This is only a brief note (a complete and comprehensive site update is in progress) for FYI purposes.
There have been a lot of developments since these web pages were written;
1. The plaintiff has lost four lawsuits at the federal district level (PAED- Federal District Court for Eastern Pennsylvania) and finally an appeal to the US Court of Appeals for the Third District.
2. Dotster.com and Ravi Puri have been involved in several well publicized domain name hijackings- the most well known has probably been the Panix case)
3. The plaintiff has filed suit against several other individuals and businesses for various perceived grievances
4. For whatever reasons, the plaintiff has changed ISP services numerous times in the last six months
5. About the illegal Yahoo takedown of my site with public documents from the lawsuits Gordon Roy Parker filed against me, when the plaintiff posted material to his own web site containing my own original works and content, his web host at Infopop.com refused my requests that he treated the same, and still allows him to post my IP property to his own site.
6. Even  though, as documented in these pages, the plaintiff filed a complaint with ICANN and Dotster concerning alleged erroneous information in the WHOIS records for the Ray-Gordon.com domain name, It has recently been discovered that the plaintiff himself has registered a domain name with false information in its WHOIS records-

-there's just one problem, the plaintiff's name is not Ray Gordon. His legal name is Gordon Roy Parker, and he claims no such alias in federal court records.
7. The plaintiff has succeeded in finding a disciple in his pursuits on usenet, a character known as "Speeding", who claims to be from Oklahoma. Interestingly enough, as mentioned in #6 above, like the plaintiff who's own domain name WHOIS records are false, the plaintiff's new "friend" similarly has a domain name registered with false WHOIS information; 

-oh, and look who the web host is. None other than Yahoo.com.

All these developments, and a lot more, will be covered in the soon to be completed site update. If you are interested in what can happen when internet psychos abuse the US civil legal system, stay tuned for some humorous, disturbing and unbelievable developments.

                TG

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Welcome to ChewOnThis.Org, the elite of "This chaps my butt" web sites. If you prefer not to read gripes, complaints, grievances, nit- picks and angry responses, this isn't the place for you. You can leave by way of the door.

If you decide to stay, then read at your own risk. That being said, and with the usual disclaimers that at no time whatsoever will the author of this page be responsible for anything you experience as a result of reading what's written here, then away we go....

What's at the bottom of the domain name thing-
(you can catch up on and follow the domain name controversy at this link.)

Before I begin with this, I'm going to get the legal mumbo jumbo out of the way for a certain newsloon who will be reading this.
The content on this site authored by me, Thom E. Geiger, is MY OPINION and nothing but my opinion. I won't continuously remind readers I'm giving my opinion here, so if you don't like that, or anything I write here, you can kiss my butt. There is no legal advice being given, this is not a commercial site (unlike yours GRP, as pathetic as yours is) and I am entitled to my First Amendment right to have and express my opinion. I am also entitled to respond to your attacks against me in your stupid lawsuit and the crap you spew in the internet newsgroups.

******************************************************
ATTN READERS: The newsloon being discussed here has recently filed a second amended complaint, with the federal court of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, in the case against both myself and LTSC, Inc., case #03-cv-6396. The case is demanding a jury trial and damages of ONE BILLION DOLLARS (yep, that's right, a BILLION $$$ with a 'B') for what this idiot says are charges of  defamation, invasion of privacy, tortious interference, abuse of process, unfair competition, civil conspiracy, racketeering (RICO), and violations of the Lanham Act.

Anyone interested in seeing how delusional this newsloon is, how badly the state of Pennsylvania needs some serious tort reform to stop such frivolous SLAPP type lawsuits, or just to see what a BILLION dollar lawsuit looks like, check out the complaint here.

Apparently, the moron has decided to stop trying to get me to name the person I loaned the ray-gordon.com domain name to (something I can't tell him because I don't know who it was. All I have is the same email address this wacko already knows), and now he's decided to lie under penalty of perjury and try to assert that I created the website I directed the domain name to, even though he knows full well I'm not that person, and I know I can prove he knows that fact in court.
******************************************************

For my web host (who have been warned about this ahead of time), and any upstream geeks who might fall for this jerk's so-called irresistible hypnotic power, this moron has already tried to get a federal judge to issue a restraining order against my domains and similar content (although the other content wasn't authored by me) and FAILED. A copy of the judge's refusal to grant the restraining order is here, signed by Judge James M. Kelly, of the federal court of the eastern district of Pennsylvania. I repeat,

Motion was made in federal court for Temporary Restraining Order and was DENIED!

