Just received an email from someone claiming to be Christopher Scully who says they’re representing IAVRT (see my previous post for all the details – reLink). I don’t know if this is the same Christopher Scully with whom C|Net corresponded, or even if this is maybe just someone who made up an email account this morning; they’re using an “official” Hotmail email address. Consequently I’ll treat this communication rather casually. I think it’s reasonable to expect that the real Scully would at least use a more official email address if everything was legit.
So for entertainment value I’m posting that email in it’s entirety here. If it’s someone actually associated with IAVRT, please come out into the light and let everyone know just exactly who you are and explain/answer some of the things raised (that gives you what most of us would call “Credibility”).
In addition, if and when I hear from the real people behind IAVRT, should they express the same concerns and make the same comments, I’d strongly dispute the claim that I’ve posted “false” remarks. Rather, I believe I’ve posted conjecture and hypothesis based on what little real information is available to me. In fact, I’ve even corrected people who, in my opinion, have ventured too far from speculation on this matter.
If I have overstepped my bounds and mistakenly made an error in claiming something definitive, I would certainly expect the other party to quote those passages which they would wish stricken or amended; after which I’d take it under consideration and act appropriately. After all, I do try to be fair and believe that on plenty of occasions that effort is apparent. However, I’m not perfect, so specifics are more than helpful, they’re necessary.
On to the entertainment…
To Rebang:
New announcements will be made over the next several weeks about IAVRT and the Neuronet, which will eliminate concerns over legitimacy. I would ask that you withhold passing judgment until then.
In the meantime, you have posted some false and very damaging remarks about hard-working people including the owners of the firm IAVRT contracted for web development.
Please immediately remove all references to theorized associations between IAVRT and the individuals named on your ReBang weblog. You have published libelous statements which will be pursued legally if they are not removed immediately.
Directly related to the false and damaging assertions you have made IAVRT has been forced to temporarily suspend its Sunrise pre-registration process effective immediately. Be advised, the organization may take legal recourse to pursue damages caused by your weblog.
The Sunrise pre-registration process will resume after additional announcements have been made concerning major partnerships and the naming of IAVRT’s new Executive Director.
Chris Scully
IAVRT
I’m sure we’re all looking forward to those quotes.
{btw, this “Neuronet” should not be confused with the other one out there. I suspect they’re related in name only.}
hey actually :
http://www.iabit.com/domains-s-online.html
[IAVRT’s recent Neuronet announcement has been met with excitement, but has also raised some excellent questions from the global community the organization will serve.
Sunrise Pre-Registration has been temporarily suspended and will resume following several major partnership announcements over the next few weeks and the naming of the new IAVRT Executive Director. ]
ok.. off to party in london , h n y
You should check the hotmail header X-Originating-IP: (in the message source)
to see if at least the IP sending the mail comes from Vancouver/Canada.. would help you to get a clue if this mail is interesting.. or not (!)
I’ll claim headcold for not thinking to do that right off the bat. Thanks for the reminder.
The originating IP does appear to come out of Vancouver. So it’s gained some validity. Of course, being the fair skeptic that I am, or try hard to be, that could be anyone in Vancouver and I’d hate to falsely attribute this email to the real(?) Chris Scully. So I’ll wait for something more definitive.
In the meantime, the Freedom to Theorize is still ours.
Still on the “iabit” one. They really should divorce the two.
Happy New Year
Something tells me we are never to hear of DoughNet… I mean Neuronet, again. But be on the lookout for the next slick trick from these fly-by-night floozies.
Unless it *is* an ARG. I’ve found photos of a couple of “Nigel Malkin”s living in Vancouver. One is tied to a PR firm which I linked back to “Chris Scully”. Could be coincidence. Could be any number of things. Hopefully we’ll get some additional info on IAVRT and the rest will fall in place.
He couldn’t sue you for anything! you expressed your opinion, as we are all free to do and investigated his website and just simply posted the interesting coincidences and such that was found! This whole thing just cracks me up!
First off, let me reiterate: I don’t know if that email came from anyone associated with IAVRT. It’s possible and maybe even likely, but not a sure thing.
That said, it’s not whether or not they could sue, it’s whether or not they have a case. Anyone can sue for most anything. I just don’t believe they have a case, as I’ve been careful to not make factual statements and – last I checked – theorizing isn’t illegal.
Now, should some *public* figure representing IAVRT provide to me documentation listing those alleged “published libelous statements”, I’d be happy to respond, as indicated above. After all, the courts shouldn’t be used for intimidation, they should be a last resort when involved parties are unable to resolve a dispute.
What I received seemed more like a threat to me. Now, if I give IAVRT the benefit of my very serious doubt, I cannot fathom how a legitimate, above-board company could send an email which seems so at odds with the expressive freedom implied by the very project they’re selling. That only makes sense to me if they are, in fact, a scam. And as I’ve not come to that final conclusion, I therefore can’t assume the email is genuine.
