El Naschie Watch reader Froginblender commented
First line of Gruaniad article: "A *theoretical physicist* who ..." and that's where I stopped reading.
And as Shrink noted, that characterization of the Great Man then abruptly disappeared from Nature's news article where the Grauniad probably got it.
Richard Holmes of University Ranking Watch covers the story, and unlike some parties, acknowledges El Naschie Watch.
The post CERN Found 2 out of 3 Needed Pieces of Evidence for the Higgs – A Bargain? on Otto Rössler's Lifeboat blog has attracted abundant pro El Naschie comments, and is begging to be archived here [Done.] so that the comments are never lost. There seems to be no urgency, however, because the admin Tom Kerwick acknowledges the importance of that dialog.
PassingByAgain points to these new Nature articles about the case:
Libel win reveals need for reform by Daniel Cressey; and I was sued for libel under an unjust law by Quirin Schiermeier, who wrote the article El Naschie sued over so long ago. The Cressey piece puts the cost of the defense at roughly £1.5 million (US$2.3 million), not £6 million, as we reported sockpuppet "Rajeev Sindan" saying. Sindan's idea we suppose was to get El Naschie Watch to report exultantly but erroneously on the larger number. If £1.5 million is the correct amount, El Naschie's house in Surrey would cover it with a half million pounds to spare. That half million could perfectly cover the additional required lawyers fees. Go for it, Nature! Quickly, before he sells it and puts the dosh in German or Egyptian jurisdiction.
The older Cressey piece Nature Publishing Group wins long-running libel trial became a sockpuppet playground, and Nature shut down further comments.
There's a new Nature editorial too: Victory for responsible reporting.
French readers can check out Agence Science Presse's article by Ariel Fenster, Une victoire pour la liberté d’expression… scientifique
Out-law.com has Journal's 'responsible journalism' and story's 'public interest' undermine libel claim.
Arunn of Nanopolitan has a good blog post, El Naschie Update that gives due credit to El Naschie Watch, pleased that we re-hosted the John Baez material. Also on Nanopolitan, see Chronicles of Extreme Publishing posted by Abi, and the comments there.
Arunn's post concludes
May be now John Baez would write about why he removed his criticism from n-Category Cafe. May be he won't. We all move on.
Doubt it. Still, John Baez wrote to me on 14 May 2009
I will make it publicly available again if and when I feel I'm not under threat of a lawsuit.
If he does not restore the vanished material, perhaps he will explain why he is still in fear.
There are comments on this thread at Math 2.0, but none on this thread at sbseminar since the proprietor David Speyer thinks they would be "unpleasant and unproductive". If I recall correctly it was on sbseminar that I called Baez and Distler cowards way back when, so that's probably what he means. Ah, yes here it is in our February 2009 archive From Cairo with Love. And see Did Baez and Distler succumb to legal threats? which has details.
Disconcertingly, there has been no reporting on the judgment in the Arabic news media. Nor have El Naschie's several websites mentioned it in English or Arabic. On December 31, 2009, El Naschie told interviewer Ayman al-Hakim that he expects to win from Nature ten million pounds, and to have a front-page apology from them. As we see today, the outcome is different.
Traffic on this blog remains extremely high relative to our modest norm.