THE JERSEY GIRL MEGATHREAD

[_EAllusion]

When used to imply weak, I think the term 'pussy' is merely short slang for pusillanimous. I don't think its use came about as a gender snub.

I think you are right about etymology, but I think it holds onto its place in our language because of its gendered association. Our language is filled with similar expressions - throwing like a girl, crying like a bitch, etc. I think we've ended up with some cross-pollination of meaning. I'm sure there's a term for that.

[_Hades]

So Jersey Girl got into a fight with the mentally ill. What did she expect to come of that? Then she herself gets angry and throws a 3 year-old tantrum. She issues an ultimatum of legal action and begins the process of following through. She got the boot.

Personally, I think the ultimatum itself should have gotten her the boot. Who does that? Why not just close your browser and go back to the real world for 24 to 48 hours then come back to see what shook out? There's no need for 3 year-old tantrums and ultimatums. You're taking this crap way too seriously.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

I find it interesting that some people think a person shouldn't be banned for contacting the web host as a first step to initiate a legal action against the board... But God forbid someone is vulgar. <- Banned because it's the latter that creates a toxic posting environment? Crazy.

Frankly, if I have to choose between vulgarity, or running the risk of being sued over a hurt wussy I'd, obviously, choose the former.

Wow. Talk about a sense of skewed priorities... Just take a friggin' break from the Internet if you're getting bent out of shape. Sheesh.

- VRDRC

[_Yoda]

I find it interesting that some people think a person shouldn't be banned for contacting the web host as a first step to initiate a legal action against the board... But God forbid someone is vulgar. <- Banned because it's the latter that creates a toxic posting environment? Crazy.

Frankly, if I have to choose between vulgarity, or running the risk of being sued over a hurt wussy I'd, obviously, choose the former.

Wow. Talk about a sense of skewed priorities... Just take a friggin' break from the Internet if you're getting bent out of shape. Sheesh.

- VRDRC

Who has been banned for mere vulgarity? No one has been banned for that. Name me one poster who has been banned for that. Darrick was banned because he threatened physical violence to more than one poster. He had done that type of thing previously, and should have never been allowed to post here to begin with.

That is the only thing I really take issue with.

My purpose in answering questions here, and in posting on Jersey Girl's behalf has not been to try to reverse Shades' decision. I don't agree with Shades' decision, but I do respect it, and support it as his Moderator.

I can disagree with his decision, and stilll respect him as a person, and as an administrator. I want to make that very clear.

Jersey Girl has no desire to post here. She even requested that I block her IP so she can no longer READ here. I have accommodated her request.

All she wanted was her side of things known, and I accommodated that as well.

Everyone has a right to their own opinion of the events that occurred.

Everyone here knows my feeling on this issue. I stand by what I have written.

[_Alter Idem]

Shades is claiming Jersey Girl tried to sue him and his moderators.

Where's the proof of this?

Because she posted that the board would have a legal fight on their hands?

THAT is NOT a statement that she was planning to sue the board. It can mean different things, but it's not her fault Shades over-reacted and believed she intended to sue. Why he jumped to that conclusion, I have no clue--it's not even reasonable in my opinion. Jersey Girl has explained that she announced on the board that she was going to begin with a complaint to the webhost and that's what she says she set out to do. Once again, how he perceived 'sue' (or the others on this board thought 'sue', I don't know--even months ago when I read about it, I NEVER thought Jersey Girl planned to sue the board!), but she says she looked over the policies to see if her complaint met the criteria and she submitted an inquiry to find out.

Let's not forget what prompted this; a poster received in real life threats the night before, reported the posts in question, and the next day, saw that the reported posts had not been attended to in any fashion; the moderator showed no evidence that he intended to act on the reports, and wanted it over and done with. We find out later that the moderator's hands were tied by Shades' direction that no one should do anything about Darrick--he would make the decisions, but he wasn't around to deal with Darrick when he escalated and the moderator did not inform Jersey Girl that this was what he was waiting on. All she saw was that nothing was being done in 12 HOURS to deal with the threatening poster.

