|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 17, 2013 21:49:11 GMT -5
Cross-posted from AnonNews
July 10, 2013
Many of the posts by "Gwen" were copy/pasted from hoatalk.com. The name of the thread of this post is "Florida Covenant Expiration MRTA" if anyone cares to read the full context of the posts. I have been a contributing member for several years and posted under different names whenever I forgot my password and had to re-register. Forum members refrain from identifying their HOA and use made-up UserNames as a Terms of Service Agreement.
Whether the writer agrees or not, applying judicious anonymity in certain circumstances is not an evil deed and can be both self-protective to facilitate truth-telling and other-protective to avoid casting an unintended shadow on the entity under discussion. (Certainly, if his memory serves him, he should be able to understand the wisdom of maintaining anonymity after the NewsHound was shut down after being threatened by the Management/BOD in Jan 2012.)
_________________________________________________________________
June 11, 2013
So someone used an anonymous name or several, BIG DEAL. My question to the Anon. post 2 up is : How then can you ask an anon. or fictitious poster ANYTHING ? (this is the problem we have with people that bump their gums before engaging their brain...)
I think that using a false name isn't near as bad as thinking one is important and must lie and deceive people to avoid the truth to cover their ass.
Time has expired on the few that feel they can just blurt out statements and not be held accountable or to prove what they say to be correct.
Take note liars, come clean or get exposed to the Community for what you Truly are OR option B. SHUT UP .
Signed
Anon.
__________________________________________________________
One thing I don't understand is why the person who is bashing GWENG about using an Anon. name DID NOT sign off with their real name ?
Is it because if they don't convince anyone of their distorted view of things they can continue to hide and spread more lies ? Self protection is key to liars because they know the consequences when caught by the ones they deceive.
________________________________________________________
I don't know why people have such a problem with anonymity; the only problem I have with it is when powerful and moneyed attorneys attempt to intimidate those who might differ with its clients' interest target individuals to shut down conversation and threaten them with frivolous lawsuits. THAT is the main reason for assuming the cover of anonymity! And, since that has already happened in SLR with the presently-seated Board, I have every reason to be cautious. However, to eliminate this "issue" from the discussion, I sH all sign and we sH all see.
S u e Tg
________________________________________________________________
September 13, 2013
Wanted !!!
Reliable, substantiated, truthful, uncensored information on all things “S-bag”. I have joined and read all the former web blogs, and forums . I also read the “chug”.
None have helped to get what I am looking for. The Internet can be a good information tool, but if you read and except what someone says without some verification. You are not getting reliable information. If someone does not even put his name to something he expects you to believe is true – don't even bother to read it. The is Internet 101.
The only one that I has put their name any article is S u e T. If you speak the truth and are able to prove what you have stated. You do not have to worry about being sued or receiving unfavorable repercussions . Thus you do not need to be “Anonymous”.
Jry Sln
50 QW
_______________________________________________________
Congrats for having the courage to identify yourself. I believe in BOTH choices of communicating; there are strong arguments for disclosing authorship and in SLR, there are EXCELLENT arguments for maintaining anonymity.
I do disagree with your statement that you do not have to worry about being sued if you speak the truth. Truth is a moving target and sends many attorneys' kids to college! Remember the BOD lawsuit threats against Mik's NewsHound? Though it was legal intimidation (bluff), it was effective. Facts are an absolute defense in a libel lawsuit but it will sure cost you a lot of money to get a lawsuit adjudicated!
There is also the matter of trying to maintain harmony with your friends and neighbors; we all have different points of view and anonymity can be used as social grease to keep the wheels of friendship turning without unnecessary squealing! Some people like the "back and forth" of debate but others can get their feelings hurt.
I do not believe that an anonymous post automatically makes content "suspect" any more than I believe that someone who signs their name gives credibility to the content. For me, the content stands on its own merits. I know there are many who disagree.
I belong to a very large and active HOA forum that forbids posters to identify their HOA or their name. Perhaps the website owners don't want to get a letter from some attorney or management company demanding to know the identity of persons describing problems with their HOA or .
To your comments, I agree and would only add that people should use forums as an ADDITIONAL source of information and not as a primary source. If regarding it as a primary source, one should seek validation through a secondary source before accepting information as TRUE.
