posted on July 31, 2000 01:39:38 PM new
I vehemently disagree that this thread be WOMD until the reputation of all and the locale be publically restored as close as possible to what it was before calam provided the uncorroborated information she has.
To those who believe whom and where she was talking about was an unknown until I said it, are located outside the periphery.
Also, how many people must be offended before the message is offensive? If (only)one person knows what is being said regardless others might not, does not subordinate the impact.
You might consider that I might be closer to the matter than you realize.
posted on July 31, 2000 01:56:00 PM new
I think that there is entirely too much lecturing from obvious paranoics on issues of privacy, particularly when those issues , if they can be called that, do not affect the lecturer one whit.
Haven't such people enough to do to look into their own corners and over their own shoulders without assuming a duty to see that everyone else follows their example?
It seems to me that in all of the studious efforts toward achieving a sense of security there are some who have missed the most basic tenent of all, which is "mind your own business".
posted on July 31, 2000 02:26:33 PM new
Just for practice, what if I rebutted by saying;
- maybe the son was taken in by others because he (is) gullible but not a criminal.
- maybe he was not stealing the chemical, but rather duped into siphoning off his own chemicals from (his) farm.
- maybe he might like his booze but has never been addicted to an illegal substance.
- maybe any excessive expenditures that he might have made was (actually) a result of being conned for the money and was not expended to purchase crystal for an addiction.
If what I have just said are facts, the son is seen in a different light, isn't he?
posted on July 31, 2000 03:24:49 PM newSgtMike: the only one who named names & locations regarding all this was *you.* Having done that, you go on to castigate Calamity? I'm sorry, but trying to claim, as you have done elsewhere, that her previous posts pinpointed all that is flim-flam. I would wager that very few people keep a log of other's posts in order to discover clues of where they are posting from. Most probably don't remember such details even if posted outright by someone.
As to others from her area or town or the family in question being on AW...there couldn't be too many because you were the only one that jumped on her. You brought it to their attention. As for proof--where is your proof that the person she spoke of is indeed the one you assume it is? Perhaps you have caused grief needlessly...
posted on July 31, 2000 04:02:31 PM new
It's a disgrace that AuctionWatch has let this thread stand. The private details of a family have been published to the world by a nonrelative, in what seems to me less grief than self-promotional payback to all and sundry for perceived misdeeds. Would you want to be befriended by someone who'd treat your memory this way? I sure wouldn't.
Grief is necessary, but ignoble. It can bring one to do things that are ill considered, wrong, hurtful, foolish, and this thread is proof. And that's putting the best possible spin on it. AW should show some compassion to the family left behind who are reportedly distressed by this, and make it disappear.
I have deleted your posts which provide identifying information, including first names and the name of the town they are from. Please do not post such identifying information again. To do so will put your posting privileges in jeopardy.
Everyone,
This thread has become far too personal, and I'm locking it.
posted on July 31, 2000 04:24:56 PM new
I don't think Calamity said anything with malice. I think she was sad and wanted to share with people she thought could or would understand her pain. I feel for her loss. Maybe she said more than she (or others) felt necessary but it wasn't done to be mean. I can't say that for a few other people posting here. Maybe a little compassion would've been nice. A gentle nudge in private could've made it easier for her. I am stunned that anyone who actually knew where she lived would seek out people that might have known her landlord to tell them about this thread. That seems very cruel to me.
