golfmom
Former Member
PrayersForMaura said:
:waitasec: I know that MrAG blogs are not traditional main-stream media, but I've always viewed them along the lines of editorials. Sort of like what Bob Greene used to do.
General Discussions #5
- Thread starter Timex
- Start date
- Status
:waitasec: I know that MrAG blogs are not traditional main-stream media, but I've always viewed them along the lines of editorials. Sort of like what Bob Greene used to do.
OriginalJerseyGirl
CERTIFIED FLYERS FANATIC!
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2005
- Messages
- 7,203
- Reaction score
- 19
Right back atcha, GM! :blowkiss:golfmom said:
cappuccina
Former Member
and the time, effort, and intelligent thought that goes into it...
Timex, here's what I don't understand...you come off lots of times as being annoyed, and overly rigid about information and the way it is posted on this board...This is an INTERNET FORUM, and we have freedom of speech and expression. Frankly, the ONLY things that can be regulated on this board are:
1. Remarks that cross the line from speech to action (a la the Supreme Court decisions on this);
2. Remarks that qualify as "hate" speech or threats- again because they have been determined to be "beyond speech" and thus out of the realm of "normal" freedom of speech; and
3. Things that violate WS terms of service, like posting another poster's personal info., etc.
You can think of it as a large coffeehouse where different conversations are going on about different topics at different tables. If I say to my friend, for example: " You know, I was told XXXXX about something; I don't know if it's true or not, and I cannot reveal my source, because my source is uncomfortable about coming forward"....THIS STATEMENT IS JUST NOT "CENSORABLE" SPEECH...It's just not, OK? It may bug you, you may not like it, but you should not censor it...I also cannot censor you trying to censor it, but I can tell you what I think about it...(is everyone writing this down, LOL)
What is your agenda here? I didn't want to come out and say this, but why be snarky to people who are VOLUNTEERING thier time, energy and intelligence to help solve a crime? They are not doing anything wrong. I have seen very little on the Janet Abaroa board that has violated any of the tenets I've listed above, with the exception of AutumnBorn's little diatribe. We don't ned to me micromanaged; we are a very civilized group of pople, if you ask me...
Something that comes to mind is instead of being envious of some of the greatly talented people we have here, why not learn from them instead...I know I am taking advantage of having people like Mr. A. here; I learn new things from him all the time, and appreciate his gifts and insights related to the human condition, as well as sleuthing and writing...I appreciate the time that others give to this and related causes that I cannot...I appreciate golfmom's intellectual quickenss and ability to "juggle the hundreds of balls that are in the air on this", NCBankers willingness to be a gentleman and share all kinds of information, SES's thouroughness and logic, EI's humor and insight, etc., etc.
...just my opinion...
Timex, here's what I don't understand...you come off lots of times as being annoyed, and overly rigid about information and the way it is posted on this board...This is an INTERNET FORUM, and we have freedom of speech and expression. Frankly, the ONLY things that can be regulated on this board are:
1. Remarks that cross the line from speech to action (a la the Supreme Court decisions on this);
2. Remarks that qualify as "hate" speech or threats- again because they have been determined to be "beyond speech" and thus out of the realm of "normal" freedom of speech; and
3. Things that violate WS terms of service, like posting another poster's personal info., etc.
You can think of it as a large coffeehouse where different conversations are going on about different topics at different tables. If I say to my friend, for example: " You know, I was told XXXXX about something; I don't know if it's true or not, and I cannot reveal my source, because my source is uncomfortable about coming forward"....THIS STATEMENT IS JUST NOT "CENSORABLE" SPEECH...It's just not, OK? It may bug you, you may not like it, but you should not censor it...I also cannot censor you trying to censor it, but I can tell you what I think about it...(is everyone writing this down, LOL)
What is your agenda here? I didn't want to come out and say this, but why be snarky to people who are VOLUNTEERING thier time, energy and intelligence to help solve a crime? They are not doing anything wrong. I have seen very little on the Janet Abaroa board that has violated any of the tenets I've listed above, with the exception of AutumnBorn's little diatribe. We don't ned to me micromanaged; we are a very civilized group of pople, if you ask me...