For my part, I am a frequent poster and attempt to do my fact-checking before I post. (Heck, I even fact-check email circulars and drive some of my pals nuts!) When I state an opinion, I try to say that it is my understanding of fact or qualify an opinion. On the Covenants thread, I began to sign my name to posts as the entire issue of "anonymity" was taking over the subject and it was becoming bogged down with angst about anonymity.
Subject-focused social forums, by their very nature, are not intended to be a fact-rich environment, but they can be valuable in pointing readers towards the facts and enlarging our points of view.
S u e Tg
|
|
|
|
Post by Dianne Gillies on Nov 2, 2014 11:34:31 GMT -5
Yes, I am using my own name because I totally disagree with negative posts/letters/newsletters that are anonymous. If you believe something and want to share it then you should have the decency to sign your name. I have seen too many committees, groups that have been attacked by anonymous negative messages. Yes we all have the right to our opinion but we shouldn't malign others unless we are willing to be identified.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alaska HEMI R/T Jm Admin. on Nov 2, 2014 11:44:51 GMT -5
Yes, I am using my own name because I totally disagree with negative posts/letters/newsletters that are anonymous. If you believe something and want to share it then you should have the decency to sign your name. I have seen too many committees, groups that have been attacked by anonymous negative messages. Yes we all have the right to our opinion but we shouldn't malign others unless we are willing to be identified. Opinions are like having gas. Everyone has it but nobody wants to hear it. Everyone has a right to an opinion, of course, just like everyone has the right to free speech, just like everyone has the right to be anonymous.
People having an opinion about something that isn't their business have the right to voice their opinion, but, they have a right to speak that opinion in their head.
Jm Grnt aka JG Alaska Cookout King
|
|
|
|
Post by Carol Grnt on Nov 2, 2014 11:59:37 GMT -5
It's ok to be anonymous, don't see anything wrong w/that...but, IT IS WRONG what certain individuals are doing in SLR by saying what they think and what they heard from someone else TO BE FACT, WHEN IT's MERELY THEIR OPINION--OR SOMEONE ELSE'S.
Too many people in SLR have been blinded by B.S. opinion comments that others accept as facts when they are NOT FACTUAL.
This is the crux of the issue here, and has nothing to do with anonymity.
I know this forum is putting out the truth and the facts, or that WHICH IS NOT OPINION, in addition to opinions, and if someone wishes to remain nameless, so what?
I know for a fact we have bigger problems in SLR, and that's what this forum is here for--to inform those who are sick and tired of hearing lies and hear say instead of the facts and the truth.
Personally I don't care if I see a name in the box or not, if it's true and if it's a fact, it needs to be said, period. |
|
Anonymous Environmentalist
Guest
|
Post by Anonymous Environmentalist on Nov 2, 2014 12:39:28 GMT -5
TRUTH AND FACTS DO NOT CHANGE,(NO MATTER WHOSE MOUTH THEY COME FROM)...LIARS AND THE LIES THEY TELL ALWAYS WILL.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 2, 2014 13:43:22 GMT -5
Dianne Gillies wrote:
This "anonymity" argument seems to go on and on...a superficial reading of the subject will describe the evil of cover of anonymity (chatty child molisterines posing as "friends") as well as the beneficial shield of anonymity (whistleblowers, preservation of relationships). In S-bag, the purpose of anonymity in the social Ntwerk environment is to avoid being targeted by MANBOD for retaliatory actions. Thus, anonymity is reasonable and justifiable to further communication.
You say "If you believe something and want to share it then you should have the decency to sign your name." Why? I really don't have any idea how to evaluate your comments or consider a new way of looking at the issue. As it stands, it is just an opinion with no rationale to "flesh it out". Do you think the negative message would be positive... or less negative...if it were signed by the author? Some religions conduct confessions in an environment of secrecy where one's identity is private. Does this anonymity promote or degrade the quality of the expression and honesty of the remorse for sins? Is fear of retaliation for free expression a justifiable reason to seek the protection of anonymity?
IMO, content stands or fails on its own, regardless of who the author is. Personally, I would rather not have the content "colored" by a preconception of WHO wrote it! My best example would be Mamager--I would be extremely prejudicial and inclined to dismiss anything she wrote. However, if she were to write a cogent argument-that made sense and was spelled correctly- but did not sign her name, I would read it without an advance bias and evaluate it on content alone.
