Where is.....

[critical bill]

Well, it would seem this whole thread was fraudulently launched under false pretenses.

The whole thread? Are you saying that those who posted in Wes' defense or supported him throughout this thread were part of some plan or scheme? Perhaps this is true for Roz, but I was never party to any alleged scheme or scam to cause any kind of mayhem on this site.

 

[WebSlave]

The whole thread? Are you saying that those who posted in Wes' defense or supported him throughout this thread were part of some plan or scheme? Perhaps this is true for Roz, but I was never party to any alleged scheme or scam to cause any kind of mayhem on this site.

No, I am not interpretting it that way at all, myself. The only people behind this fraud were Rozanne, Wes, and possibly some other self interested persons. I think all of the evidence was plainly provided by Rozann in her postings.

Other people joined in innocently enough just because they truly like Wes and would like to see him back here. Or perhaps this is now past tense. I lost a lot of respect for Wes with these shenanigans. He was obviously goading Rozann on behind the scenes feeding her quotes to parrot. It does make you wonder about what Wes's true intentions in all this were. I would truly hate to think that his apparent desire to damage this site extended long before he got banned, and my patience with him and giving him constantly the benefit of the doubt were sorely misplaced. But to say I am troubled by his apparent actions behind this are an understatement, to say the least.

Oh well, another lesson learned, I guess. Fortunately Wes (and possibly 'gang') picked an unsuitable pawn for their game who could not carry it off. It could have been much worse if they had chosen someone who had the capability to keep from tripping over their own tongue. A smart person would have dropped this when their hoped for seeds of dissention had been planted and then left it alone. Rozann just wasn't smart enough to know to quit before I had to publicly prove what she was doing. She had to get me irritated enough to have the motivation to do that.

So Rozann wanted this thread to be "sound off style", eh? I hope she got what she asked for.

 

[nicolai]

ok now...

All the questions I have regarding the players here now have anwers.

I am not going to be drawn in (or distracted) by the endless BS spewn about this thread.

It's annoying to read, and an insult to a normal person's intelligence.

Where exactly did you post or ask all the questions you are reffering too? If they re all answered would you care to share the answers with the rest of us?

Well, it would seem this whole thread was fraudulently launched under false pretenses.

Now that everyone can see through this little scam, this whole, annoying, piece of crap thread should be put to rest.

Bill Leverton, you have admitted to felony fraud only after you were busted scamming another member of this site. Now, you find yourself involved in another fraud. Coincidence? Or does your character just attract low lifes?

Over 99% of the members here do not give a rat's ass if what's his face is ever allowed back here or not. Give it a freakin rest.

What does Bills past have to do with anything on this thread whatsoever. This thread was about the possibility of getting WES back but Rich has made it perfectly clear now that will never happen. And even though I am a friend of Wes's the decision is probably a good one looking in retrospect and thinking about the possibility of an endless feud. Wes is happy where he's at, Rich is happy that he's not here.

How exatly is Bill L. involved in a fraud on this thread I ask you? It does seem that 1 person had an ulterior motive but why do you point out Bill. You made the accusation, now its time for you to prove it!!!

This is not an opinion, just a fact, if I have not missed anything in this 39 page thread.

Number of members willing to pay to get Wilomn reinstated: 4

Number of members who are not willing to pay to get Wilomn reinstated: 24,579

Up until your last post your participation in this thread was only to show that you indeed didnt want wes here. Nothing you added to this thread was constuctive or informative whatsoever.
Now you want to be a monday morniing quarterback and jump in and start making accusations that I sure hope you can prove. Do you have any info on Bill like the info Rich had on Roz? When Rich makes a accusation he backs his accusations up with facts as seen on this thread. Now its you turn to show what you have. I await to see the proof of your slanderous comment below.

Now, you find yourself involved in another fraud. Coincidence? Or does your character just attract low lifes?

 

[shrap]

It does make you wonder about what Wes's true intentions in all this were. I would truly hate to think that his apparent desire to damage this site extended long before he got banned, and my patience with him and giving him constantly the benefit of the doubt were sorely misplaced. But to say I am troubled by his apparent actions behind this are an understatement, to say the least.

Rich,

I may be wrong but I do not think you or this site was the primary intended target at all. I think if you look closely enough and keep in mind who Wes is and how Wes used to do his thing here, it is really obvious who the target was.

 

[Bill_Leverton]

Nick as far as I see it Jim picked me because he thought he'd get a rise out of me, (being the hot head I was) but he don't know me that well, I also want to take this time to appologize for anything I may have said here that may of offended anyone sometimes typing isn't as easy as talking

 

[jsrocket]

I await to see the proof of your slanderous comment below.

