There’s no one-armed man in the mob, but there might just be a one-eyed one

The real estate mobbers, those criminal spectulators or those who hired them, who have been trying to forcibly evict me from my legal home and convince my landlords to sell have shown increased caution as of late. This since a formerly vacant house on the other side of the south mobbing house was sold at a King County Sheriff’s auction a few weeks back.

The house was purchased by a guy who rehabilitates and flips houses—a house flipper, yes—but the feeling I get from him, an affable man of European origin who has been friendly to me, is that he is an ethical businessman who doesn’t shy away from taking part in the work from which he seeks to make a living. He and those working with him seem a breath of fresh air in this unfriendly enclave overrun by a dysfunctional neighborhood watch and influenced by an elderly and scheming builder who hails from a more conservative state as well as from a time when “clearing by smearing” was likely how you ran the residents off a property to “acquire” it. At least, given what I’ve heard this builder said about there being “ways to get [me] out,” that’s what I’m given to believe.

Continue reading


Recommended reading: Your new neighbor might just be an LLC

This morning I ran across Gene Balk’s article in the Seattle Times, “Your new neighbor in the house next door might just be an LLC”  ( The piece comments on a surge in the number of King County, Washington homes that are owned by limited liability companies (LLCs). According to Balk, since 2002, the number of LLCs listed as owners of residential homes has more than tripled and foreign investors have shown keen interest in Seattle. Balk notes that limited liability companies are often created to hold real estate investments.

Continue reading

Unmotivated sound and the narrative of mobbing (part 2)

Dear, dear! How queer everything is to-day! And yesterday things went on just as usual.

—Alice though the looking glass

Like Lewis Carroll’s Alice, I find myself in the most unusual of circumstances. I am a middle-aged woman and a legal tenant in northeast Seattle who, to the best of my understanding, is being stalked by real estate speculators and the nastiest of neighborhood watches! So let’s get on with it, shall we? Let’s document the crimes, the manner in which they occur, and how they escape detection.

Seattle Police Department, this one’s for you.


In Unmotivated sound and the narrative of mobbing (part 1), I talked about how the sense of sound and sound technologies were emphasized at the beginning of the mobbing. Around me in my neighborhood, microphones were deployed, or at least so I was told. Attempts were made to intimidate me into keeping my doors and windows shut; all the better to make surfaces to receive the projected harassment. Statements were deliberately said in public space when I was within earshot, derogatory comments made between titters betwixt gaggles of girlfriends of the nasty neighborhood watch lady, for example. The environment around me was altered, deliberately so, to ensure that specific sounds and utterances carried to me as though I was literally “captive” audience to a performance or to an orchestrated soundscape, a soundscape not unlike the soundtrack of a film.

In film, sound is motivated or it is environmental. The novice filmmaker is taught that sound, light, and other aspects of the film frame—the mise-en-scène—should be motivated, that is, they should make sense within the context of the film. Likewise, sound is synchronous or asynchronous. Without synchronous sound, film sound could not be motivated. Synchronous sound is the fundamental premise of sound for vérité, for reality. “Sync” gives the spectator the visual confirmation of truth. Techniques and technologies of sound such as stereo, foley, and advancements in sound and speaker technologies site the narrative and give it spatiality within the film frame.

Motivated sound is driven by the narrative. The source of the song in the soundtrack is revealed in the film frame by a tracking shot as coming from the radio of a passing car. The sound of an engine is revealed by a pan and tilt as a plane passing overhead. The dynamics of motivated sound most closely apply to narrative filmmaking, with its conventions of suspension of disbelief and narrative closure.

Film sound is artifice. Alongside motivated sound, environmental sound in film adds to the texture of the film, the lushness of the sound track. Environmental sound does not forward the plot per se, but it is critical in representing physical space and, thereby, in creating a sense of realism. To make recorded sound believable, traditional filmmakers record “room tone” to capture the ambient sound of a space. Room tone becomes the foundational layer in a sound track, representing “silence” in the scene. “Room tone,” a sound that is as close to silence as the human ear gets, situates us in the physical environment, in a moment of time. Room tone is layered with other sounds in a layered sound track to give the film, and the spectator, a sense of realism. Room tone is the fundamental environmental sound of narrative film.

