The Who

[TheWho]

For those of you just joining us (shyeah, right), its TBS numbers are make-believe.

::troll::

Stop. Feeding. It.

Well, at least I am giving my sources.  Some of the data provided me from fornits people are kids who died that were never within 100 miles of a wilderness camp or TBS before or when they died.  Your data is beefed up to make a point.

I have reviewed all the data presented me and applied the same boundary conditions as the NCES.  If you feel I have omitted a name make it known to myself and these people and I will add them

[psy]

Don't know why i bother:

http://http://www.teenadvocatesusa.homestead.com/INMEMORIAM.html

see those dead kids.  yes.  those ones.

[TheWho]

Don't know why i bother:

http://http://www.teenadvocatesusa.homestead.com/INMEMORIAM.html

see those dead kids.  yes.  those ones.

My response to Milk was in defense of the TBS data I am collecting, I dont question your data only poss the question.  I will stay out of your thread as requested.

[RobertBruce]

Cindy let it go. Why does winning matter to you so much? Espically after you've clearly lost.

Youve presented the same tired data again and again and I've shot it down each and every time. People are tired of hearing you spew off the same nonsense time and again, they are tired of watching us go in circles with each other. You need to face reality, your data is skewed and your point has been disproven.

Can you seriously not see that no one is on your side?

No one Cindy, not the posters on fornits, not people who collect this data, not even the imaginary people you have secret meetings with.

Even the program devotees are absent from your corner Cindy.


Why is this?

Is it because we're angry? Or jealous? Or bothered by your data? Is it because we're "disgruntled ex students and employees"?

No Cindy.

It's because anyone with half a brain can see how wrong you are.

You're only making a fool out of yourself, no one else. You can keep digging that hole if you want to, but it's just going to keep getting deeper.


For someone who is as obsessed as you are with maintaining credibility you sure seem bent on destroying what little you have.

It's sad really.

[RobertBruce]

I apologize in advanced, but it seems to be the only thing this whackjob understands.


Here again Cindy is what we have. What you have is pure nonsense.


Here's the first year:

Out of 52,000,000 public school kids 16 were killed in school

Translating to 1 out of every 3,250,000 kids being killed.

Out of those 52,000,000 6 committed suicide while in school.

Translating to 1 out of 8,666,667 kids killing themselves.

Of those same 52,000,000 kids 2140 were killed outside of school.

Translating to 1 out of every 24,300 kids being killed.

Of those same 52,000,000 public school kids 1928 kids committed suicide outside of school.

Translating to roughly 1 out of every 27,000 kids committing suicide.

Out of 20,000 kids in the private theraputic sector so far we have 7 who were killed by staff members.

Translating to 1 out of every 2,857 kids being murdered by staff.

Of those same 20,000 kids 2 committed suicide.

Translating to 1 out of every 10,000 committing suicide.

This is of course for only one year June of 1999-July 2000

[RobertBruce]

The second year:

In the public sector out of 52,000,000 kids 2059 were killed outside of school, roughly translating to:

1 out of every 25,255 kids being killed outside of school.

Of those same 52,000,000 1,890 committed suicide outside of school.

Translating to roughly

1 out of every 27,513 kids committing suicide outside of school.

In school out of 52,000,000 17 kids were killed. Translating to:

1 out of every 3,058,824 kids being killed in school.

Of those same 52,000,000 5 kids committed suicide while in school.

Translating to:

1 out of every 10,400,000 kids killing themselves while in school.

In the Private Theraputic Sector out of 20,000 kids 6 kids were killed by staff members, translating to:

1 out of every 3,334 kids being killed by staff members.

Of those same 20,000 kids 1 committed suicide, translating to:

1 out of every 20,000 kids killing themselves

[RobertBruce]

So for the 2001-2002 school year we have the following data regarding deaths in the public school/sector versus those in the private theraputic sector:

Out of 52,000,000 kids in the public sector 17 were killed while in school.

Translating to:

1 out of every 3,058,824 kids being murdered while in school

Out of those same 52,000,000 kids in the public sector 5 committed suicide while in school.

Translating to:


1 out of every 10,400,000 kids killing themselves while in public school.

Of those same 52,000,000 2,036 were killed in the public sector.

Translating to:

1 out of every 25540 kids being killed

Of those same 52,000,000 kids 1,772 kids committed suicide.

Translating to

1 out of every 29345 kids in the public sector killing themselves

In the private theraputic sector out of 20,000 kids 2 were murdered by staff members.

Translating to:

1 out of every 10,000 kids being murdered by staff members.

Of those same 20,000 kids in the private theraputic sector 1 committed suicide.

Translating to:

1 out of every 20,000 kids killing themselves.


At least its an improvement over the previous years I guess.

http://nces.ed.gov/programs/crimeindica ... le_1.1.asp

[TheWho]

Bob, fairly simple:  The results you present are based on assumptions and that is fine as long as you back up where your numbers come from.  (for example where did you get the bases of your assumption of 20,000 children?)  All these numbers need to be clear.

When providing me with data you tried to slip this person thru who was never even near a TBS in her life:
Candace Newmaker
10 years old
4/18/2000
, so your credibility really is in question here and needs to be scrutinized if you are making assumptions to prove a point.


