Wise's rights?

[StrictlyExotics]

Sigh... I am aware that Christina hung in chat 24/7 almost..but those people weren't there when Christina first came in...and you are forgetting the point that I have the right to speak to whomever I WANT to speak to, I have the right to create a chat room with a password. I have a right to have those rights respected. Last I heard, I wasn't the one that was accused of a crime.

I did not "accuse" you...I used it as an example of neutrality and why I trusted Kelli's post more so than the rest of the posts that went to the extreme of trying to prove that Ed fabricated an IP. I am not going to talk about that convo anymore..it would be he said/she said except for the point that people came in and witnessed. So..that's one reason that I didn't bring up the first convo except for you claiming that "somebody" called you a scammer in chat.

About your wife cussing..I don't have a lot of faith in people that can't use English to get their points across, and I have been upset with someone that messed with my husband..I didn't have to get her in front of an audience and show my backside.

You are correct, there are a lot of victims in this crime...can we PLEASE focus on them? The best avenue is still the one laid out in the BOI.

Deb, thats where you do NOT understand me. If you were NOT the only one in chat, I am almost guarantee that Christina has spoken to them. I never once spoke about you making a private chat, in fact, I am glad it was you who did it. You pointed your finger towards me and if she cant convince you that I was involved, then she wouldnt be able to convince anyone else.

As for the "other" thread, I made a total of 4 post in that thread Deb. I am pretty sure I was impartial and only reacted when ALL of the evidence was shown. You chose only to believe one side of it, not the other. Well, I chose the other. Fabricating an IP is not hard to do, especially when using a third party site like Kingsnake to do it from. Again, YOUR choice not to think so.

As for my wife not being able to use the "English Language" to get her point across. You sure ate up the article she wrote in the Wise thread right? Should I post your comment regarding that?

As for the BOI and the victims of the Wise's, I wasnt the one who decided to derail it from them. I didnt have a private chat with them trying to see who else could have possibly been involved. I handled my business with them OUT of the BOI thread and through personal contacts.

This thread was created because you and Brian feel compelled NOT to post what was said in the private chat that deals with DIRECTLY speaking to the Wise's. Oddly enough, neither one of you had anything at stake regarding the Wise's or the Wise's auctions. But, for some reason, you two feel like you have the right to hold whatever info that you have so dear to you. I would imagine that you two feel this compelled to do so because all it was could make you two accountable for what you have had to say.

 

[DaveyFig]

Davey - you were the one that broadcast the password to everybody. Maybe it was all in fun, or maybe you felt everybody had a right to be there; but that wasn't what Deborah wanted. She set up the room, and password protected it, because she wanted to continue her conversation without the disruptions of everybody throwing in their comments. When she said she wanted everybody gone, you stayed. I removed you. Then you came back - that was your mistake, and the reason you were banned from that room. That might have worked with Deborah, but did you really think I was going to tolerate it? Now, you can play the victim if you want, but you were still in the other chat (separate windows, DaveyFigXXXX) for some time...I know that for a fact because, after I banned you from Deborah's room, I went back to the main chat and looked. Maybe you got booted for inactivity, the system kicked you for some other reason, or you simply closed the window - but, once you were gone, you couldn't get back until the ban expired a couple hours later.

Harald, I gave out the password because I thought it was stupid that Christina was given a safe haven for discussion, and I figured out the password on my own. If I were given the password and asked not to share it, I wouldn't have. I was banned from the chat room after Deb asked who shared the password. I was not being disruptive, just answering Deb's question. At one point I thought I had lost my connection, and returned to the chat to be banned. I wasn't trying to come back in after being kicked out. I didn't know I had been kicked out. Deb was the one kicking Chris out, and she said I could stay as long as I was quiet. Like I said, I was quiet til she asked who was giving out the password. Interesting that when you went in and Deb was asking you to do something about Chris, you just told her to "kick him", but banned me. Was anyone else banned? I didn't even say anything when I returned. How did you get the password to the chat room?