So, if this idiot comes whining to any of you about something being wrong on this web page, or he tries to use another false DMCA complaint to try and keep me from exercising my First Amendment right of FREE SPEECH, you should tell him he is required to identify the error in my content and I should then be allowed the chance to make corrections--- AFTER he has furnished proof of his allegations, not before.
The takedown notification provisions in the DMCA that shield service providers from liability for removing content due to a false claim (and there are mandatory notification requirements in the DMCA) can be read at this link, straight from the United States Government Copyright Office.

Here is a link to a copy of the Google, Inc. Motion To Dismiss from this idiot's other billion dollar case currently clogging the Pennsylvania Federal Court system. You can right click on the link and select "Save As..." to copy it to your own computer for later reference. The file size is 1.28 mb.

If any of my service providers are too busy or too lazy to read the DMCA before they try to enforce it, here's the applicable part:
"The statute also establishes procedures for proper notification, and rules as to its effect. (Section 512(c)(3)). Under the notice and takedown procedure, a copyright owner submits a notification under penalty of perjury, including a list of specified elements, to the service provider’s designated agent. Failure to comply substantially with the statutory requirements means that the notification will not be considered in determining the requisite level of knowledge by the service provider. If, upon receiving a proper notification, the service provider promptly removes or blocks access to the material identified in the notification, the provider is exempt from monetary liability. In addition, the provider is protected from any liability to any person for claims based on its having taken down the material. (Section 512(g)(1)).
 "In order to protect against the possibility of erroneous or fraudulent notifications, certain safeguards are built into section 512. Subsection (g)(1) gives the subscriber the opportunity to respond to the notice and takedown by filing a counter notification. In order to qualify for the protection against liability for taking down material, the service provider must promptly notify the subscriber that it has removed or disabled access to the material. If the subscriber serves a counter notification complying with statutory requirements, including a statement under penalty of perjury that the material was removed or disabled through mistake or misidentification, then unless the copyright owner files an action seeking a court order against the subscriber, the service provider must put the material back up within 10-14 business days after receiving the counter notification."

Some time back I agreed to point a domain name I had registered years ago to a website that was, from the evidence I have seen in a federal case against me, created to bring attention to the nasty and (in my personal opinion), dangerous internet activities of a seriously sick individual. From what I have read from the people or person who claims to have created the site, the internet kook, or newsloon (since he primarily posts on usenet newsgroups) publicly posted horrible, threatening messages, then after the person he posted them to had read them, he demanded Google (the internet search site archives and stores messages from public newsgroups here), and the old Deja news archive before them, take down all the nasty messages he would send out.
Over the last few years, the newsloon has used just about every stupid, dirty trick in the book to try and get the site taken down. He's threatened web hosts with lawsuits, made false claims about the domain name and has even filed a one BILLION dollar lawsuit against me in the state of Pennsylvania. You can see the text of the lawsuit here, but the newsloon has threatened several web hosts with their own lawsuits if I post all the evidence he has submitted against me in the suit. That's right, he's submitted evidence to the clerk of the court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, evidence he's trying to use against me at trial and that has become part of the public record, and he's doing everything he can to keep me from posting that evidence so the public can't see it. What you'll see on that site is what can be seen on the PACER electronic records system here.
The domain name is