1. Nice try, but I don't dance to your tunes.

2. I await to see proof of your ability to wite down a coherent thought.

 

[jsrocket]

write

 

[Jim O]

Bill Leverton, you have admitted to felony fraud only after you were busted scamming another member of this site. Now, you find yourself involved in another fraud. Coincidence? Or does your character just attract low lifes?

Just exactly what do you mean? Seriously. If you read this thread, really read it, you could not come to that conclusion. Bill gave opinion. Perhaps it is you who misinterpreted when Rich deleted part of Bill's post. He did that because Bill had quoted Rozann's quote of Wes's e-mail. Bill had no part in posting the e-mail originally, but once Rich deleted Rozann's post he had to delete the part of Bill's that directly quoted it.

You owe Bill an apology for that.

 

[nicolai]

Unforunetely Mr. Jim Ritchie it is against the rules of Fauna for you to make a accusation without having the proof to back it up or didnt you read the TOS for this site.
You made the accusation now prove it to the rest of the 24,000 members.

Proof or Apology, which is it going to be??

 

[nicolai]

You may want to think quicky because I can see that atleast a few people reported your post with the accusation in it for a bad post. I think the MODS and Rich will agree about the TOS of the site concerning accusations.

 

[Jim O]

Not at all. FaunaTopSites and FaunaClassifieds are two different websites. "G" did not have to go to FaunaTopSites in order to view this thread. Someone was going to FaunaTopSites solely to check the stats of their website there. That's what it is there for.

Rich,

The way I read the post by Dennis was that perhaps Gary was curious about his hits...not this thread.

 

[WebSlave]

Unforunetely Mr. Jim Ritchie it is against the rules of Fauna for you to make a accusation without having the proof to back it up or didnt you read the TOS for this site.
You made the accusation now prove it to the rest of the 24,000 members.

Proof or Apology, which is it going to be??

Eh? Well I wrote the rules, but really, I don't remember saying that at all. I looked in the TOS and here's what I came up with:

Proof is optional in your posts on the BOI, but recommended if you would like to remove any doubts about the truth of what you are posting. But this is purely up to you, just as the believability of what you post is purely up to the reader of your words.

Do you see something differently then that somewhere?

In any event, let's cut out the attacks on each other, shall we? Hasn't this thread caused enough of a ruckus as it is without the rest of you turning on each other now?

 

[nicolai]

Now, you find yourself involved in another fraud. Coincidence? Or does your character just attract low lifes?

any of the below apply to this comment


Name calling and general derogatory statements/ Warning Level 3 /points 10
Discourtesy towards another member/Warning Level 1/points 1
Unnecessary roughness/Warning Level 1/ points 1

 

[WebSlave]

Rich,

The way I read the post by Dennis was that perhaps Gary was curious about his hits...not this thread.

I mentioned no names at all. Any person frequenting a website can click on that FaunaTopSites icon on that website and be taken to FaunaTopSites to view the stats. That means ANY person. Even a member who might be interested in seeing what effect they might be having on the stats at the website they have made as a new home. My point was that SOMEONE was suddenly very interested in how the traffic stats for THAT site were doing that particular day.

You can come to you own conclusions, if any, from this interesting observation I made.

 

[WebSlave]

Name calling and general derogatory statements/ Warning Level 3 /points 10
Discourtesy towards another member/Warning Level 1/points 1
Unnecessary roughness/Warning Level 1/ points 1

I see nothing in there about "proof". Do you?

 

[Jim O]

Name calling and general derogatory statements/ Warning Level 3 /points 10
Discourtesy towards another member/Warning Level 1/points 1
Unnecessary roughness/Warning Level 1/ points 1

Rich,

I could see where the following might be worthy of one of the above:

I await to see proof of your ability to wite down a coherent thought.

 

[nicolai]

Nick,

As far as I see it, and based upon the precident that Rich has set, calling someone a liar without evidence that they are ACTUALLY a liar is name calling. I went ahead and made the assumption since you were the one who reported his post.

Have a good one,

Jay

I guess its in your interpetation of name calling.

 

[nicolai]

Rich,

I could see where the following might be worthy of one of the above:

I agree JIM

I await to see proof of your ability to wite down a coherent thought.

Thats two members he has insulted so far. Bill and Myself

 

[Jim O]

Thats two members he has insulted so far.

LOL, Nick. That had been directed at you also.

 

[nicolai]

sorry jim I hit submit before i was done with that post but i edited it so it was correct.