Something that comes to mind is instead of being envious of some of the greatly talented people we have here, why not learn from them instead...I know I am taking advantage of having people like Mr. A. here; I learn new things from him all the time, and appreciate his gifts and insights related to the human condition, as well as sleuthing and writing...I appreciate the time that others give to this and related causes that I cannot...I appreciate golfmom's intellectual quickenss and ability to "juggle the hundreds of balls that are in the air on this", NCBankers willingness to be a gentleman and share all kinds of information, SES's thouroughness and logic, EI's humor and insight, etc., etc.
...just my opinion...
golfmom
Former Member
Just to add PFM organizational abilities!
Madness and Chaos I tell you without her it would all be Madness and Chaos!
Madness and Chaos I tell you without her it would all be Madness and Chaos!
cappuccina
Former Member
I did not mean to leave her out; my brain is fried in this heat today...
OriginalJerseyGirl
CERTIFIED FLYERS FANATIC!
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2005
- Messages
- 7,203
- Reaction score
- 19
And the first-hand insight of Hummingbird, Newkid, Moxie, Munch, Rooster, Family_friend, Roddick, Juliagoulia ... whom I thank from the bottom of my heart for sharing their knowledge in spite of their pain. :blowkiss: (This of course also applies to anyone that I may have missed.)
ETA: We could never have come this far without those of you that knew Janet. I hope & pray that you will all get to see justice for Janet.
ETA: We could never have come this far without those of you that knew Janet. I hope & pray that you will all get to see justice for Janet.
cappuccina
Former Member
...what I mean, EVERYONE HAS SOMETHING TO CONTRIBUTE HERE...and we are a pretty civilized group...
I was not trying to leave anyone out; I was just trying to get my point across quickly...I'm typing with no air conditioning right now in 90 degree heat (my house is from 1926; I have no central air because I have steam heat...room air conditioners just ain't doin' it today, my friends...I am not a Southerner, I live up North, and have never learned to elegantly deal with the heat the way they do...)
I was not trying to leave anyone out; I was just trying to get my point across quickly...I'm typing with no air conditioning right now in 90 degree heat (my house is from 1926; I have no central air because I have steam heat...room air conditioners just ain't doin' it today, my friends...I am not a Southerner, I live up North, and have never learned to elegantly deal with the heat the way they do...)
OriginalJerseyGirl
CERTIFIED FLYERS FANATIC!
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2005
- Messages
- 7,203
- Reaction score
- 19
I know that.cappuccina said:
Your post just provided the perfect opportunity for me to thank the friends (and family?) of Janet that have registered to share their information with us.Love your posts, cappuccina ... I'm glad you've joined us here!!!
ETA: And I couldn't agree more about the civilized group ... this is by far the best forum in which I've participated ... by far.
1) mrallgood...does your site support Raven? Or does it not say you will not rest until he is sitting in jail with someone "purdy" in orange sitting behind him? IMO, that makes your posts about this case anti-raven. Ive never been to your site, so honestly dont know what else is there, but it is clear you are of the opinion Raven is guilty, and there can be no other explanation in this case. The term "anti raven" was meant only for your blogs position concerning this case, as like I said, I really have no idea what else is there.
2) No theory or opinion has been kept of these boards. Anyone is free to post any theory but they MUST post it for themsleves. They cannot ask someone else to post for them. We dont allow that. Not in this case, not in other cases. No one has said rumors cannot be posted. Innuendo has been, and will continue to be allowed. Ive seen several posts speculating Ravens family members as accomplices in his embezzlement scheme. They have been allowed to stand, even though there have been no charges, no hints form LE that there was an accomplice of any type. Ive seen posts about folks that have no connection what-so-ever to this case being theorized as being a distant relative etc. They have been allowed to stand.