Ray-Gordon.com

The name Ray Gordon is NOT this moron's real name. The problem child, the internet newsloon involved in this, uses the name Ray Gordon on internet newsgroups and claims to be an author of adult type seduction books. You can do a web search on the name Ray Gordon and the word "author", and the majority of the hits you will see pertain to a REAL person named Ray Gordon, who has been writing adult fiction for years before the newsloon started using the real Ray Gordon's name. The real guy, the real Ray Gordon, has his own website, which he calls "the official Ray Gordon web site", which is understandable, since it's his REAL NAME.
Anyway, for years this newsloon, the "other " Ray Gordon, has posted what can only be described as sick, disgusting messages spawned from a diseased mind to public newsgroups. Then he whines and makes threats to any business that archives newsgroup messages to try and get them to remove the messages after they've done their damage to the people he was addressing in them.
When the Ray-Gordon.com website went up, the newsloon accused me of being the author of the site. That has been a lie from the start and the newsloon knows I'm not the author. He sued the author of the site in the same suit where I'm being sued, but the author was dismissed from the suit (along with all but two of the original 100 defendants...myself and a company the newsloon considers a business rival), because the newsloon is too stupid to properly serve the rest of the defendants with summonses. You should really go and read the text of the lawsuit if you want a good laugh.
Here we have a 30 something year old guy who lives in an apartment with his mother, has had very few real jobs he can document (and I don't mean work at home stuff GRP), says he writes seduction manuals for men who can't meet women (so-called books with titles like "29 Reasons Not To Be A Nice Guy", yeah right, but I'm told he can't prove he's ever used his own "product" to get a date with one single woman since he wrote it), has written some of the worst rants and psychologically warped messages ever read on the internet, trolls the internet looking for something to use to file a lawsuit against somebody or some business, and is probably one of the most well known "trolls" on the internet in the last ten years.
His lawsuit claims there is a huge, widespread conspiracy to defame him, keep him from being able to do business on the internet, and to portray him in a false light (one of his favorite sayings). What no one who has ever dealt with this sick newsloon can figure out is how he can think to claim other people have damaged his reputation when he has posted rants, spews, and hate messages across the internet for ten years or more. At one point, the count was over 300,000 messages.
What's actually going on is this wicked, demented, fat little ogre spews hate in dozens of internet newsgroups, hoping someone will react to his crap and give him a reason to sue them in court. The weasel claims to have once been a paralegal for some law firm somewhere, and has threatened hundreds of newsgroup people with lawsuits.
What kind of trash has this idiot posted to public newsgroups? Remember, he's already gotten many usenet archives to remove hate messages he's written to people, but there are many left in the archives you can see for yourself. I'll bet he'll be trying to get Google and the other archives to remove all public access to those messages once he finds out where he left them.

 One tactic he uses to get a rise out of people is to post (write and then upload) a hateful message to someone who has experienced a personal loss, such as the death of a loved one. Then he tries to make sure all the follow-up responses focus on him, and his needs, and his imagined pains and sufferings. Here's a link to one such rant he made about a woman's son who had committed suicide. You make your own decision about whether or not he was justified for posting what he did, or if how I've described his behavior is accurate or not. To be sure you are unbiased in your conclusion, I guess you'll have to read the whole collection of messages in that thread. The newsloon who posted the message seems to feel people should be forced by a judge or jury somewhere to read every single message he's ever posted to usenet newsgroups before they can be allowed to form a personal opinion of him, his behavior and his sanity. Yeah right.
The problem this newsloon has, or at least one of his problems, is that he seems to think the average person will accept any explanation he gives for his stupid and hateful behavior if they read every single messages to him or from him that exists on the internet. I'll bet he's been told more than once there is no excuse for most of what he posts to people in the newsgroups, but still he thinks he can justify things like bringing people's children, spouses, significant others and friends into his arguments.
Here's one link to a message where he admits making what he calls a "nasty" (others, me included, would call it a threat, given the fact he was having an argument with the woman at the time he made it) comment to a woman about her young daughter. You can read his entire explanation for what he did, then judge for yourself if his so-called justification is something a rational person would accept for what he himself describes as "I DID wish death on Michelle's daughter." <Know this GRP, if you whine to Google to have that message removed, I'll link to a copy of it somewhere else.>

