I talked to a friend who is a moderator for a site. She spends all her time deleting reported posts. She says it is almost impossible to investigate any of the reported items, so she just deletes them all. The chances are almost 100 percent OP's nemesis has her blog on a host site. These all have community guidelines that prohibit certain types of posts on various grounds. A common one that would suit this case is privacy violation. All OP needs to do is to hit the report button and write privacy violation and a moderator is likely to delete.

The one reported reason that is about 100 percent likely to result in deletion is a charge of copyright violation. This is apparently a time tested way for people get unflattering blogs entries about them deleted. It doesn't really matter if it's true--no host site wants to get enmeshed in a copyright violation. There are also companies that will get stuff deleted for you using this technique. More advanced ones are needed for deleting something from, say, MySpace because it is a dead site but the content remains. My friend used a firm for this because she couldn't remember her passwords etc Her entries are now gone.

Anonymous wrote:Send two polite letters asking her to remove the post. Keep copies. Send the second one by certified mail, return receipt and keep the receipt. This often gets the job done.
If this doesn't work, hire a lawyer. You can find one for a couple hundred who will write a threatening letter. Again, document everything, including a record of your payment to the lawyer.
You might consider suggesting, in the final letter, than you are planning a press interview on cyberbullying and that you will be naming her. The final step would be to actually volunteer your information to TV producers/reporters.

Bad advice. If I was the boss and OP tried this, I’d probably hire my own lawyers. There’s a good chance the OP’s misdeeds could constitute the basis for a suit or counter suit. The boss has way more money than the OP. The OP probably doesn’t want to reignite the boss’ rage.

Anonymous wrote:Sign up with a company like godaddy to buy the domain if she lets it lapse.

Then figure out how to launch a denial of service attack on her site.

Like the first suggestion.

A DOS attack is hard to manage without involving multiple people. However, it could be of interest for the guys who post on on the 4Chan B boards, who seem to be up for pretty much anything. OP could post there and see what happens. One of them might even hack into the blog just for the heck of it. An advantage of the B boards is that threads disappear after several hours of inactivity, so there isn't a permanent record.

Another way to go is to post the dilemma on Lolcow, which tends to be female, and goes after internet bloggers and the like. They are expert at digging up dirt on people who maintain an active internet presence and might be able to find things that would force the blogger to close down her site. Some of these people also know how to hack, but are less likely to be up for it than the B guys. Also, their threads don't disappear unless you are successful in an appeal to the moderators.

Apart from 4Chan and Lolcow, the cheapest solution is to hire a college kid to hack into the account and change the name. Would probably do it for 100 bucks.

Sign up with a company like godaddy to buy the domain if she lets it lapse.

Then figure out how to launch a denial of service attack on her site.

Send two polite letters asking her to remove the post. Keep copies. Send the second one by certified mail, return receipt and keep the receipt. This often gets the job done.
If this doesn't work, hire a lawyer. You can find one for a couple hundred who will write a threatening letter. Again, document everything, including a record of your payment to the lawyer.
You might consider suggesting, in the final letter, than you are planning a press interview on cyberbullying and that you will be naming her. The final step would be to actually volunteer your information to TV producers/reporters.

Op I assume you won’t be looking for a job in the same field again. So I would be upfront and honest with any future employer. Make sure you are legally driving and have cleaned up all legal issues so that is not an issue. I would explain what happened, how you have changed, and offer to be hired under a probation/temporary term. Hopefully you have changed and can move forward with your life. I know the previous employer seems vengeful but she clearly feels someone she trusted them with put them in harms way and she is not letting it go and feels she need to warn others. Best of luck to you. I do believe in second chances and of redeeming oneself.

OP is not coming back guys, not worth it to continue this thread.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:You can try contacting whoever hosts the website. It might violate their terms is service.

Or, make a website about her and then agree that you will both remove them.

I am afraid of making a website about her because I don’t really have much on her. If I go and make a website and she sues me for defamation, what do I do then?

If she sues you, that’s when you can negotiate the removal of both sites. But, trying to contact the hosting service first is probably better.

OP, I hope you listened to Jeff about contacting the host site as that is a solid recommendation.

+ 1. And the option costing the least amount of time, resources, and potential blowback to you if the web host takes the page down.

Bangs = change. Smh

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would see if one of those "reputation defender" websites could help you. Maybe get results down to page 2 on Google. A more drastic measure might be to start using a nickname, or your middle name. Something to break the association.

This poster has good advice.

+ 1. You could even legally bangs your name.

Brother Love (formerly know as P Diddy, Puff Daddy, Sean Combs) has done it multiple times. For no understandable reason at all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:23:16, your link does not prove your point. OP's boss is not stating false things, nor is she actively attempting to "blacklist" OP. She is telling the story of her experience, which she has every right to do.

