1. Post what he sent you so we can see if you were validy notified.

2. I assume what you received was the paperwork for you to waive service. Since you don't have the money to play games, you should waive service so you have the 60 days to answer.

3. You obviously want to challenge the court's personal jurisdiction, since failure to do so can waive your right to do so later. You also want to argue that the complaint fails to state a claim. this is trickier, because while strict pleading is needned for personal jusrisdiction with conspiracy, it looks like notice pleading is sufficient to state a claim. While you can demonstrate that most of the laws he cites don't apply, there might be a possible set of facts under which 42 USC 1985 woud apply, and as a pro se, I believe that as long as he alleges acts that are actionable, he can get away with citing the wrong laws.

4. All he has to say about you is in paragraph 69.

If we omit what isn't actionable we get:

"IP-Wars.net posted stories and content stating Merkey worked for SCO and was a drug addict, advocating his murder, and [posted] contents that invaded his privacy."

So you want to state this in your motion.

5) You want to get the EFF's boilerplate concerning the protections that sites have that don't actively edit their contents, and you want to attach your cite policy as an exhibit with an affidavit as to its authenticity and include all the versions of it that were posted, with their dates. This is your best defense, because it works against most allegations concerning regardless
of their nature. This won't work, unfortunately for anything you posted yourself, or that your co-conspirators posted, but in that case we're back to conspiracy, and the rules are different.

6. You need legal advice about how nonspecific notice pleading can be in these circumstances. it can be pretty vague, but there may be limits. A key case cited is American Nurses Association v. Illinois, but it's a 1976 decision, and I can't find it on line. The gist seems to be that there is no need to allege any facts whatsoever in notice pleading or even be clear or make a claim under the correct law, provided there is some possible set of facts under which a claim is stated. There is also law that says that in pro se cases if the judge can invent a legal basis on which the claims should not be dismissed, then he should do so, since the plaintiff is not a lawyer and can't be expected to get it right.

7. Note that his allegations exist independent of the conspiracy.

8. If you answer the complaint, you have more options, but it's a risky approach, and I can't recommend it. Obviously, if you do, you can make counterclaims and drown him in interrogatories and other discovery requests, but the problem is that the venue is Utah. If you answer, I don't know what the chances are for a change of venue, but I'm guessing not very good.