Readers who would like to see some other messages from this idiot can follow the links below and see a wide collection of messages from different names this moron has used over the years in his fishing expeditions for lawsuit arguments through the newsgroups . If you see any messages you might want other people to see later, you'll probably have to save your own copy of the messages because the fat little weasel is harassing Google into taking his hate messages out of the public view as fast as he can. And Google is accommodating him, which is ironic in itself, because PACER records show the moron has filed a TEN BILLION dollar lawsuit against Google (and 50,000 Google associates) for archiving messages he thinks defame him, or put him in a false light (there's that favorite saying again). You can see the docket record of that lawsuit here. You'll also notice this individual uses a lot of America Online accounts to post his messages. Complaints have been filed for years against his AOL accounts, but the service continues to give him new accounts every time it cancels one for TOS (Terms Of Service) violations, for anything from making threats to posting hate messages. After reading the messages you can find by following the links below, if you think this person doesn't need to be on the same internet service (complete with chatrooms...I've heard the guy particularly likes the gymnastics chatroom) as women and children, you can contact AOL's complaint department at TOSGeneral@aol.com.

The totals shown below for each name lists the number of messages displayed when checked on Sunday, August 29, 2004. If there is a discrepancy in the numbers shown here and the ones on the Google pages you reach, that can only mean this individual is after Google to have his disgusting messages removed form public view.
Click on the name link to see the list of messages on Google posted by each name.
The worst messages of the bunch have been removed from public view, and were posted under the name betforaliving@aol.com, but you can still see quotes of those messages inside messages from other people here. The most outrageous and offensive messages, the ones this jerk scrambled to have removed from Google before filing his lawsuit against the people who reacted in anger to his rants, were hateful and disgusting messages posted about the victims of the 911 attacks on the World Trade Center in New York. Two such quotes (and I'm not saying they're the only ones, or that they are 100% accurate, but that could be verified at trial if we ever get there, and we will get to a trial if this web page is removed because of some lame fake accusation by the newsloon) can be seen here or here, or if you want to do your own hunting and come to your own conclusions, try this link or this link (although the newsloon's messages have been removed from what was originally a 224 message thread- but is now down to 216 messages after his were removed- you can still see his messages quoted in the messages that are still there from other people who responded to his rant against the 911 victims) .
At my best estimation (which I'm not, in any way, saying is totally accurate, especially given this newsloon's propensity for posting in the newsgroups), there is somewhere in the neighborhood of 100,000 messages that have been removed from public view, by Google, at the demand of this individual.
 *NOTE: All of the messages found at these links are from the names on the links, not from other people, and NONE of the messages have been filtered except BY NAME.