Narrative closure is all about tidying up the end in telling a story. In typical Hollywood blockbusters, it’s about giving the spectator what he wants, not letting the bad guy win, or just making sure the (heterosexual) good guy gets the girl. The dramatic arc requires a denouement, the relief of tension that comes with resolution of plots and subplots. This drive for narrative closure comes out of a psychology of comfort; there is a natural cultural tendency to make stories out of life events, stories that tell us how to read them and hold their meaning. With the exception of disquieting periods in American cultural history when styles like noir or filmmakers like David Lynch or Peter Greenaway break through the conventions of mainstream cinema, American audiences have tended to reject the ambiguous ending.

The mise-en-scène of a well-constructed film is a powerful argument that compels the viewer to suspend disbelief and enter wholly into the narrative as an emotional subject. Motivated sound is one of the elements of mise-en-scène that exerts the greatest impact on the film’s “verisimilitude.”

Unmotivated sound and the narrative of real estate mobbing

Real estate mobbing has its own narrative, the hegemonic construction of a corrupt neighborhood watch and its cronies in real estate development and speculation over the legal tenants and residents they criminally “mob” from the neighborhood, histrionically portraying their victims as moral hazards and criminals all the while. Whether by the construction and transmission of sound or by its hearing, sound plays a crucial role in the narrative of real estate mobbing.

Mobbing works—at least it works until we begin to carefully listen—because it is sound that is unmotivated, and unexpected. Mobbing is a novel crime and even if it were restricted to methods no more sophisticated than a bunch of rock-throwing cowards holing up in the glass house next door and attempting to convince their victim by never-ending insults, taunts and accusations that he is a child molester by impulse if not by deed, the police would probably still be skeptical of victim reports. The police take reports on incidents that are seen and the court system relies on witness statements to establish “truth.”

Moreover, mobbers attempt to disguise their crimes as wholly civil when, instead, the aspects of the crime that are civil are effected as a shield from detection and to confuse. Even as real estate mobbers threaten to sue for valuation and make nuisance and out-and-out false complaints about you to city and police, they commit and hide felony crimes that should send them to prison for decades. The combination of the clandestine harassment of mobbing with networking, the Internet of Things, and other advances in sound and speaker technologies makes it increasingly difficult for the victim to survive the crime and to make the police believe it is real. The mobbers use of unmotivated sound undermines victim reports; the use of unmotivated sound undermines the verity of the victim’s narrative, the narrative of victimization. No one expects to be addressed from a public address system, by window panes, or over cell phones not taking a call.

When mobbers use unmotivated sound they are using techniques common in the film genre of horror as well as in the creation of haunted houses. These uses rely on the use of sound in unexpected ways from unexpected places. Horror and other fright films show the use of unmotivated sound to increase tension. In an interesting study, it was found that the emotional response of viewers to horror was not fear at all. Rather, it was discomfiture with the out-of-context events in the narrative. What is frightening is the unfamiliar, the unknown.

 Mobbing and environmental sound

The mobbers are very aware of environmental sound as well as of the directionality of sound. In film the directionality of sound is revealed by a shot showing the source of the sound, another shot showing how the sound affected the listener, or in the sound track by the response of the listener. The key skill of the mobber, enhanced by the technology of the mob be it radio, cell phone, public address system or parametric speaker, is to “mob” or harass her “target”—in this case I am referring to the stereotypically female identity of the “queen bee” who would mob or hire or enlist assignees to mob for her—in plain “view” without creating witnesses and in a manner that cannot be ignored by her target while evading detection by authorities. The mobber harasses through the interstices of day-to-day life, over unused interfaces for sound in when applications are sending sound out; over unlikely channels used by cell phone rings, public address systems, and system sounds; and as voices familiarized to their victims heard between and under dialog and other effects of sound in television and film.