I would be interested in your considered thoughts "against anonymity" in a benign social Ntwerk environment such as this. The Forum is a closed society of a limited # of participants because the subject matter is relevant only to Saddlebaggers.
Also, I fail to see how choosing to participate anonymously is related to the concept of decency.
Welcome to the Forum. It's not for sissies!
|
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Nov 2, 2014 15:40:15 GMT -5
Yes, I am using my own name because I totally disagree with negative posts/letters/newsletters that are anonymous. If you believe something and want to share it then you should have the decency to sign your name. I have seen too many committees, groups that have been attacked by anonymous negative messages. Yes we all have the right to our opinion but we shouldn't malign others unless we are willing to be identified. Dianne I applaud you using your name but obviously you have NEVER been a target by the MANBOD. I personally have tried to keep a distance from all MANBOD and their sheep like subjects but was treated in a very rude and unprofessional manner over the last 2 years and enough is enough.
This is where I vent my frustration, this is where I report the MANBOD's failure, hopefully so other owners can take heed and this is where I get my BOD meeting information because the MANBOD have become complacent and lazy in reporting all that happens in the meetings, especially if it doesn't go their way.
I do this as by the name of "Guest" because of those who come on the forum just to read and see what that person says and does. I do this so I can drive my golf cart in peace and not be yelled names as I drive by. You see, I've been a target for just knowing my friends, which is sad and sickening but that tends to be the "sheep like subjects S-bag way". This so called "nice S-bag spirit" that some talk about is made up, in my opinion. I have seen people talk behind others back as that person walks away, I have seen people verbally attacked, I have had my spouse bad named just because I stood up for my beliefs.
Enough is Enough and I won't be sticking my neck out for the "S-bag spirit cult, sheep following MANBOD, Kool-Aid drinking "there are no problems in SLR" people to cut my head off. So Dianne, just call me "Guest" and deal with it!
|
|
|
|
Post by Lra on Nov 2, 2014 16:33:14 GMT -5
Yes, I am using my own name because I totally disagree with negative posts/letters/newsletters that are anonymous. If you believe something and want to share it then you should have the decency to sign your name. I have seen too many committees, groups that have been attacked by anonymous negative messages. Yes we all have the right to our opinion but we shouldn't malign others unless we are willing to be identified. Dianne, I wish to answer your well stated thoughts on being anonymous. While most people did not check into this site from early May on, I want to let you know that two Board members that we can specifically identify, used vile, angry and assaulting derogatory language under the cover of anonymous including harm or intent to harm me and my property. They destroyed me so badly that I had to seek emotional and spiritual asylum in a monestary in British Columbia for two months. I lived more days out of my home than in it this whole past summer. All because I wrote under my own name as I am doing now. The administrators of this Forum had to make a decision to allow anonymous or not. What ended was What we see now. If the content under anonymous is supported by facts and logical thought, then it would be allowable. There is a screen in place to control abusive, inaccurate information. That allows people an avenue to voice their views either under their own name or anonymously. This has all come about due to people having their property or self harmed by a select group who wish to act as tyrants and bullies to keep the truth from surfacing. A true, honest dialog is vital to a healthy vital community. All said, I am pleased that you spoke out. Lra |
|
|
|
Post by Anita Gofradump on Nov 2, 2014 17:29:42 GMT -5
If it's B.S. and smells, I'll know it, and I gotta call it as I see it here--it doesn't matter who delivers the message--if it's not the truth or the fact, don't listen--doesn't everyone want to know the truth about what's going on in this community?
There has been too many lies told to this community's residents over the last few years and enough is enough, that is precisely why I read this forum everyday to find out the facts and the truth.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 2, 2014 17:32:50 GMT -5
Lra wrote:
As Admin, I must clarify my position relative to screening of content submitted by Guests and registered Members. I am bound by a Terms of Service (TOS) Agreement to ProBoards, the people who own the Forum. In turn, I require other Guest behavior to adhere to similar guidelines so I can stay out of hot water and continue to have forum privileges. These are not harsh guidelines. But "abuse'--like pornography, is very subjective and I, too, have a threshold for that both personally and on behalf of other Guests. These are different boundaries. Sometimes I put my own feelings aside and allow material that goes over my personal tastes but falls short of violating the TOS.
