THE JERSEY GIRL MEGATHREAD

[_EAllusion]

If you are curious about the timeline, the heated exchanges between Darrick and others occurred sometime during the previous night. I logged on around what was 6:30am my time and saw several dozen independent reports. No joke. They were with respect to a couple of lengthy threads, so I slogged through those and sequestered posts to their appropriate forums dealing with the reports in a row. The most serious issue was Darrick speculating on MCB's in real life identity in a creepy way. Granted, he was drastically off and only seemed to connect the in real life person based on a loose connection to Mormonism and the same initials, but I erased that post. All in all, this took me quite some time. Right around the time I was finishing this, LDST started his boycott thread that you can read where Jersey Girl chimes in. The 12 hour wait that keeps getting mentioned is in reference to the time where no mods were on. From there, what happened is discussed in this thread.

Regarding A.I.'s argument that doesn't make much sense in light of this PM of Jersey Girl's

Okay, I appreciate it. I'm looking at the DreamHost website and terms of service. According to their contract, Mav is fully liable for what goes on here and what Darrick has done is against their "Acceptable Use Policy". That is, assuming that making threats is,

"Also, using DreamHost’s servers or network to conspire to commit or support the commission of illegal activities is forbidden as well."

and

"Collecting or using email addresses, screen names or other personal identifiers without the consent of the person identified (including, without limitation, phishing, Internet scamming, password robbery, spidering, and harvesting)."

DreamHost incurs no liability whatsoever.

Jersey Girl seemed to think that what Darrick was doing on this board was criminal - in fact she still seems to think that - and that the board admin here are legally liable for that behavior, and thus open to some sort of penalty. This is all nonsense on stilts, but that's what seems to best explain what she was saying at the time. If she was using legal lingo simply to refer to the fact that Dreamhost would investigate the matter in a nonlegal way and perhaps temporarily shut down the board, why on earth is she writing what I quoted above? She made some empty legal threats based on poor understanding of the law in order to prompt mod behavior. She gave an outline for initiating legal action and actually took the first step in that outline. That's probably as far as it was going to go, but that step, as she fully understood, could've threatened this board's existence. I think this is fairly plain from her words.

[_EAllusion]

I discuss this more at length in the mod forum thread, but it bears mentioning that blocking Darrick's IP would do little to nothing to deter him from driving to someone's house wearing lipstick and carrying a shotgun. IP bans are easily got around. Since a sizeable % of posters here are so banned from MADB and still access it, I'm sure that's known. But even more to the point, if someone has the ability to hunt you down personally merely from accessing this board, then it's overwhelmingly likely that a mere IP ban isn't a significant barrier to them. An IP ban is meant to discourage further posting and interest. That's something we wanted to do in Darrick's case, but waiting a few hours to make that decision wasn't making anyone appreciably more at risk. Now, I understand if someone isn't thinking rationally about this in the moment, but we have to take into account what people do when they aren't thinking rationally.

[_marg]

marg, you are saying that Jersey Girl's threat of legal action was just an idle threat? If you are EA and Shades, do you bank on such an assumption, particularly when the preliminary steps, contacting DreamHost, were actually taken by Jersey Girl? The legal action that was threatened was something that Jersey Girl could initiate on her own, not requiring EA's or Shades' consent.

Idle or not, the threat was a bullying tactic. I think the response was appropriate, whether the threat was idle or not. Shades did what was within his power, he banned the poster making the legal threats.

I've said I think what Jersey Girl said is not what she intended but I also said that was my opinion only and that clarification on that would need to come from Jersey Girl. I do think as you do that her words indicated a threat which was meant as a bullying tactic. Given what Jersey Girl said and how her actions could or would reasonably be interpreted..I agree Shades acted justifiably.

The reason I posted today was in response to Alter Idem, who is still concerned that Jersey Girl is being unreasonably misinterpreted. But what I'm saying is that it is up to Jersey Girl to explain if that is the case..and I don't think she's done so, so far. If she's not interested that's her choice.