On a simpler level, vis-à-vis the common mobber’s ploy of insulting their victim by muttering under their breath while they clutch a cell phone to their ear or look in the other direction, when the speaker is not regarding us we assume his speech is not for us, and even if as in a mobbing it has happened so many times that it is clear it is a tactic, in a civil courtroom the reporter would likely be discredited and the speaker given the benefit of the doubt under the law. Mobbing sound is sound that we ignore, at least, unless like victims of mobbing, we are acculturated to the insulting voice, the demanding voice, the threatening voice. Unless like the victim of mobbing, we know we are being bullied, and being stalked and monitored to make good the dirty work, the bad deeds of those criminal bullies and racketeers who would seek to bully someone from their home.

In my northeast neighborhood, the mobbers must be increasingly attentive to environmental sound and they must blend in with motivated sound as the homes around me change hands and new families move into them. This morning in particular, work is ongoing at the formerly abandoned house one door away that was recently put on the auction block by the King County Sheriff’s Office. And across the street at a new house now occupied by husband-and-wife doctors with a new baby, work continues to modify the premises for the new inhabitants. As builders and remodelers who may not be friendly to developers and neighborhood watches that would criminally harass residents out of their homes to take their properties move closer to me, it becomes increasingly obvious that the mobbers working from the houses on either side of me wait until some power equipment is turned on or demolition of some type is underway from one house or another, and then mob intensely until the din ends. They then stay quiet, listening until the next safe period to harass comes, the next period when the sounds of their slings and arrows won’t be heard by those who shouldn’t hear them, by anyone but me. This is a variation of the techniques they use to keep those who are close to me from hearing what I hear, which is to refrain from mobbing when others are so close that they would hear, in the checkout line, at the gas station; and to mob only when their voices, unfamiliar to others, will be ignored and perhaps not even perceived by those for whom they are not motivated sound, those for whom they are not part of the narrative.

An example of the use of environmental sound in mobbing would be, for example, when I went outside this afternoon to garden and suddenly the south mobbing house owner and his two pals returned outside and begin washing their vehicles, turning on country music and then turning it up. For them, this is motivated sound in that it forwards the narrative of mobbing. It is intended to ensure that I have no quiet and no quiet enjoyment of my legal contract to reside on a property that developers want.

The importance of environmental sound in the mobbers’ denial of quiet

The mobbers’ goal is encapsulated by the words of the north mobbing house owner who is ennobled by his profession and nothing more. It was he who once said to another mobber, and said it for me to overhear so that I would know what to expect if I remained in my home: “Don’t give her any quiet.” This intentional deprivation, which when forced on the victim twenty-four hours daily and within the supposed privacy of her home, may legally be “torture,” but that narrative, here in northeast Seattle, in the relatively liberal State of Washington and in the United States, is not yet a compelling one to authorities and as I try to report the crime, suspension of disbelief is hard to come by. For those who might walk by, although the loud crashes and bangs coming from the spiteful nasty neighborhood watch lady as she emerges from her house to play Roust the Renter (against the renters in the neighborhood that she herself is not making money off of), harassment is delivered outdoors either in a manner that is not noticeably different from the environmental sounds in any neighborhood of DIY home owners, or it is served up using the beam-focused sound of a parabolic or parametric speaker or coupled with monitoring of the street.

When the mobbers hide behind the walls of the residences next door, when they harass over public address systems, over speaker-enabled public address systems or over the cell phones of others, they gain an advantage not only from hijacking sound systems in a way that is unexpected, they use sound in a manner that is unmotivated. The victim or “target” of the mobbers learns, though the slings and arrows of voices to which he is familiarized, that the sound is for him. This means that for the victim, unlike for all others who are not acculturated to the threats and taunts, all others who know nothing about being continually stalked and harassed, all others who enjoy the privileges they are accorded by their own good-faith agreements to rent or purchase a home, for the victim mobbing sound is never environmental.

When mobbers mob in public, when mobbers mob within sight of their victims or within sight of others, they evade detection through avoiding the appearance not only of motivation but of synchronous sound. Synchronous sound is hearing the words someone speaks while seeing their lips speak them. Mobbers attempt to introduce doubt not only into what the victims knows, which is that they are criminals attempting to harass him from his home, but by muttering threats and insults under their breath while they look the other way or while they hold cell phones to their ears, they set up the victim to be discredited in court, to be ridiculed as paranoid, to have his very perceptions of reality challenged.

