Half a year back Andy and Marcia have denied they were the ones who complained to Eric about NN. When Eric was asked to reveal a bit more about the ones who DID complain he always refused to give further details. Apparently, under the cloak of protecting people's privacy this owner/moderator had all too easilly said that 'people complained' without giving real evidence of those complaints.

>Yes, you used English vernacular correctly: interfering with his business. I have not spent a lot of time on Foxite but my impression of Eric is the same as yours. He clearly took sides early on in the dispute between Andy and Marcia and Naomi. Maybe he is just taking care of business by taking the side of two of his best contributors.
>
>
>>The day after, I sent a complaint to Eric den Doop, the Foxite owner. I gave him enough details and asked him to remove the thread and to give Marcia a warning. He was not willing to remove that message, because Marcia had written to him that it was an innocent joke and she had already made this clear to some members involved. My further investigation made clear that Marcia must have thought that it was about another message in another thread. I informed him about this and asked him to redo the investigation. However, he had decided to no longer reply to any of my messages.
>>
>>(Also he accused me of interfering with his business (is that a proper English saying?) because I told him what he should do (remove and warn). Recently I heard about the word GodKing. Eric came to mind as one who is behaving like one. Some state that the UT is commercial and Foxite has free access. That's only one view. The other is that Foxite gets revenues from Google Ads and that the site owner oftentimes behaves like a GodKing.)
>>
>>>Attempt to prevent future employment. Now this is very very sad. I didn't know that.
>>>
>>>
>>>>If only it didn't get to that point and if only it had ended there. It did not. Still, recently disparaging messages continued:
>>>>
>>>>http://www.foxite.com/archives/consalting-job-in-ny-0000149278.htm
>>>>
>>>>Not to mention the 2nd letter that was sent after the first with followup links to time spent online (not sent by the same individual as the first letter though). I find it difficult to believe that someone with altruistic motives would not feel remorse over the effect of their actions and even afterwards continue to attempt to prevent future employment.