[_LDSToronto]

Hey moron, you don't need to copy Alter Idem's long post..in order to respond with 2 lines. And if your work is done...then piss off.

Oooooh, the lengthy-quote-burn! Hey marg, I know words (reading, writing, hell, probably arithmetic, too) aren't your strong suit, so my apologies for putting so many in front of you. Must have been really confusing.

Maybe liz can write some porn about me getting spanked by the board idiot. Then you can really have a good wank, marg!

H.

[_Shulem]

Maybe liz can write some porn about me getting spanked by the board idiot. Then you can really have a good wank, marg!

H.

I want to watch.

On a serious note, it's painful to read the convoluted thinking contained in Alter Idem's posts. Therein lies only half a brain, folks.

And Jersey Girl sure is stubborn. She should listen to advice of Marg and Beastie. Pretty much all Jersey Girl is going to be remembered for is how STUBBORN she is.

Paul O

[_Alter Idem]

I've said I think what Jersey Girl said is not what she intended but I also said that was my opinion only and that clarification on that would need to come from Jersey Girl. I do think as you do that her words indicated a threat which was meant as a bullying tactic. Given what Jersey Girl said and how her actions could or would reasonably be interpreted..I agree Shades acted justifiably.

The reason I posted today was in response to Alter Idem, who is still concerned that Jersey Girl is being unreasonably misinterpreted. But what I'm saying is that it is up to Jersey Girl to explain if that is the case..and I don't think she's done so, so far. If she's not interested that's her choice.

This is the problem. She can't post here because she is banned. She can't give her side of the story. I've tried to explain what I understand, but clearly it's not good enough.

I still think that most have ignored a telling bit of evidence. Jersey Girl was initially banned, then she was unbanned for a while. That in itself is something that to me shows that Shades was not sure of her intentions--as he seems to be now. You can all ignore this, but to me it speaks volumes. If people would look at her actions and not just pick apart words in a post, her intentions would be clear, in my opinion. I've tried to explain it in a clear and concise way, giving evidence as well, but I can't keep writing the same things over and over again.

My purpose for posting on this subject was to make sure that Shades' version did not stand unchallenged. Jersey Girl didn't deserve to be maligned this way and I think I've done that.

I'm also putting in writing a warning to posters that Shades puts his own and the board's interest first and foremost and posters' safety and concerns second. It is a part of the risk we take when we choose to post here and newbies should be aware of it. It seems posters have no redress if they find themselves at odds with the board owners, because if they go over their heads and contact the webhost, they will be banned.

[_Shulem]

I'm also putting in writing a warning to posters that Shades puts his own and the board's interest first and foremost and posters' safety and concerns second. It is a part of the risk we take when we choose to post here and newbies should be aware of it. It seems posters have no redress if they find themselves at odds with the board owners, because if they go over their heads and contact the webhost, they will be banned.

Now the other side of your brain isn't thinking. It seems that nothing about you works properly except your mouth. Shut the hell up already! Jesus Christ suffering on a cross -- shut up!

You, Alter Idem, are going on ignore. I never want to read such foolish ramblings again. I blame myself for not putting you on ignore earlier. I was so stupid!

Paul O

[_Alter Idem]

In answer to a query in Marg's recent post;

Jersey Girl did not act as if she was truly concerned about her or her family's well being. If she was truly concerned it would have been in her best interest to back off from the discussion and encourage others to do so.

Jersey Girl said this:

I DID! That is EXACTLY what I did and THAT'S EXACTLY when Darrick turned his sights on me!

Search on the phrase "admin chips fall where they may"

That phrase will show up in my exchanges with Darrick and on the BLOODY STATEMENT THAT I SENT TO SHADES WHICH IS POSTED ON THE VERY THREAD YOU FOLKS ARE POSTING AWAY ON.