Yes, it actually does. If you actually read it, you’d see that blacklisting doesn’t require false statements nor does it require the actual maintenance of a “blacklist”.

“The chart below is a synopsis of state laws prohibiting blacklisting. Note that these laws define blacklisting in varying ways. Some prohibit employers from maintaining an actual blacklist, some prohibit employers from making false statements about an employee, and some simply prohibit employers from using any means to prevent an employee from finding a job.”

The owner of the site is welcome to share her story and the OP is welcome to sue her under blacklisting (depending on state law). Telling “your story” or the “truth” doesn’t negate the application of blacklisting laws. That is why they exist.

Yeah, so OP's previous employer is trying to prevent OP from getting another job doing something that she was evidently not qualified for in the first place, since she needed to lie in order to get the job and was ultimately fired for incompetence (probably among other things). And she is doing this merely by reporting facts that she has proof of. I'm not generally a risk taker, but I'd be pretty comfortable taking my chances in court with that.

Oh, and forgot to add that she's not going out and actively contacting people to warn them against employing OP either. It's just her personal website where she has recorded her own experiences.

I'd enjoy eating popcorn while I watch you try to take someone down for that.

Not to mention that OP admits the boss has way more financial resources than the OP. Good luck filing a frivolous lawsuit against someone who can afford tons more lawyers than you. There’s no way that could end poorly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:23:16, your link does not prove your point. OP's boss is not stating false things, nor is she actively attempting to "blacklist" OP. She is telling the story of her experience, which she has every right to do.

Yes, it actually does. If you actually read it, you’d see that blacklisting doesn’t require false statements nor does it require the actual maintenance of a “blacklist”.

“The chart below is a synopsis of state laws prohibiting blacklisting. Note that these laws define blacklisting in varying ways. Some prohibit employers from maintaining an actual blacklist, some prohibit employers from making false statements about an employee, and some simply prohibit employers from using any means to prevent an employee from finding a job.”

The owner of the site is welcome to share her story and the OP is welcome to sue her under blacklisting (depending on state law). Telling “your story” or the “truth” doesn’t negate the application of blacklisting laws. That is why they exist.

Yeah, so OP's previous employer is trying to prevent OP from getting another job doing something that she was evidently not qualified for in the first place, since she needed to lie in order to get the job and was ultimately fired for incompetence (probably among other things). And she is doing this merely by reporting facts that she has proof of. I'm not generally a risk taker, but I'd be pretty comfortable taking my chances in court with that.

Oh, and forgot to add that she's not going out and actively contacting people to warn them against employing OP either. It's just her personal website where she has recorded her own experiences.

I'd enjoy eating popcorn while I watch you try to take someone down for that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:23:16, your link does not prove your point. OP's boss is not stating false things, nor is she actively attempting to "blacklist" OP. She is telling the story of her experience, which she has every right to do.

Yes, it actually does. If you actually read it, you’d see that blacklisting doesn’t require false statements nor does it require the actual maintenance of a “blacklist”.

“The chart below is a synopsis of state laws prohibiting blacklisting. Note that these laws define blacklisting in varying ways. Some prohibit employers from maintaining an actual blacklist, some prohibit employers from making false statements about an employee, and some simply prohibit employers from using any means to prevent an employee from finding a job.”

The owner of the site is welcome to share her story and the OP is welcome to sue her under blacklisting (depending on state law). Telling “your story” or the “truth” doesn’t negate the application of blacklisting laws. That is why they exist.

Yeah, so OP's previous employer is trying to prevent OP from getting another job doing something that she was evidently not qualified for in the first place, since she needed to lie in order to get the job and was ultimately fired for incompetence (probably among other things). And she is doing this merely by reporting facts that she has proof of. I'm not generally a risk taker, but I'd be pretty comfortable taking my chances in court with that.

It's so tiresome when fake lawyers go at it. Come back OP and spill more details!

Anonymous wrote:23:16, your link does not prove your point. OP's boss is not stating false things, nor is she actively attempting to "blacklist" OP. She is telling the story of her experience, which she has every right to do.

Yes, it actually does. If you actually read it, you’d see that blacklisting doesn’t require false statements nor does it require the actual maintenance of a “blacklist”.

“The chart below is a synopsis of state laws prohibiting blacklisting. Note that these laws define blacklisting in varying ways. Some prohibit employers from maintaining an actual blacklist, some prohibit employers from making false statements about an employee, and some simply prohibit employers from using any means to prevent an employee from finding a job.”

The owner of the site is welcome to share her story and the OP is welcome to sue her under blacklisting (depending on state law). Telling “your story” or the “truth” doesn’t negate the application of blacklisting laws. That is why they exist.