The victim is criminally and brutally harassed inside her very home in a manner that is inapposite to civil law, civil rights and even the Constitution, and she has no easy means of proving it. The crime of mobbing is designed to be impossible to prove and the mobbing criminals delight in taunting their victim; taunting is an important part of their strategy to hurt and perhaps even to “destroy” their victim and his life. Those who would mob or who would enlist mobbers to do their bidding enjoy cruelty in a manner that is psychopathic. Mobbing is not designed simply to forcibly evict, it is designed to crush and just the stress of being mobbed can probably kill. The brutality of the mob is probably something the mobbers feel is justified as a method of ensuring that there are no victim reports and that they and their clients evade legal liability for the crimes they commit. Just the same, to do what has been done to me over the thirty plus months, you’d have to be willing to commit manslaughter. From that standpoint, you might as well call mobbing attempted murder. Mobbing harassment may, in being harassment that seems to consist of endless repeating statements made even during sleep, or at least when the mobbers hear the sounds of the victim stirring from sleep, even be intended to brainwash.

The mobbers’ use of umotivated and environmental sound is a large part of the reason why one of the most effective tools to forensically capture mobbing is likely to be the acoustic camera, as I wrote in Fighting crime with acoustic detection systems. As Donald Lowe noted in History of Bourgeosis Perception (1983), vision prevails over other human senses; the same sound that is used to create an authentic feeling of physical space in film is trusted less than sight. The acoustic camera depicts an “image” of sound that visualizes its sources and direction, a crucial capability when it comes to beam-focused sources of sound like parametric speakers. Seeing will be believing in mobbing, when we can see its sound.

In part 3, we’ll talk about mobbing technologies and the “weapons” and tools—including drones—of unmotivated sound. Stay tuned. ▪

Unmotivated sound and the narrative of mobbing (part 1)

We want our land, get off our land, cried the two white coats, petulantly stomping their feet whilst wildly waving about their forceps, their retractors, and handfuls of sharpened instruments.

Ditto, said Tweedledum.

Ditto, ditto, cried Tweedledee.

Get off our land, get off, get out! No matter how you scream and shout, we’re still going to get you out, this is what we’re all about!

So said the scumbucket criminal speculators, and so it must be done down, down the rabbit hole and alongside the lakeside in this most nasty of neighborhoods ruled by the Nasty Neighborhood Watch and the nasty neighborhood watch lady of the northeast.


In spring of 2014, I became aware that I was being “mobbed,” real estate mobbed, that is. I didn’t know it as “real estate mobbing” or “property mobbing” at the time, but that’s when it began. Around that time when the mobbers got started, protected from apprehension by the collusion of the corrupt and anti-renter neighborhood watch of my northeast Seattle neighborhood as well as vacancy of numerous houses that were being built, sold, or remodeled, technologies of sound became an important feature of my existence here in this semi-rural enclave that some have said is the quietest place they have ever lived, this enclave that should have been a place of peace and, as stipulated by my lease contract, quiet enjoyment for me as well.

There are several key utterances that I recall in the weeks around the time when the final steps were taken to remove quiet and privacy—at least, what quiet and privacy I believed was still mine—from my existence in this, the neighborhood of the nasty  neighborhood watch and its developer and speculator cronies.

The event that, for me, formally marks the onset of the mob, was the day when I was in my own bathroom with the window shut and heard the familiar voice of the single male owner of the house on the north side of me: “I turned down the mic. She’s in the john.” This event is documented in the entry “On being mobbed,” for which this blog is named. So far as events in a mobbing, this one is perhaps comparable to the moment in Louis Carroll’s Through the Looking Glass, when Alice climbs into the looking glass. This is the moment, in property-crazed northeast Seattle anyway, where not only is the world is turned on its head but you find yourself living betwixt the properties and property aspirations of Tweedledee and Tweedledum, be they agents in their own right or the assignees of some other scumbucket speculators.

