Response To Criticism and the Road Ahead

[_dblagent007]

Ultimately, GoodK, I think the question that needs to be answered in all this is what your endgame is? What is the "road ahead"?

It probably should be obvious by now, but Eric's endgame is to cause pain to DCP and Bob. It's pretty simple. He is sort of like a wounded animal that wants to lash out at.

Attorneys see this stuff all the time. Emotions get involved that cloud out rational thinking and the next thing you know, the lawyers are rich. Eventually, both sides will give up and walk away - a lot poorer.

[_dblagent007]

I cannot let him have my house and my life savings, Inconceivable. I have a wife and children.

You don't have to worry about GoodK taking your house because his case sucks. As for your attorney taking your house and life savings, well that's another story.

[_harmony]

Look, I like Eric, and I think that he's been treated very poorly by DCP and crocket. I think that threatening, hinting, or even outright contacting real life family members about posts on this board is in very poor taste, and on many boards would merit an immediate banning.

But I am having a very difficult time understanding the fundamental difference between Eric's "addiction" post about DCP, and DCP's post about Eric. Can someone explain this to me?

I see no difference. None. Which is no doubt why I'm not an attorney.

[_Pokatator]

Look, I like Eric, and I think that he's been treated very poorly by DCP and crocket. I think that threatening, hinting, or even outright contacting real life family members about posts on this board is in very poor taste, and on many boards would merit an immediate banning.

But I am having a very difficult time understanding the fundamental difference between Eric's "addiction" post about DCP, and DCP's post about Eric. Can someone explain this to me?

Good question Beastie, I can't explain it! That has been my point. Kettle/Black. I just can't stand it that DCP thinks he is so innocent.

DCP just wrote

Other than that, I'm done. I deny any and all wrongdoing, and deny feeling even the slightest malice toward GoodK. Even now.

But no apology, I have trouble believing there is any sincerity in that post.

[_Pokatator]

It probably should be obvious by now, but Eric's endgame is to cause pain to DCP and Bob.

Same endgame that DCP and Bob have been doing to Eric.

It's pretty simple. He is sort of like a wounded animal that wants to lash out at.

....lash out at its tormentors.

Attorneys see this stuff all the time. Emotions get involved that cloud out rational thinking and the next thing you know, the lawyers are rich. Eventually, both sides will give up and walk away - a lot poorer.

I totally agree apologies are in order. Problem is both want that to be a one-way street.

[_harmony]

Look, I like Eric, and I think that he's been treated very poorly by DCP and crocket. I think that threatening, hinting, or even outright contacting real life family members about posts on this board is in very poor taste, and on many boards would merit an immediate banning.

But I am having a very difficult time understanding the fundamental difference between Eric's "addiction" post about DCP, and DCP's post about Eric. Can someone explain this to me?

Good question Beastie, I can't explain it! That has been my point. Kettle/Black. I just can't stand it that DCP thinks he is so innocent.

DCP just wrote

Other than that, I'm done. I deny any and all wrongdoing, and deny feeling even the slightest malice toward GoodK. Even now.

But no apology, I have trouble believing there is any sincerity in that post.

Perhaps it matters who is the aggressor, off the board.

For my part, if you can't take it, don't dish it. GoodK started this whole mess with his initial post about his sister. It's escalated from that.

[_Ray A]

But I am having a very difficult time understanding the fundamental difference between Eric's "addiction" post about DCP, and DCP's post about Eric. Can someone explain this to me?

I think the legal eagles will have to work that out, but here's my perspective. I thought DCP's first post was serious, because he knows Eric's step-dad very well, and I thought this may have been "inside information", and that DCP wanted to finally "burst the bubble". It did momentarily shake me and make me wonder if my support of Eric may have been misguided, until the clarification came. When it did come, my estimation of Eric actually grew stronger, those accusations out of the way, but that's just my perspective. I could see how it would have been extremely offensive to Eric. I think DCP was also trying to demonstrate how he has been subjected to "Scratch's lies", in an indirect way.

Eric's counter-post was more obviously a counter-parody, but still somewhat persuasive, initially. I'm not sure how the lawyers will deal with this.

I should also point out that for anyone interested in visiting Eric's forum, you'll see former staff of UBR posting there, and virtually verifying (though not always agreeing) everything that Eric and others who were abused have been saying.

[_harmony]

I should also point out that for anyone interested in visiting Eric's forum, you'll see former staff of UBR posting there, and virtually verifying (though not always agreeing) everything that Eric and others who were abused have been saying.

I'm not seeing a connection between UBR and this lawsuit.

[_Pokatator]

Harmony: You have a point about aggression I hadn't thought of, but Eric would think DCP struck "off the board" first and was the aggressor first. Impasse.

They say time heals all wounds, but I don't know who "they" are.


edited because I totally screwed it up...twice

Make that three times, my fingers are cramping and I'll give it a rest

[_Alter Idem]

Look, I like Eric, and I think that he's been treated very poorly by DCP and crocket. I think that threatening, hinting, or even outright contacting real life family members about posts on this board is in very poor taste, and on many boards would merit an immediate banning.

But I am having a very difficult time understanding the fundamental difference between Eric's "addiction" post about DCP, and DCP's post about Eric. Can someone explain this to me?

I agree that the actions by these posters could easily have gotten them banned on other boards--as I see it, it is harrassment. Also, I thought there was a rule against posting private information on this board too...but I did not see it in the guidelines.

As for this ongoing fight, I know about Goodk's posting a family email that had been sent to him and then rrocket and DCP getting involved--because they knew the people who were being discussed and so it escalated with posters taking sides...and what was it? A year ago? It's hard to believe we are STILL discussing this!

I don't know what Goodk's been posting against DCP to turn this into another war of words. In general, I don't read his threads.

My concern is that this stuff hurts the board atmosphere. Even as I posted my own thoughts I thought a couple of times if I really wanted to take a stand--because I'm not sure I want Goodk putting me on his enemies list.

I think it would be best for the board if all involved would back off and not threaten to get the law involved. If not, you all can do what you want, but I'll probably make myself even scarcer than I already am around here, cause it's just not worth it if posters are going to find that threatening a lawsuit is the way to gain the upper hand in a debate.