Because of the abusive behavior of certain Owners, who are known or reasonably identified, extreme and immediate response was necessary. The verbal abuse was so ugly and relentless that I briefly considered a temporary halt to all posting. However, the ProBoards team provided the best alternative in the form of a Quarantine. The purpose was to permit me to preview all posts coming from anonymous Guests and read them before permitting the post to be published. Folks who are registered on the Forum are treated differently because they had to agree to the Terms of Service individually AND their identity is known to me. They are also easily banned from participation. This is not the case with Anonymous Guests, hence, the Quarantine.
There were two recent very nasty posts about me that were stopped by the Quarantine. The computer the posts came from has been identified and I am reasonably certain by identifying words, syntax, time of day/night posts submitted, previous comparative emails etc who the person is. I might have decided to report the abusive content to the Internet Service Provider but then I realized that the ISP is within SLR and reporting would have been pointless. The Quarantine is to prevent ABUSE.
The goals are to open the forum to ALL who wish to participate--either anonymously or not--and not to be heavyhanded with "rules".
To clarify another point, there is no banning of misinformation but there may be censoring of hurtful gossip that is unfounded and unsupported by any fact or evidence. There can also be no named accusations of criminal wrongdoing without a substantial body of evidence to support that. Speculation on individual and group behavior is fair game and again, there must be "something there" you can put your finger on. An observation. A statement. A pattern of behavior. A fact. Opinions supported by evidence are very acceptable forms of public debate.
We will all make mistakes of conclusion based on our possession and understanding of facts. Inaccuracy is forgivable and, when identified, will likely be cH allenged by another Guest.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dick Tracy on Nov 2, 2014 21:11:04 GMT -5
Dianne Gillies posted this earlier today: Quote Post by Guest on 8 hours ago "Yes, I am using my own name because I totally disagree with negative posts/letters/newsletters that are anonymous. If you believe something and want to share it then you should have the decency to sign your name. I have seen too many committees, groups that have been attacked by anonymous negative messages. Yes we all have the right to our opinion but we shouldn't malign others unless we are willing to be identified." (end quote) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dianne, I have a question, you stated: "I have seen too many committees, groups that have been attacked by anonymous negative messages." Exactly what committees and groups have you seen, that have been attacked by anonymous negative messages. I am very curious about that statement. Please give us some more details, as to what you have seen.
I have made statements about our BODs and the Election Procedures, that our leaders do not follow. I was not talking about The Election Committee, they get their instructions from our Elected Leaders. Some of our friends are on the election committee, they are not the problem. The problem is with SLohA's Board of Directors and the Management. Jm 16RC  |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 3, 2014 5:45:47 GMT -5
Anita Gofradump wrote:
From the mindless hate expressed in some of the emails received in the last few months, my answer to that question is NO. The tone and content of these emails goes far beyond the "not wanting to know". There are a few "Certifiables" living amongst us.
On the other side of the coin, most people who don't want to know or hear about anything except "sunshine, lollipops and rainbows" simply hit the Unsubscribe button and behave like mature adults. Mik and I also found this behavior with the NewsHound--there were a few nutcakes who were intolerant of anything that departed from their world view but most people expressed their displeasure in an appropriate manner.
On the edge of the coin are a few emails where people ask "Change my email address to another one" or say "I enjoy reading the Forum" or "Nice job".
|
|
Name remains the same
Guest
|
Post by Name remains the same on Nov 3, 2014 5:55:41 GMT -5
Yes, I am using my own name because I totally disagree with negative posts/letters/newsletters that are anonymous. If you believe something and want to share it then you should have the decency to sign your name. I have seen too many committees, groups that have been attacked by anonymous negative messages. Yes we all have the right to our opinion but we shouldn't malign others unless we are willing to be identified. Dianne, its not so important what you ''believe''. What's most important is what you can PROVE. It's a good thing were given only one mouth and two ears. Talk in SLR is cheap, there is plenty of it and it generally comes from both sides of someone's mouth that just wants to talk and not listen. Many will wait to speak, others wait to listen. |
|
|
|
Post by Anon. Owner on Nov 3, 2014 9:37:50 GMT -5
Maybe some examples of what happened to other communities could help shed light on how toxic Scum-baugh Inc.'s mgmt. co. is to HOA's. I've heard that other HOA's in central FL have suffered financial losses because of this very same mgmt. co.'s out of control over-spending.
