Response to Times Bulletin Bullying Accusations

*A major update occurred within an hour of writing this post. See the addendum at the bottom. The Times Bulletin and/or Apsters Technologies chose to take down the post. I am very grateful to those organizations for their dedication to honesty.

My media work is interesting. I get lots of support. With that support comes the occasional message about how I’m ineffective or not changing anything. Today, I can show my audience just how effective I really am. On my post about how US Legal and Veritext lied about the shortage, it got loaded up with troll comments. Then last night while I was slumbering peacefully and/or coughing up my lungs, there was a pingback to the article “Is Christopher Day, AKA Stenonymous, Bullying Others In His Articles?

I’ll just be upfront about it. In pockets of December and possibly November I was being a bully. That’s thanks to the mental illness I later found out about and addressed. I’m all better now.

Tellingly, the post doesn’t point to any of that behavior. It points to my very real and serious accusation that US Legal and Veritext are lying to the public and whines that that’s bullying. It claims “some have said that” I’ve crossed the line, but it gives no good example of where or when that line was crossed. The best crack they can take at it is that I made a post about US Legal and Veritext and insinuate the information I provide is inaccurate despite providing no evidence of inaccuracy.

The article also pokes at my claim that Brad Patterson and other commentators on the post in question were foreign troll operatives. Hilariously, the site itself is in India.

Apsters Technologies is awesome. See the addendum.

The author, “Derek Robins,” is a faceless entity I can’t contact or even look up as far as I can see.

Possible Foreign Troll Operative

I’m so effective that it appears a bona fide disinformation campaign has been started against me. I’m a little disappointed that it wasn’t funded or written better. I’m also a little insulted that they think my audience is full of unsophisticated rubes that’ll fall for that. But I am flattered to be the subject of such a campaign.

As always, I have attempted to mediate the situation Christopher Day style.


Apsters Technologies and the Times Bulletin appear to be legitimate. The author was likely the one who was bribed to write about me. I received the following response:

I am deeply moved by their compassion. Thank you so much Arun Patil.

Stenonymous Receives Demand for Correction & Apology from Naegeli

Last night at about 10:00 p.m., I received an e-mail from Richard Hunt of Barran Liebman LLP about Naegeli. It was a fairly standard legal threat, not that I know what those look like, since I’ve never received one before. If you’re short on time, skip their nonsense and read my reply.

The demand letter is available for download here:

Now, I understand that this kind of thing may have a chilling effect on the free speech I have worked so hard to promote in our industry. I must ask all of you not to be afraid, but to turn to your state and federal legislators and law enforcement. Take this opportunity to share with them what is happening. I will lead by example in defense of our collective futures. I will be brave as I am asking all of you to be.

The PDF download and plain text is below.

Dear Mr. Hunt:

I’ll assume you’re an honest lawyer roped into this circus by your corporate client. Welcome. Make sure you’re sitting for this one.

This is my show. Defamation is a false statement of fact published to a third party that causes damage. Naegeli’s reputation is so awful that I find it hard to believe there’s anything that could be said that would damage its reputation further. Some of the statements I make are factual, and truth is an affirmative defense to defamation. Beyond that, some of the statements I make are an opinion based on my expertise as a stenographic court reporter for the last 11 and a half years and creator of what is indisputably the largest blog in my industry. You do not have a cause of action and therefore it would be legally wrong for you to file a complaint against me.

You should peruse my blog. I’ve been reporting corporate corruption against much larger corporations than Naegeli. Veritext and US Legal Support appear to be involved in a plot to rig the court reporting and stenotype services industry against consumers/lawyers. What was done to the healthcare industry as portrayed in the series Dopesick about Purdue Pharma is more or less being done to my industry. The difference here is that what is occurring in my industry is what would have happened if one doctor rallied the others to fight the misleading advertising and dishonest behavior. Conceded that the series is a dramatization of the actual events, of course. I have a moral obligation to stop the lies and dishonesty rampant in my field because of the damage this plot will likely do to my profession, its students, minority speakers, and testimony transcript accuracy. Once the public takes note and begins alerting the DOJ, FBI, and FTC as I have, there is virtually no chance the plot will continue. Naegeli’s gouging was such a minor and unrelated part of that, that in my wildest dreams, I couldn’t have imagined this kind of foolish overreaction and strategic blunder.  Thank you.

My field is beset by silence and fear. I aim to break this. To achieve this I have become a goal-oriented person. You see, now that Naegeli has threatened to sue through an actual law firm, it’s put itself in a much worse position than anyone could have conceived. Now Naegeli has two choices. It can fail to sue me, and show an entire field of nearly 30,000 court reporters that it is a scared barking dog, which will embolden them.  The competition from all of them will become so fierce that it will run the company into the ground. Alternatively, Naegeli could sue. I am quite sure that I can find a valid counterclaim. We can lock each other in for a lawsuit and give this field the show it never knew it needed. It will be the single-largest destruction of capital the industry has ever seen and your client’s reputation will drop even more as court reporters across the nation realize that money could’ve gone into advertising to fix the stenographer shortage. Imagine the backlash. “Yes, I could’ve spent $400 an hour advertising this profession but instead I, Naegeli & Co., have decided the money is better spent stifling Christopher Day’s free speech.”

I know the latter seems like an attractive choice, but it will only expand my audience exponentially and possibly allow me to run daily ads decrying Naegeli’s hatred of free speech and the stenographic free press. I took a personality test recently, and it claimed I was a mediator. Perhaps unsurprisingly, I have come up with a third option. I can use my media personality to completely rehabilitate Naegeli’s reputation. We can sign a contract that Naegeli will use only stenographers and/or voice writers, and will shift their billing model to be the more open and honest “split of invoice” method. I’ll take $100,000 for up to two dozen press releases or media actions in 2022. Together, we will find a way to repair Naegeli’s image in the eyes of the public and court reporters across the nation. We can donate 5% of the contract to NCRF and 5% of the contract to Open Steno to show the field our resolve and unity. 

I have about $1,200 to my name and am about $20,000 in debt. You see, the corporations in my field looted it so much by the time I got here that as a young man, I simply didn’t have a fair shot. I let you know that in order to explain that in the event you sue and somehow manage to bribe a judge and/or jury to see things your way, you will have succeeded in little more than obtaining a piece of paper called a judgment that says “you win, congrats.” Meanwhile, the work I am doing will ensure that not a single stenography grad ever has to suffer like that again. If you believe there is any universe where I will back down, there is an ancient stenographic proverb designed just for you.