Another keynote moment in the opening of the mob was the day I was outside my home within earshot of the nasty neighborhood watch lady when she swept her hand in my direction and proudly announced to a passerby, “We have very sensitive microphones in place to hear when she moves her cars.” I remember my disbelief at her words and the awkwardness of the man who heard them or, perhaps, the man she “used” to malignantly and backhandedly inform me that I was being watched. Within weeks, I came to understand that I was being “monitored,” a term describing a subset of stalking activities.

And there was the curious moment when the nasty neighborhood lady took to gardening along the margins of her parking strip closest to my own home, all the while talking loudly on her cell phone about how some “film people” would soon descend upon the neighborhood and how she liked “film people.” This was around the time the mobbing began and the microphones deployed, at least, it was around the time I became aware that I was being listened to, even in my own home. And it was about the time that the mobbers began projecting their voices into my house, remarking on my activities inside my home from the properties of Tweedledee and Tweedledum, to ensure that I knew it. This was the time when the hoaxes began, when I lost my contract at Microsoft after reporting to Microsoft Security that I believed my neighbors put an Internet “bot” on my laptop, and the time when I fell down, down, down, into the rabbit hole.

But no matter which side of the looking glass you’re on, the techniques and technologies of mobbing rely heavily on sound. So let’s talk about sound, and since the nasty neighborhood watch lady so likes “film people,” let’s talk in part 2 of Unmotivated sound and the narrative of mobbing about film sound.

Stay tuned.



$5,000 reward for Seattle real estate mobbers (“tenant clearers”) is offering a $5,000 reward for the real estate mobbers or “tenant clearers” who continue in their attempt to harass the author of this blog out of her home in northeast Seattle in order to force its sale to real estate speculators. The reward will likely be matched and will be given for the arrest and prosecution of the mobbers themselves, or those in the neighborhood watch or in business with them who were instrumental in installing the mobbers in the houses around the author of this blog. This is a serial crime and there may be a circle of people who “clear” residents for developers or for their own ventures, so it’s possible that if you’ve experienced something similar or heard of something similar, that some of the same people may be involved.

Mobbing and wireless networks: Data in, and data out

Suppose that you could constrain the extent of your wireless network. There are tools that allow you to do so, after all. My Century Link router allows the consumer administrator to set the percentage of broadcast power allocated to the network. I considered playing around with it to see if I could limit the availability of my own wireless network to my house.

A few months back, I came across NetSpot, a WiFi survey application made for the Mac. NetSpot allows the user to detect and visualize the WiFi networks by walking them. You “run a survey” by walking the network space, and Netspot “marks” your position within the mapping. So far I’ve only used the free version, which doesn’t include the sexy visual mappings, but the data amassed by the application and organized into a table shows its potential. According to NetSpot, the application “lets you troubleshoot and improve your network’s coverage, capacity, performance, APs (access points) configurations, signal level, interference, noise….” (NetSpot: Your Wi-Fi survey app for Mac,

This last weekend, a three-day weekend ending in Labor Day, the real estate mobbing continued from houses north and south, but cautiously. This likely in part because yet another house around me has changed hands; the long-abandoned house two doors down was finally auctioned off by the King County Sheriff Friday before last, with the new owners—a couple making their living by purchasing, rehabilitating and then flipping houses—taking possession the next day. They’ve been here every day, a large dumpster collecting refuse from the house and, over the weekend, a crew of gardeners taming the landscape, today grinding up their yield of wood with a portable chipper.

The presence of the mobbers or those who work onsite to monitor and protect this clandestine effort to “mob” me out of my legal rental home continued nevertheless, with fewer shows of brash, thirty-something men strutting, shirts off and designer sunglasses on, around the south mobbing house driveway, and without the roar of the engines of their SUVs as they pull in and out of the driveway, packing it with vehicles in a buildup of troops and artillery across a hostile border. There were no skirmishes, but reconnaissance continued with the comings and goings of the mobbers.

Saturday brought the return of a guy I’ve seen before in the driveway of the south mobbing house owner. He prefers to “work” with the garage door open, backing his small blue SUV with specialty Washington plates up the driveway and then stationing himself at the mouth of the open garage while mobbing harassment is directed into my house to whatever extent possible. This varies based on whether I’m alone in my home as well as whether the nearest neighbors are in evidence.