The confirmed - unconfirmed system that has been put into place is fine...dont think anyone has said differently. But then again, saying something is confirmed should require a source for the confirmation.
3) Golfmon...I have no idea where or how you have gotten the evidence you have in this case. I can only go by what I have read, which appeared to be mostly through your "contacts". Who the contacts are really makes no difference to me. The rule remains the same. As for belittleing your theories, I havent seen anyone do that. Saying Im not ready to believe what I have not been able to see or hear for myself is not belittleing, its simply stating that I cannot/will not form an opinion when I dont have the information for myself. It would not be fair to anyone here for me to do that. As much as I sympathize with Janets family, my responsibility is to treat everyone here the same, whether they be friends, family of Janet, Raven or just plain everyday posters. That may sound cold and wrong to some of you, but that's how moderating goes. I have always held this position, it isnt something new just for this case. As for members being afraid to post...I too get the pm's saying "I am afraid to join because Im not part of the group", or "I am afraid to join in because I disagree" etc. I tell everyone the same thing. The boards are here for all to post on, if you wish to join in, please do so.
4) Media link are just that...links to media sources. Blogs are not media sources.
2) No theory or opinion has been kept of these boards. Anyone is free to post any theory but they MUST post it for themsleves. They cannot ask someone else to post for them. We dont allow that. Not in this case, not in other cases. No one has said rumors cannot be posted. Innuendo has been, and will continue to be allowed. Ive seen several posts speculating Ravens family members as accomplices in his embezzlement scheme. They have been allowed to stand, even though there have been no charges, no hints form LE that there was an accomplice of any type. Ive seen posts about folks that have no connection what-so-ever to this case being theorized as being a distant relative etc. They have been allowed to stand.
The confirmed - unconfirmed system that has been put into place is fine...dont think anyone has said differently. But then again, saying something is confirmed should require a source for the confirmation.
3) Golfmon...I have no idea where or how you have gotten the evidence you have in this case. I can only go by what I have read, which appeared to be mostly through your "contacts". Who the contacts are really makes no difference to me. The rule remains the same. As for belittleing your theories, I havent seen anyone do that. Saying Im not ready to believe what I have not been able to see or hear for myself is not belittleing, its simply stating that I cannot/will not form an opinion when I dont have the information for myself. It would not be fair to anyone here for me to do that. As much as I sympathize with Janets family, my responsibility is to treat everyone here the same, whether they be friends, family of Janet, Raven or just plain everyday posters. That may sound cold and wrong to some of you, but that's how moderating goes. I have always held this position, it isnt something new just for this case. As for members being afraid to post...I too get the pm's saying "I am afraid to join because Im not part of the group", or "I am afraid to join in because I disagree" etc. I tell everyone the same thing. The boards are here for all to post on, if you wish to join in, please do so.
4) Media link are just that...links to media sources. Blogs are not media sources.
There's a difference between the government restricting free speech and a private organization doing so. First amendment applies to the congress passing laws abridging the freedom of speech or the press and has been extended to states and local governments and agencies. It's not a blanket protection. I don't know the division of ownership of this board, but if it's Timex's board, Timex can do whatever he/she wants with it. I happen to agree that the posts sometimes seem overly assertive, but Timex is the mod, we aren't.
cappuccina
Former Member
...a private organization...like a corporation or a private school...
We sit out here "in the ether"... This is not IBM or Harvard...
We sit out here "in the ether"... This is not IBM or Harvard...
This isn't a private organization? We're out in the ether? Where in the world did you find "out in the ether" as an element of the first amendment. I'll go check lexis and see if I can find some SCOTUS cases about your personal freedom of speech protection being extended to speaking your mind on web servers maintained by private individuals. If that was the case, then mods would be legally unable to delete posts that they find offensive or off-topic. However, that is obviously not the case since almost all boards reserve the right to delete whatever they want. HTH.
cappuccina
Former Member
...trust me, I do...
I am merely differentiating between saying that you want something a certain way...like the thread you directed me to...