amoderncaveman@aol (last count before removals=5,870)
askray@hotmail.com (last count before removals=453)
averypsychicmale@aol.com (last count before removals=1,240)
callmemrlovedoc@juno.com (last count before removals=33)
caveman21@nni.com (last count before removals=361)
delonewolf@aol.com (last count before removals=18)
DJNBlows123@my-dejanews.com (last count before removals=23)
DJNSucks123@my-dejanews.com (last count before removals=5)
dminsanity@aol.com (last count before removals=9)
dmisahussy@aol.com (last count before removals=1)
domhypno@aol.com (last count before removals=17)
foxesmail9@juno.com (last count before removals=69)
foxesmail12@juno.com (last count before removals=75)
foxesmail23942840298@juno.com (last count before removals=41)
foxoutfoxx2@juno.com (last count before removals=11)
fredd_g__sanfordd@juno.com (last count before removals=31)
freddygsanford@juno.com (last count before removals=35)
fredericagsanford@juno.com (last count before removals=19)
free_seduction_books@juno.com last count before removals=31)
free_____seduction__books@juno.com (last count before removals=19)
freee___seduction_books@juno.com (last count before removals=16)
freee______seduction___books@juno.com (last count before removals=24)
freeee______seduction__books@juno.com (last count before removals=34)
freeeee_seduction___books@juno.com (last count before removals=6)
freeeee__seduction____books@juno.com (last count before removals=114)
freeeeeee_seduction___books@juno.com (last count before removals=15)
freeeeeee_seduction______books@juno.com (last count before removals=64)
get___laid___and_get_paid_____legally@juno.com (last count before removals=25)
g_ray_sanford@juno.com (last count before removals=140)
hypnodance@aol.com (last count before removals=74)
hypnoteach@aol.com (last count before removals=23)
hypnowitch@aol.com (last count before removals=1)
iteachhypnosis@aol.com (last count before removals=567)
iteachhypnosis@aol.come4menow (last count before removals=2,090)
jensno1fan@aol.com (last count before removals=2)
ladies_purr_for_me@juno.com (last count before removals=68)
lamontgsanford@juno.com (last count before removals=39)
le_seduction_library@juno.com (last count before removals=69)
le____seduction_______library@juno.com (last count before removals=37)
le________seduction_____________library@juno.com (last count before removals=73
le__________seduction___________library@juno.com (last count before removals=55)
learn2baplayer@aol.com (last count before removals=2,540)
lemoderncaveman@aol.com (last count before removals=4,530)
mediawhizz@aol.com (last count before removals=6)
mensleepforme@aol.com (last count before removals=81)
nosexxdom@aol.com (last count before removals=281)
notraymondx@juno.com (last count before removals=43)
OutfoxingTheFoxes@juno.com (last count before removals=18)
outfoxfoxx4@juno.com (last count before removals=39)
outfoxfoxxxes@juno.com (last count before removals=72)
outfoxing_____the_______foxes@juno.com (last count before removals=60)
outfoxxxreddfoxx@juno.com (last count before removals=41)
outfoxxxxxing_the_foxes1@juno.com (last count before removals=90)
ownedbyray@aol.com (last count before removals=6)
powerbase1@aol.com (last count before removals=1)
psychdom@aol.com (last count before removals=5)
psychicdom@aol.com (last count before removals=33)
pxychic@aol.com (last count before removals=562)
pxykick@aol.com (last count before removals=460)
ray_gordon@juno.com (last count before removals=27)
ray_______gordon@juno.com (last count before removals=41)
r_a_y__gordon@juno.com (last count before removals=80)
r_a_y_go_rd_on@juno.com (last count before removals=66)
r_ay_gordon@juno.com (last count before removals=58)
r_ay___g_o_r_don@juno.com (last count before removals=11)
r____a___y_gordon@juno.com (last count before removals=146)
r____a___y_gord_on@juno.com (last count before removals=203)
ra__y__gordo_n@juno.com  (last count before removals=58)
r__a_y__gor__don@juno.com (last count before removals=56)
r__a____y_gord__on@juno.com (last count before removals=24)
ray__g____ord_o_n@juno.com (last count before removals=176)
r____a__y__gord_o_n@juno.com (last count before removals=29)
rrray_gordon@juno.com (last count before removals=96)
rrrray___gordon@juno.com (last count before removals=96)
RayGordon123@hotmail.com (last count before removals=58)
raygordon123@juno.com (last count before removals=1)
raygordon12345@hotmail.com (last count before removals=3)
ray_ol@hotmail.com (last count before removals=652)
raygsanford@juno.com (last count before removals=44)
raytemp000@aol.com (last count before removals=1)
raytemp963@aol.com (last count before removals=12)
rgsoft1@aol.com  (last count before removals=23)
rules4men@aol.com (last count before removals=1)
sanford_g_fred@juno.com (last count before removals=37)
Seducer9741@hotmail.com (last count before removals=72)
seefutures@aol.com (last count before removals=1)
snodgrasspublishing@juno.com (last count before removals=26)
snodgrassww@juno.com (last count before removals=16)
sotwareg@mindspring.com (last count before removals=989)
therevolt@aol.com (last count before removals=107)
the____revolution@hotmail.com (last count before removals=54)
the_______revolution@juno.com (last count before removals=46)
thee______________revolution@juno.com (last count before removals=(176)
theee_____revolution@juno.com (last count before removals=(27)
the_seduction___library@juno.com (last count before removals=45)
the__seduction__library@juno.com (last count before removals=35)
the____seduction_library@juno.com (last count before removals=80)
the____seduction__library@juno.com (last count before removals=38)
the_______seduction______library@juno.com (last count before removals=38)
the____seduction_________library@juno.com (last count before removals=60)
the______________seduction_____library@juno.com (last count before removals=7)
the_____________seduction_________library@juno.com (last count before removals=71)
thee_seduction_library@juno.com (last count before removals=62)
theweakestlinkur@aol.com (last count before removals=487)
unitedfree@juno.com (last count before removals=11)
unitedfree@mindspring.com (last count before removals=23)
wallyhorse@juno.com (last count before removals=420)
whizardray@aol.com (last count before removals=127)
whizzmedia@aol.com (last count before removals=35)
winatbetting@aol.com (last count before removals=1,850)
women_prefer_me@juno.com (last count before removals=38)
women_purr____for_me@juno.com (last count before removals=65)
women_purrrr____for___me@juno.com (last count before removals=69)
women_purrrr_for_me@juno.com (last count before removals=255)
women_purrrrr_for_me@juno.com (last count before removals=79)
women_purrrrr_for_me@juno.com (last count before removals=59)
you_will_get_laid@juno.com (last count before removals=29)
you___will_get______laid@juno.com (last count before removals=29)
you___will_get______laid@juno.com (last count before removals=29)
you___will_get_______laid@juno.com (last count before removals=52)
you_____will__get______laid@juno.com (last count before removals=48)