I am not trying to be a trouble maker, and I mean no disrespect. I am however confused as to why Christina was protected while she made accusations against others, and I got kicked out just for being there. The chat log would show that I wasn't being disruptive in that chat. It may also show that I ignored your warning, but I assure you that had I seen it I would have left.

 

[JudyC]

I honestly don't see what the hang-up is about sharing what was said in chat. The reasons given for not sharing aren't making much sense (and are somewhat contradictory).

1. "Nothing new was said" ......ok...that wouldn't be a big surprise, really. So why not prove it by letting everyone else see that nothing new was said?

2. "She accused others of bad things and it would be unfair to drag their names into it" ........ I agree it would be unfair to just toss their names out without the full context of what was said. BUT...if she's going to try and implicate others in her twisted schemes in order to deflect heat from herself, I think that is something everyone should know and see in writing and the people she has accused (if there really are any such) should be allowed to have their say.

3. "We're waiting for certain 'evidence' to be e-mailed to us and then it will be reviewed by a select few" ........... since when is BOI-related evidence only meant to be reviewed by a "select few"? Since when does a "select few" get to decide what is "worthy" to be shared on the BOI?

What's done is done....and hollering at Deb or Brian for deigning to consent to and facilitate a private chat with Christina is pointless. But I'm telling the both of you....whatever your motives were going in, all you're accomplishing at this point is shooting yourselves in the foot and making the entire mess even more muddier than it was a couple days ago.

 

[wyldwurm]

I honestly don't see what the hang-up is about sharing what was said in chat. The reasons given for not sharing aren't making much sense (and are somewhat contradictory).

1. "Nothing new was said" ......ok...that wouldn't be a big surprise, really. So why not prove it by letting everyone else see that nothing new was said?

2. "She accused others of bad things and it would be unfair to drag their names into it" ........ I agree it would be unfair to just toss their names out without the full context of what was said. BUT...if she's going to try and implicate others in her twisted schemes in order to deflect heat from herself, I think that is something everyone should know and see in writing and the people she has accused (if there really are any such) should be allowed to have their say.

3. "We're waiting for certain 'evidence' to be e-mailed to us and then it will be reviewed by a select few" ........... since when is BOI-related evidence only meant to be reviewed by a "select few"? Since when does a "select few" get to decide what is "worthy" to be shared on the BOI?

What's done is done....and hollering at Deb or Brian for deigning to consent to and facilitate a private chat with Christina is pointless. But I'm telling the both of you....whatever your motives were going in, all you're accomplishing at this point is shooting yourselves in the foot and making the entire mess even more muddier than it was a couple days ago.

I agree with everything Judy has said here.

I also wanted to ask a question. If Christina isn't privy to this part of fauna, why NOT post the chat log here? Or at least make it available to the people Christina was pointing the finger at.

To me, it looks like the people who had trust issues with Dean are only withholding this information to continue to point the finger at him. It's obvious they have something to hide, otherwise the accused would have had this information already.

 

[StrictlyExotics]

I agree with everything Judy has said here.

I also wanted to ask a question. If Christina isn't privy to this part of fauna, why NOT post the chat log here? Or at least make it available to the people Christina was pointing the finger at.

To me, it looks like the people who had trust issues with Dean are only withholding this information to continue to point the finger at him. It's obvious they have something to hide, otherwise the accused would have had this information already.

Kimberly, I too agree with what Judy has said and I somewhat do understand why they do not want to post it. If its nothing tangible, why drag other people into it while if it is tangible, I am sure that they would post it in the BOI.

They can continue to point at me however they want. We were all cordial towards each other in chat when I decided to pop in. I am not even upset about the fact that they had the chat to begin with.

What I am upset about is the fact that NOT all of the truths are being told about why it happened to begin with and that they both do not see that the reason Christina sought them out or chose to speak to those two. The other people that were excluded, is because they arent the finger pointers. I hold no ill will towards Deb or Brian regarding their chat with Christina. Now, that doesnt mean I think its fair for them to try to figure out how to involve me without reprocussion(s) but hey, its not my site and I see that posting in other threads that have nothing to do with me is not in my best interest anymore.