...and, for example, the chain of evidence rules in a crime lab, or a corporation's restrictions on giving away secrets to competitors, both of which have a legitimate legal and public policy basis...
I don't plan on violating TOS; I am merely pointing out to you that typing
"SO AND SO'S WORD IS LAW" IN LARGE CAPITAL LETTERS on an Internet discussion forum is equivalent to a child saying "GIVE ME CANDY"...there is no legal basis for it...I will respect it because you guys are reasonable adults, but it is not equivalent to the above...
I am done with this issue now...
I am merely differentiating between saying that you want something a certain way...like the thread you directed me to...
...and, for example, the chain of evidence rules in a crime lab, or a corporation's restrictions on giving away secrets to competitors, both of which have a legitimate legal and public policy basis...
I don't plan on violating TOS; I am merely pointing out to you that typing
"SO AND SO'S WORD IS LAW" IN LARGE CAPITAL LETTERS on an Internet discussion forum is equivalent to a child saying "GIVE ME CANDY"...there is no legal basis for it...I will respect it because you guys are reasonable adults, but it is not equivalent to the above...
I am done with this issue now...
OriginalJerseyGirl
CERTIFIED FLYERS FANATIC!
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2005
- Messages
- 7,203
- Reaction score
- 19
Hey everyone ... this is WAY off-topic but I don't know if you've heard. Please check out this link:
Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - Unknown tot in pictures may be in danger
I'm sorry that it's so off-topic but I ask that this post be allowed to stay here so that this message can quickly get out as far as possible.
ETA: I have copied the pictures and the news links into an e-mail, and mailed it out to people that I know. Perhaps some of you can do the same.
Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - Unknown tot in pictures may be in danger
I'm sorry that it's so off-topic but I ask that this post be allowed to stay here so that this message can quickly get out as far as possible.
ETA: I have copied the pictures and the news links into an e-mail, and mailed it out to people that I know. Perhaps some of you can do the same.
golfmom
Former Member
http://www.yesweekly.com/main.asp?SectionID=18&SubSectionID=44&ArticleID=230&TM=69933.55
Indeed, bloggers have stormed the figurative media Bastille, critiquing existing news stories from a hundred thousand angles, fact-checking through Google from their home computers, even forging their own brand of coverage that is quickly gaining legitimacy. Matt Drudge at drudgereport.com is now required reading for everyone in the news business. Bloggers at the Power Line (powerlineblog.com) claim to have brought down Dan Rather when in September they revealed as forgeries several documents pertaining to President Bushs National Guard Service, memos upon which a CBS News investigation spearheaded by Rather was based. Bloggers now have a presence in the White House press corps; there are bloggers covering the fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. Elected officials keep them, as do MSM personalities. And while the argument over whether bloggers are journalists or not wages on, millions of souls across the nation are not so quietly forging this new method of gathering and disseminating news and opinion.
---------------
Indeed, bloggers have stormed the figurative media Bastille, critiquing existing news stories from a hundred thousand angles, fact-checking through Google from their home computers, even forging their own brand of coverage that is quickly gaining legitimacy. Matt Drudge at drudgereport.com is now required reading for everyone in the news business. Bloggers at the Power Line (powerlineblog.com) claim to have brought down Dan Rather when in September they revealed as forgeries several documents pertaining to President Bushs National Guard Service, memos upon which a CBS News investigation spearheaded by Rather was based. Bloggers now have a presence in the White House press corps; there are bloggers covering the fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. Elected officials keep them, as do MSM personalities. And while the argument over whether bloggers are journalists or not wages on, millions of souls across the nation are not so quietly forging this new method of gathering and disseminating news and opinion.
---------------
SouthEastSleuth
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2005
- Messages
- 465
- Reaction score
- 0
Much has been discussed as far as Raven's psyche, personality, etc., if you will. We were informed of an alleged assault on a soccer referee for example.
I'm wondering - does anyone know of any other instances, eye-witness accounts, etc., of any violent tendencies that Raven may have had in the past?