Sometimes I look over to check and see who they are are in hopes of making a positive identification of them once investigators begin to crack this ring of “tenant relocators” or otherwise criminal real estate speculators. I try to memorize their faces and physical likenesses. I remember hearing in the mobbing harassment at one point, an admonishment not to be outside when they come and go, and for that reason believe it is evermore important in the bullying situation that real estate mobbing is, to the extent it is safe (and though I’m told the north mobbing house owner has talked about shooting me in the face, I so far believe that it has not been their intent to use overt violence, since that would surely expose this “white glove” method of forced eviction), to ensure that they know I am aware of what is going on around me and, moreover, that they know I am documenting it. I believe this protects me; that is a major reason for my beginning this blog. I also believe that because my blogging exposes the practice of mobbing, it helps to prevent real estate mobbing from happening to others.

On Sunday, I was in my dining room when the south house mobber with the tattoos and CrossFit stickers pulled his red SUV into the driveway. His child got out of the passenger side of the vehicle and, holding what appeared to be a smart phone in his hands, walked down the driveway started up the street, walking close to my vehicles and from the south to the north bounding property line. The child held his device in two hands, studying it as he walked the right-of-way along the perimeter of my home. Then he moved across the street, his father following along and standing opposite his child at the south end of the property of the new home owner just north of the nasty neighborhood watch lady’s house. This would be the new home owner who told me about the north mobbing house owner going on about shooting me in the face. The pair stood there momentarily, both of them studying their devices, raising them higher into the air with eyes seemingly fixed on their screens. Then they turned, walked again past my home, and up the driveway of the south mobbing house owner.

Like the pieces of the puzzle that fall into place slowly and over time spent in a mobbing, as I watched the pair walk the perimeter of my home, and then linger in the right-of-way closest to a home owner who is not in their camp, I considered if this was another such piece.

For some time, it’s been clear that WiFi access plays a central role in my real estate mobbing. I’ve stepped up my administration of the WiFi network in my home, a network that I rarely use apart from any wireless TV services that it supports on the Century Link router that replaced my Comcast service this last year. Along with changing passwords, I’m now permitting access to the WiFi network based on MAC identification. When I can, I shut WiFi radios off entirely. To provide bandwidth to my roommates, the WiFi radios in my router are these days on, most of the time.

In the same way that NetSpot allows the user to map a network by walking it, I suspect that the mobbers at least have an awareness of the margins of their wireless networks, and of mine between them. Although I was a bit shocked to see the tattooed guy’s child lead the way, it makes sense that they would walk close to the edges of my property looking for falloff of my network as well as the reach of their own wireless networks and the possible envelopment of the physical space over my home and between their own, the mobbing houses to my north and my south.

It seems plausible enough. With the weight of a black cloud, the WiFi network of the mobbing owner to the north shows the same strength as my own, and sometimes better. This is the mobbing house owner who offered, pretty much the first time I met him, to “share” his wireless network with me. After all, he said, he had done it before.

When I’ve written about this before, it was within the content of data extraction from my network, the ease with which packets of information could be captured from my network if it was shared or gave easy access to the mobbing houses. The shared neighborhood infrastructure implemented by Comcast gives great access to mobbing victims, between neighborhood “hot spots” and lines that are shared from the pole by adjacent houses, making it easy to use the convergence between Internet and television to lurk just outside your neighbor’s network with a packet sniffer. And the mobbers made assertions like, “We’ve got all of your email,” and “We’re going to kill you on the Internet [among other things, by dumping your email all over the Internet].” Given the circumstances, these statements have been believable.

For the first year of the mobbing, the harassment often included the assertion “We’re on your network,” a statement that seemed intended to convince me that I had no alternative other than to yield. They’ve also said that my security equipment, or that some of my roommates’ devices, have been on theirs. Either one of these possibilities is easily enabled by networks within proximity to one another, and the clandestine use of such a scheme is protected by the shortened attack vector that proximity provides.