 

[Southern Wolf]

Well, I see someone beat me to starting this thread. I am tired of seeing this being discussed in the BOI thread. Like Harold said, if you have a problem then bring it here. I was in the chat, so I saw it all, and I have it all saved on my computer and a thumb drive in the form of screen shots in a Word document.

1. Christina was not calling the shots on anything.

2. She accused at least four people of doing one thing or another. I will not mention names at this time. It isn't fair to them.

3. Christina did not create the private chat room.

4. There was no FREE PASS offered here. You people are assuming way to much.

5. Christina never posted any screen shots in chat. I took screen shots of the entire chat because I don't know how to use all of the features in chat, so this was my way of saving it. I have recieved a few screen shots within the past few hours that came from Christina in emails. These are screen shots that she is trying to say back up her claims. This information will be reviewed by a select few, and then a decision will be made. None of the people she has accused will be in the select few that I mentioned.

6. I am not going to guarantee anything will be shown to the public. If it is decided that it is bull crap, then there will be no reason to share it. It will only cause more distractions, and more derailing of the facts. The waters are muddy enough and don't need to be even dirtier.

7. I explained to Christina that both of their accounts (hers and Jeffs) had full access to the BOI. She knows she can come on there.

I happened to wonder into chat and she was already there. All of the people in the private chat allowed her to speak without name calling or attacks. Some of the people kicked out were being somewhat disrespectful. So then all but Deb, Harold, and Myself remained. Whether we agreed with her or disagreed didn't matter. We allowed her to talk freely without negativity towards her.

I assure all of you. If there were in fact more people involved with this scam, then they need to be exposed. I am not siding with anyone here. I am only stating facts, and they need to be looked at. If anyone had a role in the deception, then they need to go down as well.

So everyone needs to relax a bit, and be patient. Stop assuming, and keep things in focus.

Actually your wrong here... it goes to add more proof to her MO. She is trying to hide the truth with lies... .just like the bogus check and bank statement.

Either way... it needs to come out. If she is lieing.... why protect her. Burn her.... and more evidence to show a pattern.

 

[DaveyFig]

I was quoted on the BOI thread, and since I can't respond there, and it pertains to this, I will respond here.

Once I accessed the chat room (the password was "wise"), I shared that with others. I was banned while Christina was allowed to share screen shots and files. Now those files aren't being shared here. I was able to access the whole site during my ban, but could not log into the chat area for at least an hour.

That is because any staff member can ban you from chat.... then unban from chat and it only affects the chat room. We too use vBulliten on our site and a chat mod. I mostly just gag members for 2 mins if they get to riled up and are causing troubles.

I posted the above because it was stated that there was no way to ban Christina from the chat if she had access to any other part of the site. I think people think that I am whining about being banned. I'm not. If there was reason for the ban, so be it. I have been kicked out of stuff before. Live and learn. I keep bringing up the banning because it is repeated that Christina could not have been banned when people ask why she was protected in the chat room.

As Rich stated, the chat program is a separate mod, it is not part of the forum software directly. If a user has access to the forums in any capacity, they can access the chat room.


The private chat was initiated by the user who created the room. It was in no way facilitated, encouraged, condoned, or initiated by the site.
So lets not continue to make it out to appear that this site in some way allowed the Wises some sort of private platform to speak from.

The only way to ban them from the chat room would be to ban them from the entire site. That would only hand them the excuse that they couldn't defend or explain themselves because they weren't allowed to.
As it is they only have access to the BOI, which is a constant reminder that they are not posting to this thread by their own choice. Unfortunately access to just the BOI still includes access to the chat room, and the features that it contains. nothing can be done about that.

I would also add that entire chat sessions can be saved easily, if someone present thinks to do so. It's not entirely temporary, just not automatically permanent.

Just for the record here, the chat system is a third party mod that my programmer installed. There is no way through vbulletin to block someone from accessing it unless they are totally banned from the site. If they can access even one forum, then they can have access to the chat system.

 

[TattooLost]

Any emails yet? Guess it takes Christina a few days to create the evidence?