It just occurs to me how often we read of cases where someone is assused and/or convicted of a crime, and a friend or neighbor might say, "John never struck me as a violent person," or, "John would never hurt another person." And yet, often these same seemingly "innocent" people are sometimes accused, and then tried and convicted. Trials are indeed filled with character witnesses, who vouch unequivocally for the accused's character, personality, etc.
And, I'm sure there are countless cases where a person indeed NEVER once exhibited any sort of violence whatsoever, but, for whatever reason, snapped, acted violently in the heat of the moment, whatever...
But, on the flip side, quite often when an individual does some act of violence, whether it's physical, emotional, psychological - that same person has a history in that regard. May not be KNOWN, but often the history is there..
Someone in Charles Manson's past may very well have described him as a nice young man. Who knows.
I keep wondering what someday we will hear about Raven Abaroa in this regard. Maybe things as varied as:
"He would never hurt a soul."
"I remember him screaming at a co-worker."
"He hit me when we dated."
"He is the kindest, gentlest person I've known."
(I just made those things up as example, FYI)
Different people perhaps, with all sorts of different views.
So, I ask again - anyone know any factual information regarding past violence and Raven? And remember, as you all know, violence is not always just a physical thing - it can take any number of forms....
I'm wondering - does anyone know of any other instances, eye-witness accounts, etc., of any violent tendencies that Raven may have had in the past?
It just occurs to me how often we read of cases where someone is assused and/or convicted of a crime, and a friend or neighbor might say, "John never struck me as a violent person," or, "John would never hurt another person." And yet, often these same seemingly "innocent" people are sometimes accused, and then tried and convicted. Trials are indeed filled with character witnesses, who vouch unequivocally for the accused's character, personality, etc.
And, I'm sure there are countless cases where a person indeed NEVER once exhibited any sort of violence whatsoever, but, for whatever reason, snapped, acted violently in the heat of the moment, whatever...
But, on the flip side, quite often when an individual does some act of violence, whether it's physical, emotional, psychological - that same person has a history in that regard. May not be KNOWN, but often the history is there..
Someone in Charles Manson's past may very well have described him as a nice young man. Who knows.
I keep wondering what someday we will hear about Raven Abaroa in this regard. Maybe things as varied as:
"He would never hurt a soul."
"I remember him screaming at a co-worker."
"He hit me when we dated."
"He is the kindest, gentlest person I've known."
(I just made those things up as example, FYI)
Different people perhaps, with all sorts of different views.
So, I ask again - anyone know any factual information regarding past violence and Raven? And remember, as you all know, violence is not always just a physical thing - it can take any number of forms....
golfmom
Former Member
My email thanks to her ....
Julia,
Thank you so much for getting back to me. It's been a very interesting case to follow. I wish we were seeing more media coverage of it though ... hint ... hint ...
Thanks,
GM
Her Response back to me . . .
From: "Lewis, Julia" <jlewis@wral.com> Add to Address Book
To: GOLFMOM
Subject: RE: Abaroa case question
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2005 12:48:36 -0400
I know... I wish there was more to report! We went to Va. 2 weeks ago and did an exclusive interview with Janet's family. But, as far as the investigation goes... it's moving very slowly! If I find out anything though, we'll be sure to get it on the news.
Julia,
Thank you so much for getting back to me. It's been a very interesting case to follow. I wish we were seeing more media coverage of it though ... hint ... hint ...
Thanks,
GM
Her Response back to me . . .
From: "Lewis, Julia" <jlewis@wral.com> Add to Address Book
To: GOLFMOM
Subject: RE: Abaroa case question
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2005 12:48:36 -0400
I know... I wish there was more to report! We went to Va. 2 weeks ago and did an exclusive interview with Janet's family. But, as far as the investigation goes... it's moving very slowly! If I find out anything though, we'll be sure to get it on the news.
anneshirley
New Member
- Joined
- May 19, 2005
- Messages
- 85
- Reaction score
- 0
Thanks for keeping us in the loop, GM!golfmom said:
You're awesome!
- Status