I must admit that the prospect of such a venture excited me to no end. I suppose that’s why I appreciate what you and individuals like you do for/with us. Thanks for keeping it balanced.
@johnathon – no thanks necessary. I was just as interested as anyone else, but I’m just someone who just happens to notice the little things (often to an extreme degree) that made me skeptical. If it helps others that I’m like that, that’s cool.
@csven – I like how you’re covering your grounds with careful working and so on: it never hurts to be ready in case they go on and sue you. Except they [likely – csven] have neither the case nor money.
I mean, they are running on a shared server. I’m by all means poor. Yea, poor web dev. And even this poor web dev has hired a full server for publishing productions sites versus using a shared hosting.
They should be really handing on those membership and domain fees as a source of food on the table in the next months if they can’t even afford a server (and I found some pages that have stock photo water marks in them, and the content is literally “content”… yea.. as if a real organisation would leave such blank unfinished pages hanging linked on the main menu for days).
And one more thing: the “we’ll announce blah blah in FEW WEEKS” is a classic technique in action.
They seem to have used it on their other “projects” too. The idea being: if they start getting public, they have to make up so much out of thin air that they’ll surely be exposed.
If they suddenly get silent and the site is gone, again that beyond doubt that none of this is real.
But what if they leave the site hanging there unchanged and announce that things will move “in few weeks”? Well, things calm down, everyone forgets (I mean, there are plenty of other news out there to follow), and they can quietly take down the site in a couple of months without attracting attention.
Mark my words: I bet we’ll never see those “partnerships” they’re talking about.
@Stan – Gracias. Right now, I’ll just wait for the BIG announcements that are forthcoming. For all I know, they’re going to add some kind of pheromone device to this network so we can have SmellierVision.
“Well, things calm down, everyone forgets…”
I won’t.
“Please immediately remove all references to theorized associations between IAVRT and the individuals named on your ReBang weblog.”
Interestingly enough, the press page seems to have been taken offline.
Well i had a lot of fun investigating thanks to rebang on new year – and i hope that truth comes forward somedays about this story !
keep up the good work with your blog csven !
@Tecrogue – not a surprise. If legit they have some work to do before they’ll get my trust and maybe my money. If a scam, I’d expect them to fall back and try to recover. Time is money, and they’ve apparently put some time into this.
@romem – thanks, romem, both for the kind words and the helpful comments you posted. It was both fun and enlightening for me. I’ve never been so naive as to believe most of what I read online, but the extent to which a scam *could* be perpetrated is more clear to me now – especially when you mix in something like a glowing but fake review on a seemingly unrelated website that then gets picked up and spread by unrelated spamblogs. The complexion of the internet has gotten a bit more ugly for me this past week.
Has anyone considered that it’s all a plot by Mychilo Cline to sell some copies of his self-published book? I wonder how long his name’s been in this Wikipedia entry on VR: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Virtual_reality&action=history
I’m not sure Mychilo Stephenson Cline is even a real person; though I suspect he might be.
That University Press Publishing outfit? Guess who’s listed as the administrative contact for the domain. You got it… Mychilo Stephenson Cline. May as well list “Administrator X” in those things. Of course he may want to just start up a publishing company and this is on the up-and-up, but this has the same kind of deceptive feeling to me that I get from everything with which Stay Sane appears to be associated.
I’ve checked a little on Cline. He seems real based on what I’ve found, but nothing that suggests to me he’s an expert. He has a fairly recently created blog. Not enough history and some things sound third person. E.g. at the bottom his “Welcome” page he says:
I would have written “see my website”.
The first entry in January ’06 is similarly odd:
Maybe those are style issues; some people do talk about themselves in third person. But style does count and it’s not helping me to believe that IAVRT is legit.
Earlier I came across another name, Mark McIntire (Link) and in his CV he lists our Mychilo. Here’s the line: “Mr. Mychilo S. Cline, former student, author and Cottage Hospital Recruiter“. He also links to the same book page on his site, so we know they’re the same Cline.
What is a “Cottage Hospital Recruiter”? How is that linked to VR? I can see a potential link, but I’m unsure (of course) and continue to be skeptical.
Note that Mr. McIntire (assuming he’s even real) is in Santa Barbara (you’ll see why in a sec). Take a look at his CV. Interesting. A car salesman. An actor. Philosophy professor. And someone who seems somewhat involved with the web (e.g. University of Phoenix, which, iirc, is that online college). Who’s to say that McIntire isn’t creating Cline; a fictional person based on a real person? This might not be so much an ARG as a tranreality multimedia piece. An elaborate deception as art.
Now, as to when Wikipedia changed, I can answer that, it was done on 30 Nov 2005 (the book has a 2005 copyright according to a PDF of a tiny section of the book – Link)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Virtual_reality&diff=29711436&oldid=28959746
The IP – 70.191.85.193 – comes back to Santa Barbera, CA. Told ya to remember that.