetus to do so within the United States.


 link

I'm not sure mechanical limitations are a good reason for grammar rules, but it's a better reason than most.

The greatest conundrum I have is proper usage of "effect" and "affect." -ow- that hurt. 

yer off the hook, jp.


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

Steve244 said:


> yer off the hook, jp.


Shouldn't that be "_ye're _off the hook?"


----------



## terryr (Feb 11, 2001)

I see it as a cry of loneliness during the holidays...or he's just a butthead.


----------



## Steve CultTVman Iverson (Jan 1, 1970)

The one that gets me is "who" and "whom." I simply refuse to believe that "whom" is a word and refuse to use it. 

Steve


----------



## ClubTepes (Jul 31, 2002)

Steve CultTVman Iverson said:


> The one that gets me is "who" and "whom." I simply refuse to believe that "whom" is a word and refuse to use it.
> 
> Steve


Here, here!

Or is it, hear, hear?

or is it, heer, heer?

Awww, screw it. I agree with you on the 'Whom', thing.


----------



## F91 (Mar 3, 2002)

Ya know, when you start to bash Hemingway, well, it's just gotta stop!


----------



## Griffworks (Jun 24, 2002)

Club Tepes, one warning for bashing Hemingway! NOBODY bashes Hemingway on my forum! 

_Nobody_!  

















Yeah, just jokin'.


----------



## scotpens (Sep 6, 2003)

Steve244 said:


> The greatest conundrum I have is proper usage of "effect" and "affect." -ow- that hurt.


"Effect," as a noun, means "something brought about; a result; the way one thing acts upon another." As a verb, it means "to bring about; to cause (something) to come into being." "Affect," as a verb, means "to influence; to produce a change in (something)." As a noun, pronounced with the stress on the first syllable (AF-fect), it is a psychiatric term for emotion or feeling.

Long story short: If you need a verb, it's probably “affect.” If you need a noun, it's probably “effect.” 



Steve CultTVman Iverson said:


> The one that gets me is "who" and "whom." I simply refuse to believe that "whom" is a word and refuse to use it.


"Whom" is the objective case of "who." It is used correctly in such phrases as: "To whom it may concern," "For whom the bell tolls," and "From whom did you hear that?" But if you're confused about when to use "who" and "whom," don't sweat it. "Whom" will probably be obsolete in another 100 years.

Oh, any news about that guy who says he's going to sue somebody?


----------



## scotpens (Sep 6, 2003)

F91 said:


> Ya know, when you start to bash Hemingway, well, it's just gotta stop!


[IMG-LEFT]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e0/Ernest_Hemingway_1950.jpg[/IMG-LEFT]



Darn right! "Papa" was Da Man! Not only was he one of America's greatest writers -- he liked cats!


----------



## CaptFrank (Jan 29, 2005)

I was taught that "whom" was used when the speaker, or writer,
did not know the person in question.

example: A group of thugs are sitting around a car.
One would ask, "To whom does that Mustang belong?"

If the speaker knows the group of people, then "who" is used.

example:
If John P, Griffworks, Fluke, and Scotpens were sitting
around a Polar Lights 1:350 scale NCC-1701-A the question would be:

"Who built that lovely model?"


----------



## fokkerpilot (Jul 22, 2002)

scotpens said:


> Oh, any news about that guy who says he's going to sue somebody?


 He's consulting the Oracle :dude:


----------



## CaptFrank (Jan 29, 2005)

The Oracle at Delphi?

Am I missing some inside joke?


----------



## scotpens (Sep 6, 2003)

CaptFrank said:


> I was taught that "whom" was used when the speaker, or writer,
> did not know the person in question.
> 
> example: A group of thugs are sitting around a car.
> ...


Don't know from WHOM you learned that, but it's sheer twaddle. The difference between _who_ and _whom_ is one of grammar, not usage. It has nothing to do with formal/informal or polite/familar. In the sentence "To whom does that Mustang belong?", _whom_ is correct because it is the object of the preposition _to_. In the sentence "Who built that lovely model?", _who_ is correct because it is the subject of the verb _built_. Object, subject. Simple. Like falling off a log.


----------



## fokkerpilot (Jul 22, 2002)

As quoted from Wikipedia: "The Oracle's purpose is to aid The One and the humans following him by means of the Prophecy (predicting the victory of the One and the fall of the machines), not in order to bring down the Matrix, but rather so that they can voluntarily disconnect themselves from the system, ensuring its stability while preventing its destruction. As discovered by Neo, the prophecy is "just another system of control." The role of the Architect is then to reunite the One with the Source and bring about the destruction of Zion. The pair together thus ensure that neither the humans nor the machines ever achieve a permanent victory".