I don't see why anyone would want to protect Christina and Jeff. Sorry, but that's exactly what it seems like certain people are doing, but "not disclosing" anything for whatever reason. Unless there's something said or shown that might make you believe she had a good reason for stealing all that money, why help her? Is it just to be in the limelight? To have people wagging their tails at your feet, waiting for you to throw out a little piece of information?

I've avoided that BOI thread pretty much, and Fauna in general. I already hated taking charity, though we needed it and it helped greatly. Then all this crap happened, and it's turned into a three-ring circus.

I've got some dear friends thanks to this site. Luckily I can still keep in touch with them without all the drama.

On a final note, thank you to EVERYONE that donated, to us AND to Maggie. Even if it all didn't get where it was supposed to go, the thought alone means a lot. Thanks, from the bottom of mine and Sandra's heart.

Cya.

 

[Southern Wolf]

Well Dean, I'm not going to get into an argument here with you. We all have an opinion, so what agrees with you might not agree with someone else. I have been attacked several times in threads myself, but that is not going to run me off. If you let what others say run you off then that is up to you. If you chose to be silent, the one silencing you, is you yourself and no one else.

I have never accused you of anything, but I have found some of your statements to be somewhat questionable, and others have as well. I would love to see a happy ending to all of this and to see those responsible pay for their actions. If more people were involved then they need to be exposed. I don't remember Christina saying anything about me staying or not staying. Maybe Harold saved it all and he will show it, I don't know. In my opinion if this all leads to crap, then it will be of no use what so ever. It would only create more garbage to weed through. Nothing can change what has happened. People can think of me as they will, but I have not done anything wrong here, and I am protecting no one.

I have to disagree.... it will show a pattern with these two. It goes towards building a case against their character in a court of law. It should be shown for that if for nothing else.

 

[Chrisw]

Wow, this is amazing.

 

[StrictlyExotics]

Any emails yet? Guess it takes Christina a few days to create the evidence?

I don't see why anyone would want to protect Christina and Jeff. Sorry, but that's exactly what it seems like certain people are doing, but "not disclosing" anything for whatever reason. Unless there's something said or shown that might make you believe she had a good reason for stealing all that money, why help her? Is it just to be in the limelight? To have people wagging their tails at your feet, waiting for you to throw out a little piece of information?

I've avoided that BOI thread pretty much, and Fauna in general. I already hated taking charity, though we needed it and it helped greatly. Then all this crap happened, and it's turned into a three-ring circus.

I've got some dear friends thanks to this site. Luckily I can still keep in touch with them without all the drama.

On a final note, thank you to EVERYONE that donated, to us AND to Maggie. Even if it all didn't get where it was supposed to go, the thought alone means a lot. Thanks, from the bottom of mine and Sandra's heart.

Cya.

Rick, it was not charity. It was about two families in a small tight-knit community we all care about helping them in a time of need. You and Maggie were an integral part in me realizing that I actually had a heart and cared about someones needs. My wife has been very vocal about you getting whats due to you as it seems that people forget about that part of it.

I wish you the nothing but the best and hope that we both run into each other wherever that may be.

 

[Southern Wolf]

How did you get the password to the chat room?

This one I can answer from my site..... staff dont need passwords. We have all access.

 

[Southern Wolf]

Any emails yet? Guess it takes Christina a few days to create the evidence?

I don't see why anyone would want to protect Christina and Jeff. Sorry, but that's exactly what it seems like certain people are doing, but "not disclosing" anything for whatever reason. Unless there's something said or shown that might make you believe she had a good reason for stealing all that money, why help her? Is it just to be in the limelight? To have people wagging their tails at your feet, waiting for you to throw out a little piece of information?

I've avoided that BOI thread pretty much, and Fauna in general. I already hated taking charity, though we needed it and it helped greatly. Then all this crap happened, and it's turned into a three-ring circus.

I've got some dear friends thanks to this site. Luckily I can still keep in touch with them without all the drama.

On a final note, thank you to EVERYONE that donated, to us AND to Maggie. Even if it all didn't get where it was supposed to go, the thought alone means a lot. Thanks, from the bottom of mine and Sandra's heart.

Cya.