The links below show the Google returns for the most recent name used by this Einstein wantabe.
ray@cybersheet.com (last count before removals=10,600/ 300 added since 8/30/2004) It looks like we need to keep a running total of the post count from this screen name, so here's the updates:
10/11/2004 = 11,300/ 1,000 added since 8/30/2004

And what ISP is this jerk using to post the crap you can read here? Verizon, of course, whose abuse email is abuse@verizon.net .
Verizon Online's Acceptable Use policy can be read here. Its Terms Of Service agreement is here.
NOTICE! The following content is the sole property of Verizon, Inc., is being quoted in very small part below and  is used being under the Fair Use exemption of the Copyright Act. Editor comments are in black, and enclosed in <> brackets, while the Verizon text is in blue, with highlights in red.

Some of the applicable parts of those Verizon policies are:

Terms Of Service

1. These Terms of Service (the "Agreement") are entered into by and between the subscriber ("you", "your" or "Subscriber") and Verizon Internet Services Inc. or its affiliates as defined in Exhibit A of this Agreement ("Verizon", "us" or "we"). The Agreement sets forth the terms and conditions under which you agree to use the Service, and under which Verizon agrees to provide the Service to you.

Acceptance of this Agreement. You are deemed to have accepted this Agreement upon the earlier of: (a) your submission of an online order; (b) your accepting the Terms of Service electronically during registration or in the course of installing the Software (see Paragraph 4) or the Equipment (see Paragraph 2); (c) your use of the Service (see Paragraph 2); or (d) your retention of the Software or Equipment we provide beyond 30 days following delivery.
<Editor: This part defines the person who is held accountable for the use of the service. This would become important when this idiot claims, as he's done before, that his mother has used the service to upload threatening messages to the internet.>

This Agreement is made up of the terms below, plus the Acceptable Use Policy, Privacy Policy, all Attachments to this Agreement, and the other policies and materials specifically referred to in these Terms of Service, all of which are incorporated herein by reference. The Agreement and related policies are also set forth on the Verizon website (http://www2.verizon.net) ("Website") and can be found under the Policies Section of the Resource Center. You may also receive a paper copy of this Agreement either by telephoning Verizon at 1-800 567-6789 or by writing to us at Verizon, 400 Foxcroft Avenue, Martinsburg, WV 25401, Attention: Customer Service.
 

<BREAK>

3.3 You agree that you are responsible for all use on your account, including any secondary accounts or sub-accounts registered to your primary account. You understand this means that you accept full liability and responsibility for the actions of anyone who uses the Service via your account, or any secondary accounts, with or without your permission. You also agree to use the Service only within the United States.

<BREAK>

5. ACCEPTABLE USE POLICY. You agree to comply with the terms of the Acceptable Use Policy, which is attached hereto as Attachment A and which also may be found posted on the Website under the Policies Section of the Resource Center.
 

18. NOTICES.
18.2 With regard to electronic communications, you and Verizon further agree that: (a) the User ID and/or alias of a sender, contained in an electronic communication ("email'), is legally sufficient to verify the sender's identity and the authenticity of the communication; (b) an email sent containing your User ID and/or alias establishes you as its originator and has the same effect as a document with your written signature on it; and (c) an email or any computer printout of it, is a valid proof of the validity of the original content of the electronic communication.