Jersey Girl says that she wanted Darrick off the board; his access, time and opportunity taken away from him so that he couldn't obsess and escalate further. During the approx. 12 hours which had passed with not action from moderators and with multiple calls for banning seeming ignored, and given Jersey Girl's fear that Darrick could find her location, Jersey Girl says she felt that time was of the essence.

Jersey Girl states that she used the resources that were available to her. She used the report button, she called for banning. Nothing worked. Then she engaged the moderator on the board, as did others. He showed no signs that he was going to act on the reports. Jersey Girl had a terrible tragedy in her own family where a crazed person escalated. It's not surprising that she didn't just let it go. So, with no protection offered by the board, she then used the next means available which was contacting the webhost.

Jersey Girl states emphatically that at no point did she threaten to sue Shades, the moderators or anyone else. She says that if she intended to sue, she would have used the word SUE. I believe her, she's not a person to mince words and because her actions showed she contacted the webhost and filed an inquiry, the facts support her version of events. If Shades wants to provide clear evidence to support his version of events, great. Supply it. Show us evidence that she was planning to SUE you, because her words DO NOT prove it. They support what happened. A 'legal fight' does not mean 'sue', it means a fight based on legalities--legalities are spelled out in the contractual agreement with the webhost.

And contacting the webhost is NOT suing. It is trying to get the webhost to force MD to remove a threatening/crackpot from the board. When SGW felt threatened by events on this board, he did the same thing--contacting the webhost. The board was taken down for a while, while they sorted out the complaint and then put back up. For those who keep harping that she wanted to take the board down; well, that would be part of what would happen while the webhost looked into it, but it would have been temporary--and it would have stopped Darrick from continuing his escalation. Shutting the board temporarily was not a banning offense, because SGW was NOT banned for doing it.

And who is more important? A message board or a person? Any MD poster who feels they or their family are in danger should NOT be afraid or intimidated to protect themselves; they should feel they have the right to contact the webhost, if the moderators ignore valid threats! The threatening poster had a documented history of stalking, this was not overreaction by JG--She knew what could happen when potential threats are glossed over or ignored.

Look, my whole point in continuing this argument is that Jersey Girl HAS BEEN maligned by Shades' version of events, claiming that she was trying to sue him--to harm him, his family and his moderators, which she denies strongly. She's been hurt by people pointedly ignoring the events which led up to her eventual banning. The facts which we know support her denials. Her posts and messages that have been used to claim she threatened to sue, do not prove that. They support her claims of what she wanted to do and what she did do. They do not support Shades' claims. I wanted the truth on record because she doesn't deserve this.

I know this will blow over and I'll get out of everyone's hair here, but not without at least trying to set the record straight for her--because she can't.

[_marg]

Alter Idem,

When Jersey Girl says: "if you don't have the f*****g spine to block this guy, EA, in favor of political correctness, you guys are gonna have a legal f*****g fight on your hands and I'll initiate it." what is it that she's saying she's initiating? Is she saying she's initiating a legal fight that Dreamhost is going to be involved in...against the board? Who do you think or understand her to be saying will be involved in a legal fight?

That legal fight she mentions she perceives will have financial consequence..as she says "Liability is a bitch, EA, and make no mistake about it".

My personal opinion was she was trying to strong arm EA or a mod to ban or temporarily block Darrick immediately..that she never intended to initiate anything which would result in legal ramifications. But that's my interpretation, it's not what she has said or acknowledged after the fact.

[_LDSToronto]

Shades is claiming Jersey Girl tried to sue him and his moderators.

Where's the proof of this?

Because she posted that the board would have a legal fight on their hands?

THAT is NOT a statement that she was planning to sue the board. It can mean different things, but it's not her fault Shades over-reacted and believed she intended to sue. Why he jumped to that conclusion, I have no clue--it's not even reasonable in my opinion. Jersey Girl has explained that she announced on the board that she was going to begin with a complaint to the webhost and that's what she says she set out to do. Once again, how he perceived 'sue' (or the others on this board thought 'sue', I don't know--even months ago when I read about it, I NEVER thought Jersey Girl planned to sue the board!), but she says she looked over the policies to see if her complaint met the criteria and she submitted an inquiry to find out.