I wouldnt believe anything she posted without a team of folks going over it.

To the two people that is supposed to be getting the evidence.

Do you realize it took about 6 or 8 different members to fully pick appart their last bit of evidence... and everyone of us had different things we caught on... and thus made it easier for the next person.

Take for instace I found out what program they used to doctor the images.... but once I put that info out... then (I think it was) LauraB was able to locate the font as a download since it didnt come with the program.

So how do ya'll know who will be the best people to go over the "evidence"...and I use that term very loosly.

 

[WebSlave]

I was quoted on the BOI thread, and since I can't respond there, and it pertains to this, I will respond here.





I posted the above because it was stated that there was no way to ban Christina from the chat if she had access to any other part of the site. I think people think that I am whining about being banned. I'm not. If there was reason for the ban, so be it. I have been kicked out of stuff before. Live and learn. I keep bringing up the banning because it is repeated that Christina could not have been banned when people ask why she was protected in the chat room.

You do not understand the mechanics of how the chat system works. A member cannot be blocked from entering the chat if they have access to any forum on this site. Yes, they can be banned from the chat, but only from within the chat and while they are currently taking part in it. The ban is not permanent even if the above mentioned conditions apply. They will be able to access the chat later. That's two entirely different mechanisms at work that you are confusing yourself, and apparently working yourself into a lather over.

Furthermore, as Harald stated, if a member creates their own private chat, then they have an implicit right to do as they please within their own private room there (barring illegal activities, of course). That includes removing members who may guess at the password. As I understand it, Deb was the one who created that private chat room, so the only one calling the shots there was Deb herself.

 

[Shadera]

I honestly don't see what the hang-up is about sharing what was said in chat. The reasons given for not sharing aren't making much sense (and are somewhat contradictory).

1. "Nothing new was said" ......ok...that wouldn't be a big surprise, really. So why not prove it by letting everyone else see that nothing new was said?

2. "She accused others of bad things and it would be unfair to drag their names into it" ........ I agree it would be unfair to just toss their names out without the full context of what was said. BUT...if she's going to try and implicate others in her twisted schemes in order to deflect heat from herself, I think that is something everyone should know and see in writing and the people she has accused (if there really are any such) should be allowed to have their say.

3. "We're waiting for certain 'evidence' to be e-mailed to us and then it will be reviewed by a select few" ........... since when is BOI-related evidence only meant to be reviewed by a "select few"? Since when does a "select few" get to decide what is "worthy" to be shared on the BOI?

What's done is done....and hollering at Deb or Brian for deigning to consent to and facilitate a private chat with Christina is pointless. But I'm telling the both of you....whatever your motives were going in, all you're accomplishing at this point is shooting yourselves in the foot and making the entire mess even more muddier than it was a couple days ago.

If I am understanding the gist of what supposedly went down in the chat room, Christina is trying to throw some other folks under the bus? Ask yourself this question - if you were going down and someone else truly was in on it, wouldn't you burn them immediately rather than waiting a few weeks and then conveniently remembering they were involved? Perhaps what is more likely to be happening in their world is that they're starting to feel the burn, and as they've done in the past, are fabricating more story to try and take the heat off of them, where it squarely belongs. My guess is that the people mentioned were ones that were perceived as being closest to them. Probably Dean, Dave, and whomever else they chatted with a lot. I could be way off, but that sounds about how low they (the Wises) would stoop.

I too hold no faith that there are "a few" folks on this forum that should in entirety be trusted with what amounts to the reputation of the people Christina is implicating. Being lumped in with the Wises could put someone's rep down for good, and I don't know about the rest of ya'll but I'd be way more comfortable with everyone doing their little part to bring the truth to light as has happened with the unWise stories in the near past.

 

[SierraMarie]

About your wife cussing..I don't have a lot of faith in people that can't use English to get their points across, and I have been upset with someone that messed with my husband..I didn't have to get her in front of an audience and show my backside.

I haven't finished reading everything yet. But Deb you spoke my husband's name in chat before anyone else did. Deb you proceeded to speak badly about my husband when I wasn't even talking to you. Deb you proceeded to do all this knowing I was Dean's wife and was in chat. If anyone showed their backside to an audience it was you. I was NOT going to stand by and let you speak of my husband behind his back without saying anything.

