Westridge & Other Schools(Formerly LDS Perceptions thread)

[_Jersey Girl]

What it says about you, Eric, is that the link you supplied means absolutely jack s*** nothing.

It could. Or it could say that you are too stupid to realize that courthousenews.com is a service you must sign up - and PAY FOR - to access their archives.

Seriously. If you would have just clicked "search" once you would have found that out for yourself.

You're supposed to be supplying the information, Eric, not me. You wrote the summary, you posted a link which you now (after how many posts?) tell me cannot be used.

It's not my place to "realize" anything. It's YOUR place to come forth with the information and not send people on a wild goose chase.

Is this how you, a self described researcher, provides documentation?

You may as well have written a report on the Viet Nam War and threw a library card down on my desk and said "Here, go find the sources yourself".

[_Jersey Girl]

No part of me is kidding, Eric. The link you supplied under your summary, shows me NOTHING that supports the summary.

I never said it would. This is why, folks, this is why...

You never said it would? Then why did you USE it? You're a self described former researcher, now writer. Who is supposed to be transmitting the information, Eric? The reader or the writer?

[_GoodK]

You're supposed to be supplying the information, Eric, not me. You wrote the summary, you posted a link which you now (after how many posts?) tell me cannot be used.

It's not my place to "realize" anything. It's YOUR place to come forth with the information and not send people on a wild goose chase.

Is this how you, a self described researcher, provides documentation?

You may as well have written a report on the Viet Nam War and threw a library card down on my desk and said "Here, go find the sources yourself".

I am supplying the information, dummy. Holy crap. I never said, "click the link of the citation at the end of my summary to find out more." Why would I write a summary, if I could just link to the article for free?

In fact, I explicitly told you that I had to purchase the court records myself. I then explicitly supplied case numbers when challenged. I said "you can purchase them yourself" didn't I? Do you remember that?

I linked to my own summary for a very peculiar reason -- because I knew the information wasn't publicly available for free! Jesus Christ.

I don't know how much more descriptive I can get, I supplied the first and last names of both plaintiffs, the case numbers, the defendants names, my own personal summary.

Give it up, Jersey Girl. You're not going to "get me" on anything here. I've done way too much homework.

This has been an epic fail on your part, and an epic waste of time on mine.

But thanks for demonstrating why I don't take your "expertise" very seriously, and call your posts what they are. I was beginning to worry that others would feel I was being irrational.

[_Jersey Girl]

You may as well have written a report on the Viet Nam War and threw a library card down on my desk and said "Here, go find the sources yourself".

It could. Or it could say that you are too stupid or lazy to realize that courthousenews.com is a service you must sign up and PAY FOR to access their archives.

Seriously. If you would have just clicked "search" once you would have found that out for yourself.

Go ahead. Find out for yourself.

And there it is.

[_GoodK]

And there it is.

Yeah... okay.


(I'd be embarrassed too, if I were you. Hey, at least you're anonymous.)

Actually, here it is:

This has gone on long enough. I can't bring myself to entertain any more of it. Hopefully Liz and others will understand why I absolutely disregard Jersey Girl's "expert opinions" after reading this post, why I call her posts what they are. That's all I can really hope for. Most of what she says can be verifiably falsified within this long thread of posts.

[_Jersey Girl]

Eric: I am supplying the information, dummy. Holy crap. I never said, "click the link of the citation at the end of my summary to find out more." Why would I write a summary, if I could just link to the article for free.

Jersey Girl: To document your freaking summary.

Eric: In fact, I explicitly told you that I had to purchase the court records myself. I then explicitly supplied case numbers when challenged. I said "you can purchase them yourself" didn't I? Do you remember that?

Jersey Girl: Yup.

Eric: I linked to my own summary for a very peculiar reason -- because I knew the information wasn't publicly available for free! Jesus Christ.

Jersey Girl: The link at the bottom of your summary has nothing to do with your summary. You may think it very charitable of yourself to provide a summary, however, there is no way to verify it.

Eric: I don't know how much more descriptive I can get, I supplied the first and last names of both plaintiffs, the case numbers, the defendants names, my own personal summary.

Jersey Girl: I don't dispute the above, except for your unverified summary. Had you had a link to the courthouse article, THAT would have provided verification.

Eric: Give it up, Jersey Girl. You're not going to "get me" on anything here. I've done way too much homework.

Jersey Girl: Where is the date of and who are the boys in the photographic image you used in your youtube video?

No place.

Where is the can of Deseret sausage located that proves Deseret food was in the kitchen at West Ridge?

No place.

What am I supposed to find out by using the link below your summary?

Nothing.

How do I know your summary is accurate?

I don't.

Eric: This has been an epic fail on your part, and an epic waste of time on mine.

Jersey Girl: Right.

[_Jersey Girl]

And there it is.

Yeah... okay.


(I'd be embarrassed too, if I were you. Hey, at least you're anonymous.)

Actually, here it is:

This has gone on long enough. I can't bring myself to entertain any more of it. Hopefully Liz and others will understand why I absolutely disregard Jersey Girl's "expert opinions" after reading this post, why I call her posts what they are. That's all I can really hope for. Most of what she says can be verifiably falsified within this long thread of posts.

That has nothing to do with the above. It's a total cop-out on your part.

[_GoodK]

It's a total cop-out on your part.

What chutzpah!

The link at the bottom of your summary has nothing to do with your summary. You may think it very charitable of yourself to provide a summary, however, there is no way to verify it.

Actually, there is. Pay to access the records yourself. I even gave you case numbers.

[_Jersey Girl]

What chutzpah!

You got something right.

Now tell me:

Where is the current dated link to the Executive Committee at West Ridge?

Who and where are the boys in your photographic image?

When was the photo taken?

Are they boys?

Where is the can of Deseret Sausage located?

What is your verification of your summary and especially your description of the outcome of the cases for your website readers?

Bonus Question: What is West Ridge Academy officially licensed as?


.

[_GoodK]

You got something right.

So far, I'm batting 100.

I'll be responding to JAK next, so you'll have to wait.