When the apparent child of the tattooed mobber walks the right-of-way areas that bound the neighboring homes and the networks they broadcast, he and his father can determine the range of the WiFi networks available for use as well as the margin for error. Does the 5G network of the north mobbing house extend over my home and into the south mobbing house? Is my SSID broadcast and available at the street? And does the wireless coverage of the north mobbing house diminish before anything transmitted to or from a wireless radio can be picked up by radios, networked or otherwise, in the home of the new neighbors just across the street?

It is this acute awareness of WiFi networks’ reach and extent that likely allows the mobbers both access to their mobbing victim and protection from detection. Again, I am limited in my knowledge of radio and hacking, but everything is a radio, and as I’ve written before, when it comes to mobbing, All Your Device Are Belong to Us. The creation and access of shared WiFi networks as well as access to the network of the mobbing victim himself likely enables the hidden use of software-defined radio to transmit mobbing harassment to victim devices as well as providing a wireless “umbrella,” or perhaps a “canopy,” in the airspace above the victim home and network that could be accessed by a surveillance drone enabled for hacking and for the projection of beam-focused sound. Determining the margins of the network would be critical to help to ensure that sound meant for the network of the victim is not received by radios of all kinds within the homes of potential witnesses. Awareness of network information for the victim house as well as surrounding homes, including the mobbers’ own homes, is not useful simply to acquire data, but to send and protect mobbing harassment that is transmitted over the wire as data.





How being a victim of real estate mobbing is a bit like living Harrison Ford’s role in “The Fugitive”

You remember the Harrison Ford vehicle, The Fugitive (1993). Forced to do his own detective work on the run, Ford’s character breaks into the apartment of Sykes, the one-armed man, and finds some telling photographs in a drawer. He calls Tommy Lee Jones’ character from the phone of the one-armed man, to tell him that he just found a big piece of the puzzle.

Figuring out mobbing is a bit like that, and choosing to remain in a mobbing situation is a bit like being on the run, though the mobbers certainly couldn’t stand up to Tommy Lee Jones’ down-home detective—the mobbers wouldn’t even make a B grade cast. Sometimes they do remind me, however, of failed voice-over actors who, denied a career in acting, seek solace in harassing legal residents out of their homes. After all, there’s typecasting as well as method acting in the many hoaxes and roles (of poor character) they play. But let’s get back to Harrison Ford and the puzzle.

It was a bit like figuring out a piece of puzzle when, with nowhere to flee, I wound up staying in my legal home in northeast Seattle and was not blown to bits, made famous for my potty-cam and shower-cam on the Internet, or killed online and off, despite the many threats of the mobbers.

Another piece of the puzzle fell into place when a Microsoft friend told me that directional (parametric) speakers could explain why I heard the familiar voices of the neighbors and their mobbing friends when I worked outside my house when others did not. With a bit of research, I learned how directional speakers isolate a single person for a communication and, because of their novelty, can result in someone coming to believe they must be “hearing voices” and might even be losing their grip on reality.

It was like figuring out a piece of the puzzle when I experimented with opening windows and using sound board and found that both would quiet the level of the mobbing harassment, in other words, when I came to understand the phenomenology of surface harassment on the window panes of my home from the mobbing houses north and south.

It was like figuring out a piece of the puzzle when I blocked access to the half-light window in my kitchen door from the kitchen exhaust fan of the south mobbing house, and it quieted a significant portion of the mobbing harassment that I faced any time I went to the kitchen to prepare meals.

And it was like figuring out a big piece of the puzzle when I realized that drones now becoming ubiquitous on the consumer market could be used to follow and for mobile hacking. Sports photography offers an example of early adopters of not only parabolic microphones to capture the drama of the final kick in a soccer game; cameras like the GoPros that athletes use to record their own feats of daring can now take flight and follow by drone. The ability to follow from a remote location and by machine increases the ease, affordability and efficiency of constant surveillance while reducing the risk of detection. And radio-powered drones provide a fantastic platform for mobile hacking as well as for the deployment of a range of technologies for reconnaissance and attack.

The piece of the puzzle that one of this week’s blog entries is about, is one I haven’t written enough about: the pairing of a drone with a directional speaker. Stay turned for a post coming up soon, in which we talk about swimming pools, residential air conditioning, and the inscrutable pairing of the drone with traditional techniques of ventilation-transported harassment.