Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > Brat Camp
Karen In Dallas
OverLordd:
--- Quote --- All this was not exactly what I had in mind when I started the thread.
--- End quote ---
Its fornits, its got a mind of its own.
Troll Control:
--- Quote ---On 2005-09-01 06:29:00, Anonymous wrote:
""She was a troll who accidentely gave a little too much info about herself out. THAT is the lesson here. IF ya gunna troll, try not to get caught!"
Uh- I don't exactly think that is what happened. Seems like some Fornits kid did a witch hunt, decided she was the parent from ST who was posting, and posted her email address and a supposed phone number which turned out to not even be correct. There was no real proof that she ever had posted on this forum. "
--- End quote ---
Hey, Karen! Nice to have you back again.
Good thing that we don't operate needing "absolute proof."
We operate by "preponderance of evidence" and it suggests that Karen was posting, was insulting people unprovoked, being nasty, making ad hominem arguments, etc.
The problem was that she got "busted" by a "dumb fornits kid" who was able to forensically compare her verbiage, punctuation and even personal information she stupidly posted on both sites.
If she were smarter than the person who blew up her spot, she'd be fine. It appears she wasn't nearly as smart as those whom she chose to disparage and was furiously and rightfully ridiculed for it.
She didn't like that at all and consequently turned up the rhetoric. She brought it on herself and deserved every bit of it.
If you're not Karen, what's your vested interest in supporting that coke-sniffing, teen-hating drunken sot?
Love ya!
Anonymous:
"If you're not Karen, what's your vested interest in supporting that coke-sniffing, teen-hating drunken sot?"
Well, I'm not Karen but I suppose it doesn't matter much if you believe that or not.
And as far as supporting her, it's not her personally, I just think it's a misuse of this site to "out" people when you really are not sure that you've named the correct name---a little evidence just isn't enough to slander someone.
And about the posting of "Karen in Dallas"'s phone number that happened here: what if some poor woman in Dallas got harassed because a fuck nut here listed her phone number---and it hadn't occur to said fuck nut that there might be more than one person in Dallas with that name. It's not a responsible, ethical way to act, period.
The terms "coke-sniffing" and "drunken" used by a previous poster to describe this woman may or may not be slanderous, I don't know. They do sound like descriptive terms that by personal admission would apply to many of her opponents at this site.
Anonymous:
Anon- I am not Karen, either, but I am very familiar with her from the other, more reputable site. She is an extremely intelligent lawyer and an excellent parent whose kid has bounced back after his wilderness and TBS stints to be a super-star in every way. She told me she posted a few times on this site and then got out when she realized there was no rational discussion going on.
She also told me she was harassed by instant message and email after her contact information was made public on this forum- by Deborah among others.
Troll Control:
So it WAS the correct information and she DID post here.
That's what I suspected. Thank you for validating my opinion.
By the way, you can't slander an anonymous person. Who's going to sue for saying "Joe in St. Louis is a cocksucker." Get real, stupid.
I heard about the coke-sniffing and excessive drinking from one of your "buddies" at the "more reputable site." I'd be careful what I said to those people under the guise of "confidence." They'll sell ya down the river in a heartbeat.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version