Let's not forget what prompted this; a poster received in real life threats the night before, reported the posts in question, and the next day, saw that the reported posts had not been attended to in any fashion; the moderator showed no evidence that he intended to act on the reports, and wanted it over and done with. We find out later that the moderator's hands were tied by Shades' direction that no one should do anything about Darrick--he would make the decisions, but he wasn't around to deal with Darrick when he escalated and the moderator did not inform Jersey Girl that this was what he was waiting on. All she saw was that nothing was being done in 12 HOURS to deal with the threatening poster.

Jersey Girl says that she wanted Darrick off the board; his access, time and opportunity taken away from him so that he couldn't obsess and escalate further. During the approx. 12 hours which had passed with not action from moderators and with multiple calls for banning seeming ignored, and given Jersey Girl's fear that Darrick could find her location, Jersey Girl says she felt that time was of the essence.

Jersey Girl states that she used the resources that were available to her. She used the report button, she called for banning. Nothing worked. Then she engaged the moderator on the board, as did others. He showed no signs that he was going to act on the reports. Jersey Girl had a terrible tragedy in her own family where a crazed person escalated. It's not surprising that she didn't just let it go. So, with no protection offered by the board, she then used the next means available which was contacting the webhost.

Jersey Girl states emphatically that at no point did she threaten to sue Shades, the moderators or anyone else. She says that if she intended to sue, she would have used the word SUE. I believe her, she's not a person to mince words and because her actions showed she contacted the webhost and filed an inquiry, the facts support her version of events. If Shades wants to provide clear evidence to support his version of events, great. Supply it. Show us evidence that she was planning to SUE you, because her words DO NOT prove it. They support what happened. A 'legal fight' does not mean 'sue', it means a fight based on legalities--legalities are spelled out in the contractual agreement with the webhost.

And contacting the webhost is NOT suing. It is trying to get the webhost to force MD to remove a threatening/crackpot from the board. When SGW felt threatened by events on this board, he did the same thing--contacting the webhost. The board was taken down for a while, while they sorted out the complaint and then put back up. For those who keep harping that she wanted to take the board down; well, that would be part of what would happen while the webhost looked into it, but it would have been temporary--and it would have stopped Darrick from continuing his escalation. Shutting the board temporarily was not a banning offense, because SGW was NOT banned for doing it.

And who is more important? A message board or a person? Any MD poster who feels they or their family are in danger should NOT be afraid or intimidated to protect themselves; they should feel they have the right to contact the webhost, if the moderators ignore valid threats! The threatening poster had a documented history of stalking, this was not overreaction by JG--She knew what could happen when potential threats are glossed over or ignored.

Look, my whole point in continuing this argument is that Jersey Girl HAS BEEN maligned by Shades' version of events, claiming that she was trying to sue him--to harm him, his family and his moderators, which she denies strongly. She's been hurt by people pointedly ignoring the events which led up to her eventual banning. The facts which we know support her denials. Her posts and messages that have been used to claim she threatened to sue, do not prove that. They support her claims of what she wanted to do and what she did do. They do not support Shades' claims. I wanted the truth on record because she doesn't deserve this.

I know this will blow over and I'll get out of everyone's hair here, but not without at least trying to set the record straight for her--because she can't.

Aside from you and Liz, I don't think anyone else cares much about this issue anymore, now that the facts are out and Jersey Girl is no longer reading the board or responding. My work in this thread is done.

H.

[_marg]

Aside from you and Liz, I don't think anyone else cares much about this issue anymore, now that the facts are out and Jersey Girl is no longer reading the board or responding. My work in this thread is done.

H.

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.

[Tator]

Alter Idem,

When Jersey Girl says: "if you don't have the f*****g spine to block this guy, EA, in favor of political correctness, you guys are gonna have a legal f*****g fight on your hands and I'll initiate it." what is it that she's saying she's initiating? Is she saying she's initiating a legal fight that Dreamhost is going to be involved in...against the board? Who do you think or understand her to be saying will be involved in a legal fight?