I've also heard that this very same mgmt. co. that SLR has, has either bankrupted or nearly bankrupted other HOA's in central FL.
When other HOA's members attempted to get info. from their BOD's and/or bookkeepers regarding this issue, they were very tight lipped--as if they were perhaps all paid to keep quiet about what this mgmt. co. did (wrong) to their community.
Gee, I wonder what was going on in these other HOA's that had to be kept so hush-hush? Anyone out there know for sure?
If this mgmt. co. has a bad track record, it ought to be put out there and made known so they do not destroy other HOA's.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 3, 2014 17:51:06 GMT -5
There is a lot of smoke here but no fire because the people with the facts are reluctant to talk.
Several years ago, a few people in here did make discreet inquiries with varying degrees of success--from a "deer in the headlights" response to another contact who said "I believe we dodged a bullet". Stmbug Ixx knows that this is a Sm all town where people know each other and they talk. Stmbug Ixx got in here with ReROOKa's sponsorship. He had virtually no experience with HOA's. He appeared to have a very modest real estate business at the time of expansion into "property management". There could not have been any serious vetting of this company. The sitting board accepted the inevitability of ReROOKa ushering in his golf buddy, fired a perfectly good accountant (Paychex) on a trumped up excuse so they could pay Stmbug Ixx for bookkeeping..and here we are 4 years later--divided, angry and miserable! We have a nasty witch for a manager who houses feral cats at the office, costs are climbing, our park-like property is pockmarked with ugly metal towers, there are plans to recall the board, two lawsuits and maybe a third on the way and we have to submit Official Records Requests for understandable financial information. Certainly not a ringing endorsement for the competence of the management company.
It is clear to me that if even half of what was told to me was true, that other associations provided "on the job training on how to SPEND!" But, we must be careful to not point an accusatory finger for unsubstantiated suspicions. The truth will reveal itself in time and, in the end, SLR will just be "another Stmbug Ixx story" for the next Association to whisper about.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brian Park on Nov 3, 2014 18:52:10 GMT -5
There have been instances when people speak out against the board or manager,they come under personal attack.
On one occasion a woman stood up at the microphone and said she didn't want internet and would never use it.The response was ,two flat rear tyres,christmas lights pulled off her house and banging on her walls at 3 in the morning.She was terrorised for a week until her daughter had to stay for a week to settle her down.I was called and asked what the hell was going on in here.
The board wonders why folk don't speak at meetings or write in letters.MANY HAVE BEEN SILENCED afraid to speak out
So when people on this forum dont give their name, I can understand.
If you think this isn't happening ,then a board member taking a swipe at someone in his car is a grim reminder of what is going on in here.And yes that did happen. a police report is on hand.
|
|
|
|
Post by Anon. Owner on Nov 4, 2014 13:16:16 GMT -5
The post regarding SLR's mgmt. co. was merely a query as to anyone having any other knowledge of what this mgmt. co. has done in other communities, and how they performed mgmt. duties w/respect to these other communities.
I've neither pointed a finger nor made any unsubstantiated accusations towards this mgmt. co., I've only revealed things I've merely heard about in passing with regard to how this mgmt. co. has operated in other communities, as well to ascertain the validity of what I've heard, and if anyone "in the know" wants to share, that's all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 4, 2014 18:15:46 GMT -5
No worries. It was only a precautionary reminder to "be careful going there". This MANBOD is vigilant for any opportunity to persecute/prosecute owners and continue their mutually beneficial relationships with attorneys at our expense. Didn't want to open up a can 'o worms and give 'em an easy shot. This subject is best discussed "casually" because it IS a can 'o worms.
Wonder how that Angie's List ad is working for 'em...
|
|
|
|
Post by Alphbit Soup on Nov 4, 2014 18:47:17 GMT -5
O
|
|
|
|
Post by courious on Feb 9, 2016 8:13:31 GMT -5
if this post will show up on quarantine
(Editor: Yup; quarantine is alive and well and your post was passed!)
|
|