 

[WebSlave]

Furthermore, this forum is NOT for personal pissing duels between members. Matter of fact, there really isn't any forum on this site allocated for that purpose. If such issues cannot be resolved privately, then you all need to meet somewhere in person and start taking whacks at each other with two-by-fours until SOMETHING gets resolved.

I personally don't care who doesn't like whom, nor who doesn't trust whom. If it continues, rather than trying to figure out who is at fault, and then be inundated with "but HE started it!", I will simply ban all participants for a few days. That way you can all just get pissed at me for a while.

 

[DaveyFig]

You do not understand the mechanics of how the chat system works. A member cannot be blocked from entering the chat if they have access to any forum on this site. Yes, they can be banned from the chat, but only from within the chat and while they are currently taking part in it. The ban is not permanent even if the above mentioned conditions apply. They will be able to access the chat later. That's two entirely different mechanisms at work that you are confusing yourself, and apparently working yourself into a lather over.

Furthermore, as Harald stated, if a member creates their own private chat, then they have an implicit right to do as they please within their own private room there (barring illegal activities, of course). That includes removing members who may guess at the password. As I understand it, Deb was the one who created that private chat room, so the only one calling the shots there was Deb herself.

Rich, I understand the chat system just as you described it. I didn't say she could be banned permanently, I'm just saying that her stay could have been terminated as quickly and easily as mine was. I know she could still be there as long as there wasn't a moderator around to keep her out, but had Harald not been there, I wouldn't have been banned either. Really, there is no "lather", but when people asked why she was allowed to stay, they were lead to believe that there was nothing that could have been done.
Deb did create the password, and I did weasel my way in. Deb allowed me to stay, and I watched as she kicked others out. She didn't remove me for guessing the password. Had Deb kicked me out, I would have gone back to the main room and not thought anything of it. The message that I got was that I was banned and needed to try later.

 

[joseydiann]

If I am understanding the gist of what supposedly went down in the chat room, Christina is trying to throw some other folks under the bus? Ask yourself this question - if you were going down and someone else truly was in on it, wouldn't you burn them immediately rather than waiting a few weeks and then conveniently remembering they were involved? Perhaps what is more likely to be happening in their world is that they're starting to feel the burn, and as they've done in the past, are fabricating more story to try and take the heat off of them, where it squarely belongs. My guess is that the people mentioned were ones that were perceived as being closest to them. Probably Dean, Dave, and whomever else they chatted with a lot. I could be way off, but that sounds about how low they (the Wises) would stoop.

I too hold no faith that there are "a few" folks on this forum that should in entirety be trusted with what amounts to the reputation of the people Christina is implicating. Being lumped in with the Wises could put someone's rep down for good, and I don't know about the rest of ya'll but I'd be way more comfortable with everyone doing their little part to bring the truth to light as has happened with the unWise stories in the near past.

OMG finally!! I agree 100%

Amanda

 

[SirenSanJose]

3. "We're waiting for certain 'evidence' to be e-mailed to us and then it will be reviewed by a select few" ........... since when is BOI-related evidence only meant to be reviewed by a "select few"? Since when does a "select few" get to decide what is "worthy" to be shared on the BOI?

This is the part that bothers me the most. A "select few" review isn't what the BOI is about and never has been. As I stated in the other thread, it goes against the entire "permanent and transparent" principle the site is FOR.

(I know I'm a relatively new poster, so I'll probably be discredited. So be it. But the Wise scandal brought me out of the woodwork after being a BOI reader for years and years with pride and amazement at what it does.)

It took the sleuthing work of a LOT of people in the original thread to bust open all of the lies in the forged documents we were given. I'm not sure "a select few" would have been able to hunt down the exact font the fake check was dummied in, for example. If she's giving us more forged, fake "proof" of things, aren't more eyes better? A couple of people can overlook things, or not have the skills to bring them out. It took a large handful of people to really bust open the extent of the crimes and lies when this all shook down.