That legal fight she mentions she perceives will have financial consequence..as she says "Liability is a bitch, EA, and make no mistake about it".

My personal opinion was she was trying to strong arm EA or a mod to ban or temporarily block Darrick immediately..that she never intended to initiate anything which would result in legal ramifications. But that's my interpretation, it's not what she has said or acknowledged after the fact.

I think that she was turning it over to dreamhost. She had no idea what they would do with it, but I do think she must have thought some sort of legal action was at least a possibility. People have been using the word "sue" as a substitute for "engage in legal action against."

You know when an abusive husband slaps his wife, then later claims he didn't mean it? My view is that he absolutely meant it in the heat of the moment, but now regrets his behavior and wishes he didn't mean it. Maybe his emotions overwhelmed his better judgement and if he was thinking more clearly he wouldn't have done that. Not intending to make a legal threat would've been something like using a poor choice of words that misled people into thinking you meant something you didn't. I don't think that happened here. Jersey Girl intended to make a legal threat in the moment, then maybe later wished she didn't. Sure, she might've been overwhelmed by intense emotion and said something she otherwise wouldn't have, but that doesn't change what happened and you'd have to consider the fact that she's susceptible to doing that.

See above. I think that she never meant to imply that she, herself, was going to engage in legal action against the mods, but rather that she was turning it over to dreamhost, and that may have been one possible outcome she imagined.

In terms of the effect on the mods, if that had happened (which I know was not possible, but if), it would have been the same as if she personally engaged in the legal action. So I'm not saying this difference would or should have modified Shade's response, but I think the differentiation may be why Jersey Girl insists she never said or meant to imply that she, personally, was going to engage in legal action.

I asked her specifically about this, and she said that she really didn't know what dreamhost would do. But I can't help but think that legal action was one consequence she imagined possible, otherwise her words don't make much sense.

Shades is claiming Jersey Girl tried to sue him and his moderators.

Where's the proof of this?

Because she posted that the board would have a legal fight on their hands?

THAT is NOT a statement that she was planning to sue the board. It can mean different things, but it's not her fault Shades over-reacted and believed she intended to sue. Why he jumped to that conclusion, I have no clue--it's not even reasonable in my opinion. Jersey Girl has explained that she announced on the board that she was going to begin with a complaint to the webhost and that's what she says she set out to do. Once again, how he perceived 'sue' (or the others on this board thought 'sue', I don't know--even months ago when I read about it, I NEVER thought Jersey Girl planned to sue the board!), but she says she looked over the policies to see if her complaint met the criteria and she submitted an inquiry to find out.

I have to object to this, A.I.. It is most certainly a reasonable interpretation of her words. In fact, it's the most reasonable. It took me a long time, many rereadings, and many questions to be able to understand a different possible interpretation.

"Met the criteria" for what, by the way?

Look, I want posters to be fair to Jersey Girl in this, but I also want posters to be fair to Shades and EA. They weren't smoking crack, hallucinating, or deviously putting words in Jersey Girl's mouth when they say she threatened to take legal action against them. I think it's important to recognize and concede that point if you hope that the rest of your points will be taken seriously.

[_Ceeboo]

Hey LDST,

And Ceeboo can suck it.

H.

Hmph!
That's the first time I have had that specefic act offered to me on these boards.

Anyway, here is where I am with all of this(for what it's worth)

I hope that Shades and Jersey Girl can find and extend each other the space (perhaps a mutual benefit of the doubt and/or truce) required to repair their many-year investment they once shared on these discussion boards. After all, if you consider the countless contributions (by both human beings) that have been made over the many years, it would seem that this one debacle should be measured against all that is outside of it, in my opinion.

To be crystal clear:

I like Shades and Jersey Girl a lot.

I have enjoyed both of them on these boards.

It saddens me to have seen this happen and continue as it has.

I do not care about the Jersey Girl banning (decided and done)

I do indeed care about both of them and find little value for Jersey Girl, Shades, and/or any of us posters to continue adding fuel to this personal and raging fire. (Hoping a hero might arrive soon with several buckets of water)

Just my take!

Peace,
Ceeboo