As interpreted: "The Oracle's purpose is to aid The KTM and the humans following him by means of the Prophecy (predicting the victory of the KTM and the fall of the Global Conspiracy), not in order to bring down the psuedo-matrix, but rather so that they can voluntarily disconnect themselves from their anguish, ensuring their stability while preventing their own destruction. As discovered by Melvar, the prophecy is "just another system of control." The role is then to reunite KTM with the Forum and bring about the destruction of HT. The pair together thus ensure that neither the GK's nor the Global Conspiracies ever achieve a permanent victory."

...or somethin' like that. :lol:


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

However, if you use a contraction that ends in an apostrophe at the end of a quote, such as "I ain't goin'!" - then the punctuation goes after the apostrophe, but inside the quote. :freak:


----------



## Griffworks (Jun 24, 2002)

You guys are makin' my head hurt, dangit! :freak:


----------



## Eric K (Jul 15, 2001)

John P said:


> However, if you use a contraction that ends in an apostrophe at the end of a quote, such as "I ain't goin'!" - then the punctuation goes after the apostrophe, but inside the quote. :freak:




Ok...ya got me with yer first listing (and the other subsequent grammar lessons from the rest of the gallery) but, wow...that just makes me head hurt!!:jest:


----------



## scifibear2 (Oct 19, 2003)

Whom is a word. Used for males only and only in the singular. I know all kinds of useless.... "Whom" isn't really worth the effort to try to use anyway.


----------



## scotpens (Sep 6, 2003)

scifibear2 said:


> Whom is a word. Used for males only and only in the singular. I know all kinds of useless.... "Whom" isn't really worth the effort to try to use anyway.


MALES ONLY??

Some folks must have learned their English grammar from Borat!

Uh. . . Any news on that guy who said he was going to sue somebody?


----------



## Y3a (Jan 18, 2001)

SciFiBear.....

QUIT USING HENRY's Logo! G-XII (Gemini 12) is HIS!



Also, can anybody tell me what a Hemmingweighs anyway?


----------



## Dr. Brad (Oct 5, 1999)

Steve CultTVman Iverson said:


> The one that gets me is "who" and "whom." I simply refuse to believe that "whom" is a word and refuse to use it.
> 
> Steve


 That one's not too hard - just whom whenever you use a form of this pronoun as the object of a verb or preposition...

Brad.


----------



## scifibear2 (Oct 19, 2003)

Sorry. Bye guys


----------



## scotpens (Sep 6, 2003)

Y3a said:


> Also, can anybody tell me what a Hemmingweighs anyway?


About as much as a Greek urn. . . or should that be "urns"?


----------



## Jim NCC1701A (Nov 6, 2000)

Law suits. Grammar Nazis's. Punctuation.

It's getting to be a mighty scarey place to post...


----------



## Admiral Nelson (Feb 28, 2002)

What's funny or sad, is that I asked a paint question here and got 1 reply. This stupid free for all keeps going and going with no end in sight. Sigh.


----------



## Eric K (Jul 15, 2001)

Unfortunately, as little as I know about grammar, I know less about painting. I just fumble my way through that.


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

Admiral Nelson said:


> What's funny or sad, is that I asked a paint question here and got 1 reply. This stupid free for all keeps going and going with no end in sight. Sigh.


_"Cry, 'Havoc!', and let slip the dogs of grammar!"_ :woohoo:


----------



## CaptFrank (Jan 29, 2005)

"Angels and Ministers of grammar, defend us!"


----------



## bragstone (Apr 14, 2007)

Was'nt this thred about hiked up underware or somthing you know a "full melvin"? But anywho, what is a preposition any way?, and why can't you end a sentence with one?


----------



## bert model maker (Feb 19, 2002)

my high school english teacher once asked the class what came after a sentence, and the school delinquent in the class said "an appeal"


----------



## jsnmech18 (Sep 26, 2006)

This hear, be one of the funniest threads ever! Me likee!
I could learn me some grammer!";:><!)*&. (didn't know what to end with)  

Oh, sorry to hear the you've been targeted by insanity Hank.


----------



## Guest (Dec 27, 2007)

As a little mention on grammar issues  










On a more serious note, by all means be prepared for this sue nonsense Hank but don't give it too much thought untill bona fide legal papers land in ya hands...
A prospect that i'd bet a serious amount of money on will never happen.

Go easy


----------



## fokkerpilot (Jul 22, 2002)

Dang Raytheon!! You made me spew my coffee over that thar cartoon :lol:


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

Yes! ^^

That was a nice cathartic release for me there since I'm sick of hearing folks say "was" instead of "were."


----------



## Admiral Nelson (Feb 28, 2002)

PerfesserCoffee said:


> Yes! ^^
> 
> That was a nice cathartic release for me there since I'm sick of hearing folks say "was" instead of "were."


You taking about the Lubliner Seaview?


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

Admiral Nelson said:


> You taking about the Lubliner Seaview?


Hey, you've got your obsession, I've got mine


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Sorry Hank, but I think this thread needs to come to an end before it takes a turn for the unpleasant.

And so, without further ado...

:wave:


----------