<BREAK>

1. This is Verizon’s policy on the acceptable use of the Service. It is designed to help protect the Service, Verizon's customers and the Internet community, from irresponsible or illegal activities.

2. Verizon reserves the right to deny Service to you, or immediately to terminate your Service for material breach, if your use of the Service or your use of an alias or the aliases of additional users on your account, whether explicitly or implicitly, and in the sole discretion of Verizon: (a) is obscene, indecent, pornographic, sadistic, cruel or racist in nature, or of a sexually explicit or graphic nature; (b) espouses, promotes or incites bigotry, hatred or racism; (c) might be legally actionable for any reason, (d) is objectionable for any reason, or (e) in any manner violates the terms of this Acceptable Use Policy.

3. You may NOT use the Service as follows: (a) for any unlawful, improper or illegal purpose or activity; (b) to post or transmit information or communications that, whether explicitly stated, implied, or suggested through use of symbols, are obscene, indecent, pornographic, sadistic, cruel, or racist in content, or of a sexually explicit or graphic nature; or which espouses, promotes or incites bigotry, hatred or racism; or which might be legally actionable for any reason; (c) to access or attempt to access the accounts of others, to spoof or attempt to spoof the URL or DNS or IP addresses of Verizon or any other entity, or to attempt to penetrate or penetrate security measures of Verizon or other entities' systems ("hacking") whether or not the intrusion results in corruption or loss of data; (d) to bombard individuals or newsgroups with uninvited communications, data or information, or other similar activities, including but not limited to "spamming", "flaming" or denial or distributed denial of service attacks; (e) to transmit unsolicited voluminous emails (for example, spamming) or to intercept, interfere with or redirect email intended for third parties using the Service; (f) to introduce viruses, worms, harmful code and/or Trojan horses on the Internet; (g) to post information on newsgroups which is not in the topic area or charter (e.g. off-topic posting) of the newsgroup; (h) to interfere with another person's usage or enjoyment of the Internet or this Service; (i) to post or transmit information or communications that are defamatory, fraudulent, obscene or deceptive, including but not limited to scams such as "make-money-fast" schemes or "pyramid/chain" letters; (j) to damage the name or reputation of Verizon, its parent, affiliates and subsidiaries, or any third parties;
 

<END OF QUOTE>

If you've followed the name links in the first part of this page, particularly those from therevolt@aol.com, lamontgsanford@juno.com, askray@hotmail.com, raygsanford@juno.com, you_will_get_laid@juno.com, and esp. RayGordon123@hotmail.com, you should be able to see and judge for yourself if having a business idiot, someone who continuously drones on about his prowess at operating a commercial enterprise on the internet, use the service to try and intimidate private individuals, consumers and anyone who has an opinion of him and/or his product that he doesn't agree with, is damaging the name or reputation of Verizon, its parent, affiliates and subsidiaries or not.
If you've followed more than one of those name links, you've already seen this jerk has been threatening people who criticize him and/or his product as far back as 1997/98. Do you think this self-described business owner is using the service " to interfere with another person's usage or enjoyment of the Internet"?
The practice of threatening critics, or just anyone who expresses a negative opinion of a commercial product, is commonly called predatory commercial speech, which is different than an individual's right of free speech.

 Do Verizon or AOL (which this individual seems to use when he wants to post messages to the internet which unquestionably violate Verizon's policies) endorse predatory commercial messages from any business interests, written with open legal and other threats, apparently with the sole intent to intimidate individuals into self-censoring their online speech and bully service providers into forsaking the rights of their users to speak freely, particularly on matters related to the dependability, effectiveness, marketing, use, or safety of their particular commercial product? I would be interested in hearing their response to that question.

If you have any lingering doubts that someone could, over the period of 7 years or more, continue to try and control the free speech of private individuals, citizens and consumers in multiple usenet newsgroups, to try and prevent anyone from expressing a negative opinion of him and his product, you can follow a few of those newsgroups through these links:
alt.seduction.fast
alt.hypnosis
rec.games.chess.politics
You can read messages as far back as you like (although, remember, a large number of this individual's messages have been removed from the archives because HE DEMANDED IT), and then you can make up your own mind about what this person is doing and why.