I am just presenting base line data from known sources.  No assumptions are being made at this point.

[Troll Control]

Quote:
TheWho wrote:
"forget HLA, try helping more of the kids and their parents"

The response:

I'm not sure how I can help the parents and kids at HLA more by ignoring the fact that they have been defrauded and horribly abused, respectively.

Can you help me understand how forgetting about child abuse helps it go away?

this is a good question.  why won't you answer it, who?  i noticed rather than answer for your comment, you changed the subject (again).  can you answer the question? how does ignoring child abuse help kids?

[psy]

Don't know why i bother:

http://http://www.teenadvocatesusa.homestead.com/INMEMORIAM.html

see those dead kids.  yes.  those ones.

My response to Milk was in defense of the TBS data I am collecting, I dont question your data only poss the question.  I will stay out of your thread as requested.

Thank you for respecting my request.  I apologize for telling you to fuck off.

[RobertBruce]

Bob, fairly simple: The results you present are based on assumptions and that is fine as long as you back up where your numbers come from. (for example where did you get the bases of your assumption of 20,000 children?) All these numbers need to be clear.

You are correct. The number 20,000 was given as a rough estimate as to how many kids were locked up in the PTS. It was agreed upon at a secret meeting a number of us attended at the Newark Hilton. Punch was served. If you have another number I'd be more than willing to add it to a seperate spread sheet and include it in later data.

When providing me with data you tried to slip this person thru who was never even near a TBS in her life:
Candace Newmaker
10 years old
4/18/2000

Please provide the link to the post in which I claimed this girl was at a TBS.


I'll wait.

so your credibility really is in question here and needs to be scrutinized if you are making assumptions to prove a point.

Is it now? Hmmmm, so by that rationale any "assumptions" you had made would then lower your credibility yes? You let me know if you want to stick with that argument Cindy. I'm assuming you won't because youre a cry baby and hate to be proven wrong.

I am just presenting base line data from known sources. No assumptions are being made at this point.

Oh but there you're wrong Cindy. You've assumed numerous times that the deaths committed in the PTS were brought before criminal courts and judges ruled them as accidents or other non homicides.

[TheWho]

You are correct. The number 20,000 was given as a rough estimate as to how many kids were locked up in the PTS. It was agreed upon at a secret meeting a number of us attended at the Newark Hilton. Punch was served. If you have another number I'd be more than willing to add it to a seperate spread sheet and include it in later data.

What I typically suggest to people prior to presenting any results is to put an asterisk after the data which may need clarification or where some assumptions were made so the reader can understand where the data has come from or based upon.

Maybe something like this  * - This is a rough estimate as too how many kids are locked up and is based on a consensus taken at a secret meeting on such and such a date?

Something along that line

Please provide the link to the post in which I claimed this girl was at a TBS.

As I was collecting data for the July1, 1999 thru June 2000 time period, you provided me with several data points which did not fit and Candace Newmaker was one?.. about halfway down the page.

http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?p=244162#244162

If this girl is being used in your data set I would clarify that she was at a private home at the time receiving attachment therapy by a nurse?..this was way outside my established boundary conditions and it is not clear what your conditions are and whether or not she fits into your set.

Oh but there you're wrong Cindy. You've assumed numerous times that the deaths committed in the PTS were brought before criminal courts and judges ruled them as accidents or other non homicides

If you feel I was unjust in my review of the data just ask.  If you have a name you feel should be in my list throw it on the table and lets take a look at it.  I believe I used the same rules of acceptance that the NCES used.

[Troll Control]

Quote:
TheWho wrote:
"forget HLA, try helping more of the kids and their parents"

The response:

I'm not sure how I can help the parents and kids at HLA more by ignoring the fact that they have been defrauded and horribly abused, respectively.

Can you help me understand how forgetting about child abuse helps it go away?

this is a good question.  why won't you answer it, who?  i noticed rather than answer for your comment, you changed the subject (again).  can you answer the question? how does ignoring child abuse help kids?

answer, please, who.

[TheWho]

this is a good question. why won't you answer it, who? i noticed rather than answer for your comment, you changed the subject (again). can you answer the question? how does ignoring child abuse help kids?


answer, please, who.

Ignoring any problem doesn?t make it go away, especially child abuse.  If you believe the problem is focused on one or a couple of schools then great, state that and focus on the problem.  If you feel the entire industry is abusive then focus on the entire industry.
Shutting one school down is like pulling a dandelion after it has seeded or not getting the root (root cause) many more will spring up else where.  This is very ineffective and doesn?t do the kids any good.  If one believes the system is abusive then y0u need to identify and attack the root cause of the problem (seed the entire lawn as you will).  Work on making it more difficult to open up new schools or work with the states/government to insist in minimum standards or work to enforce over sight etc..  But spending ones entire professional career trying to close one school smacks of personal agenda, time could be much better spent elsewhere if the children?s safety truly where the top concern.

[Anonymous]

time could be much better spent elsewhere

Making fortunes for the owners?

if the children?s safety truly where the top concern.

Which we all known is not. We do agree on this.