[_Alter Idem]

I'm also putting in writing a warning to posters that Shades puts his own and the board's interest first and foremost and posters' safety and concerns second. It is a part of the risk we take when we choose to post here and newbies should be aware of it. It seems posters have no redress if they find themselves at odds with the board owners, because if they go over their heads and contact the webhost, they will be banned.

Now the other side of your brain isn't thinking. It seems that nothing about you works properly except your mouth. Shut the hell up already! Jesus Christ suffering on a cross -- shut up!

You, Alter Idem, are going on ignore. I never want to read such foolish ramblings again. I blame myself for not putting you on ignore earlier. I was so stupid!

Paul O

Paul, don't worry about it, I think I'm done. Good bye.

[_Yoda]

I've said I think what Jersey Girl said is not what she intended but I also said that was my opinion only and that clarification on that would need to come from Jersey Girl. I do think as you do that her words indicated a threat which was meant as a bullying tactic. Given what Jersey Girl said and how her actions could or would reasonably be interpreted..I agree Shades acted justifiably.

The reason I posted today was in response to Alter Idem, who is still concerned that Jersey Girl is being unreasonably misinterpreted. But what I'm saying is that it is up to Jersey Girl to explain if that is the case..and I don't think she's done so, so far. If she's not interested that's her choice.

This is the problem. She can't post here because she is banned. She can't give her side of the story. I've tried to explain what I understand, but clearly it's not good enough.

I still think that most have ignored a telling bit of evidence. Jersey Girl was initially banned, then she was unbanned for a while. That in itself is something that to me shows that Shades was not sure of her intentions--as he seems to be now. You can all ignore this, but to me it speaks volumes. If people would look at her actions and not just pick apart words in a post, her intentions would be clear, in my opinion. I've tried to explain it in a clear and concise way, giving evidence as well, but I can't keep writing the same things over and over again.

My purpose for posting on this subject was to make sure that Shades' version did not stand unchallenged. Jersey Girl didn't deserve to be maligned this way and I think I've done that.

I'm also putting in writing a warning to posters that Shades puts his own and the board's interest first and foremost and posters' safety and concerns second. It is a part of the risk we take when we choose to post here and newbies should be aware of it. It seems posters have no redress if they find themselves at odds with the board owners, because if they go over their heads and contact the webhost, they will be banned.

Alter--

Your assessments, as well as Beastie's are spot-on. I will also add that everyone here immediately assumes that when Jersey Girl referred to legal action, she was referring to suing Shades and the Moderators for a monetary sum.

If you read the context of her concerns, that is clearly not the case. She also corresponded with Shades, and further confirmed this.

There are a few more facts here that cannot be dissected from her posts alone.

1. Jersey Girl, having been friends with Shades for quite a few years, and also because she served on the Moderating Team here for a while, was very much aware that Shades is NOT the owner of MDB. That's right folks. He is the founder, but not the owner. His friends, Mav and Keene hold the purse strings for MDB.

2. Jersey Girl's number one concern was getting Darrick off the board so that he could not continue to try to gather in real life information on posters, and further harm other posters, including Jersey Girl, herself.

Any type of legal action she was attempting to put into place would involve two things:

1. Getting Darrick permanently banned from the board.

OR

2. If Darrick was not permanently banned, getting the board shut down until he WAS permanently banned.

Shades, in his own words, has indicated that he has no problem with posters attempting to take the board down. There is evidence supporting his view this way since SWG, who actually took the board down for 24 hours was still allowed to continue to post.

So, if Shades' honest reason for banning Jersey Girl was that she was threatening to sue him personally, and the other Moderators personally, then he completely fell short in his assumptions.

Based on the extemporary evidence surrounding his long friendship with her, as well as her correspondence with him, I think it is pretty clear that she was NOT intending to sue Shades, or the other Moderators. Her intent was to pursue legal measures to remove Darrick from the board. The extreme consequence of this legal action would include taking down the board. However, this is a far cry from suing people who she considers her friends for money.