Wise's rights?

Originally Posted by WebSlave

Actually, in my opinion this whole thing is ridiculous. There isn't really anything that Christina Wise could say at this point that I would consider as being believable. Even if the chat log screen shots were posted, I wouldn't waste my time reading them.

Which is why I will more then likely destroy all of it.

Just because something isn't true doesn't mean that it wasn't said. Christina said things about 4 people in that chat. Four people who probably weren't involved were talked about at length, with information sent from one person to several. If the claims she is making are false, then those mentioned could have cases against her. I think Dean mentioned libel and slander. If what she said is true it needs to be posted to show the involvement of others. If it is false, it needs to be shown so that those who were mentioned have a means of going after her. By not posting potentially libelous material you ARE protecting Christina. Yesterday after the private chat, many people tried to get information from those who attended. They said that everything was sent to Harald, and Deb said that she deleted the chat log. They said Harald would have to decide whether anything should be posted. Harald told me that he hasn't gotten any email from Deb.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA what a load this thread is

I can't believe how many sheeople are allowing themselves to be held emotional hostages, by the wise's of all people!

Do any of you realize that the people that are being hurt by all of this infighting, are the very people that y'all claimed you wanted to help...

Way to step up and show what your made of

To quickly address a couple of things I have seen.
Chat and rules - IMO, chat is subject to most of the same rules as the rest of the site...however, in most cases, action to address violations requires that a moderator actually be present to see them. Another issue is that when moderators are in chat, it isn't generally with the intention (or desire) to moderate - we're there to relax with other members of the community. The triggers, therefore, can vary according to the day & the people involved. For example, if the room is filled with regulars & someone starts cursing about his/her day, it is likely to be overlooked. If its a newcomer that just starts spouting off, he'll be told much more quickly to modify his behavior. Racist/prejudicial comments and personal attacks are usually posted by newcomers, and are dealt with quickly.
How we deal with things depends on the situation. We can issue infractions - however, that cannot be done within chat. Since it is not tied to a post, it requires extra documentation...so it's a bit of a hassle, and I only do things that way when I'm making sure a point is made. Yes - people can get kicked out of chat, banned from chat (that is a short lived tool that simply removes them from the chat area and denies access until it expires), or banned from the site based upon their actions in chat.

Regarding the sentiment that the transcripts of the chat be posted for everyone to judge - this isn't a usual BOI scenario, but I don't recall everybody barking this loudly over email corresponence with a thread subject. The difference here is that it impacts the community as a group; and, because the communication was brought up in a manner that suggests controversy, people feel entitled for whatever reason.
Just curious - if it were to come out that I exchanged a series of emails with Christina about this, and hadn't posted them - nor was I inclined to do so - would the uproar be as loud? If I stated as my reason that there was no great revelation, just the same old crap, would I be answered with cries of Who are you to decide?

FWIW - I wasn't following the private chat intently (I was feeding critters, so I wandered by for a quick peek between groups). Admittedly, I probably missed a good deal, but what I saw of the Stemple accusations was that both Dean and Reagan were involved. Reagan contributed to the atrocity by trying to think of companies that might contribute an item to auction. Dean's role was that he was bidding on auctions (in some cases, just to up the ante - ohhh noooooo ). Let's see......he also sent emails to the Wises - I think some were during the auction period, and some were after the BOI thread started - the latter were the cause of the cease & desist letter sent by the most eloquent what'shispuss. Of course, Christina wasn't able to produce anything damning in those emails...the closest thing to that seemed to almost be an afterthought (well, more like a desperate grab) - an implication that she dared not post any proof of, because it was a pretty heavy twist on reality. Had she shown the email, it would have been clear to anybody reading that her statement was false. And, yes, I can attest to that, because the originals were all forwarded to me.

Time to get ready for work.

Oh, and regarding the chat transcripts.
If Deborah sent them to me, I haven't received them.....I've checked both emails, and the spam folders. That's just as well, though, because I don't want them. I'm not going to be dragged into the center of this - period. I don't want the hassle as a person, or the responsibility as a moderator. Too many other things going on in my world right now. Heck, based on vague recollections of how long that chat lasted, it would take me at least a week to look through it (given my limited availability).

True.... anything that is posted wont be believed... especially if it came from Christina... but the point is this.

It APPEARS that a couple of folks are waiting for proof. You have your proof... just not the kind your looking for. Christina wont be able to provide any proof of a conspiracy because there likely isnt one. And what you are sitting on is PROOF of her ever growing attempt to deceive to cover her tracks.

Here is something to consider. Christina is nothing more than a scam artist (IMO)... do you not think that if she had evidence of a conspiracy... that she wouldnt have it instantly available? She wouldnt have to try and find it.... she would have it available in hopes that taking them down would take some heat off of her. Its the normal criminal mindset.

Originally Posted by Southern Wolf (in the BOI thread)

That is because any staff member can ban you from chat.... then unban from chat and it only affects the chat room.

Apparently the systems are somewhat different then, Kevin, because the chat ban here seems to be a timed function. The person is banned until the ban expires...there is no way to reverse it (at least not that I've found, and I did a lot of looking when I first experimented with it)

Originally Posted by hhmoore

Just curious - if it were to come out that I exchanged a series of emails with Christina about this, and hadn't posted them - nor was I inclined to do so - would the uproar be as loud? If I stated as my reason that there was no great revelation, just the same old crap, would I be answered with cries of Who are you to decide?

No you would not but "there was no great revelation, just the same old crap" was not stated. On the contrary, it was insinuated by one person who has the information that others may be involved, the information would be reviewed by a select few, and a decision would be made. To that I most certainly ask "who are they to decide?".

Originally Posted by joseydiann

You have alot of people at your side Dean.

Damned right!!

Originally Posted by bsharrah

No you would not but "there was no great revelation, just the same old crap" was not stated. On the contrary, it was insinuated by one person who has the information that others may be involved, the information would be reviewed by a select few, and a decision would be made. To that I most certainly ask "who are they to decide?".

Here's what I am feeling. I'm not saying anyone else has to feel as I do:

1) Places like the BOI will only work if the basic tenets are upheld, where readers can decide for themselves what they think, not have the information pre digested for them. That's what happens in politics, a few people retire to the back room and decide what reality to place in front of the sheeple.

2) It was simply in bad taste for anyone to say again and again that they would review the information and decide what was forthcoming. It was in a way, taunting those who wanted to know. It may have given the taunter a temporary feeling of importance to say 'nyah, nyah, I know something and you don't' but I think many people will not forget that behavior.
If you are going to keep it to yourself by all means do so, no need to show a little of what you got like the garter of a cheap floozy.

3) It is EVERY person's right to choose what they want to say and not say.(But bad taste to taunt).
Personal freedom means the freedom not only to speak, but to not speak.
The only time it is not OK is when the silence is used to mislead people and I don't think this is happening here.

4) As I said earlier, it will all come out, that is human nature.
But while the drama inevitably unfolds, remember the strengths of our community and don't let it weaken or fray. Be good to each other.